Has anyone ever had any success with "shards" spells?
 

I have never ever ever seriously damaged an enemy unit with that earth "shards" spell and hate it when my casters use it. Has anyone ever really hurt anything with that spell, or is there a trick to using it?

Re: Has anyone ever had any success with "shards" spells?
 

No, it,s a lvl 0 spell and should be worthless.

If you want your mages to join battles research some good spells or give them order to attack http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: Has anyone ever had any success with "shards" spells?
 

At close range against large amounts of frail unarmored targets the spell might be slightly useful. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif

[ January 28, 2004, 16:08: Message edited by: Teraswaerto ]

Re: Has anyone ever had any success with "shards" spells?
 

I know the slingers seem to rout alot of units easily and I took it for granted shard might do the same. Seems like stones panic elephants quicker than anything else does but Im not a tester, this is just an impression.

[ January 28, 2004, 16:29: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

Re: Has anyone ever had any success with "shards" spells?
 

I've always wondered if a high accuracy mage would get anything out of Shards or if it's just inherently spread over half the map. The thing is, by the time I can improve the accuracy enough to potentially do some good, I have better options for stuff to cast anyway. Perhaps Caelum (Aim) with an Earth-Powered pretender?

~Aldin

Re: Has anyone ever had any success with "shards" spells?
 

With high enough accuracy (20-25) stone shards can actually be quite deadly. Good luck getting there without cheating though. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Has anyone ever had any success with "shards" spells?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Buy yourself some Air mages, and you'll see some with very decent Precision. That's another reason why I like Man; those Tuatha are expensive as hell, but when they cast an Orb Lightning, they do hit.

Re: Has anyone ever had any success with "shards" spells?
 

I've had some very mild success with Shards used by a Pretender during early expansion. The problem is that you need a high earth skill to counteract it's high fatigue cost, and need a high precision to hit.

On a Pretender with high Earth and some Air or Nature (for Aim/Eagle Eye) it's a decent early spell, altough such a Pretender may well be tough enough to be better off just attacking.

Re: Has anyone ever had any success with "shards" spells?
 

Spells that tend to spray all over the map are best used when your enemies are all over the map. You don't even need precision. Being outnumbered just means it's harder to miss.

Re: Has anyone ever had any success with "shards" spells?
 

You think that shards is bad - wait til you try using tartarian titans - range 30 lightning bolt with 6 precision is kind of amusing 8)

You would need to be fighting against an army of 10,000 to have any chance of hitting anything that wasn't standing right next to you.

Re: Has anyone ever had any success with "shards" spells?
 

My moloch actually bought it from a dwarven smith with stone shards. He was standing fairly close to him though, so the entire spray hit his square.

Re: Has anyone ever had any success with "shards" spells?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I'm not sure what you're talking about here. Lightning bolt has a precision modifier of 7, so with a base precision of 6 your overall precision will be 12. Add in an aim to make it 17 and you will only miss at extreme long range. Even 12 is good enough for moderately sized armies.

Re: Has anyone ever had any success with "shards" spells?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">You obviously haven't used tartarian titans 8)

They are normal troops with a specific ranged attack called "Lightning Bolt", and they have a precision of 6, which can't be modified because they aren't commanders.

If you line up 20 of them and have them fire at a group of 400 enemy troops that are directly in front of them at range 30, they will hurl lightning bolts that are so far off course that they are more dangerous to enemies in entirely different provinces 8)

You should try it - it's pretty funny 8)

Fortunately they have 300 or so hp and great combat stats so they are actually pretty tough if you order them to melee attack or when they run out of ammo...

Re: Has anyone ever had any success with "shards" spells?
 

Always make sure not to put your Demonbred out in front of you non-fire-immune troops. Fireflies tends to shoot backwards most of the time and it can hurt them. Mix your indy troops up with enemy troops and they will be safe from friendly fire http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: Has anyone ever had any success with "shards" spells?
 

Abysians have the worst eyesight in the game. Poor suckers shouldn't be allowed on the road. Even a one eyed militia can shoot better than most Abysian commanders ;P

[ January 29, 2004, 03:42: Message edited by: Zen ]

Re: Has anyone ever had any success with "shards" spells?
 

Yep. Damn Abyssian mages - always drunk.

"I shink I'll blassht em wif a fireball... oops"

Re: Has anyone ever had any success with "shards" spells?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">*Laugh*! They really are more than a bit nearsighted, aren't they? IMHO they really should have 8 or 9 precision -- which is plenty bad enough.

Re: Has anyone ever had any success with "shards" spells?
 

Atleast they are not blind! Sure they might toast anything that looks friendly BUT remember the ivy king! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

Re: Has anyone ever had any success with "shards" spells?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Wait a minute, I dont get it -- You say it is worthless, confirming my suspicion -- so WHY does my mage cast it? He could be casting Farstrike, Mind Burn, Dessication, or any nice 1-3 level spell I have researched. WHY does the AI insist upon casting worthless spells?

Re: Has anyone ever had any success with "shards" spells?
 

It depends on the fatigue. A mage with a high amount of fatigue will cast spells (unless specifically scripted) that won't drop it too far into unconsiousness. So you will rarely see a mage with 90+ fatigue casting anything that would put it at 130+ fatigue unless you either A.) scripted it or B.) the AI decides it wants to for whatever reason (if it's target is really close, sometimes it will cast shards, or if the nearest units are routing, it will try to target farther units, which might move it out of range of other spells)

Re: Has anyone ever had any success with "shards" spells?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I see my mage casting Shards when she could be casting something (anything) better when her Fatigue is around 60. And with high powers (Earth 5+, Nature 5+), most level 1-2 spells dont require that much more fatigue than Shards.
Kristoffer O. suggested it is not such a great spell. I think it would be great if the AI gave it less priority.
This game has such a high variety of potentiates. I think it would be great if this variety was used more often, it would make things not only more functionally optimal, but more "fun" too. IMO.
Edit: And also give us the feeling that our research in the various neat things that there are is not in vain.

[ January 30, 2004, 09:59: Message edited by: onomastikon ]