Suggestion - Black/Whitelist for Battlespells
 

Suggestion

You've another option in the 'Magic' menu: a battlespell list.

Here you can find every battlespell (maybe only the researched one).
Now you can make spells blacklisted which means none of your mages autocast it.
You also can whitelist spell which means mages autocast this one with a high priority.

Optional: You can set a spell as not boostable wich means none of your mages uses additional gems to cast it.

This list applies for all mages in a nation so the micromanagement is very limited.

Re: Suggestion - Black/Whitelist for Battlespells
 

I'm afraid it's not going to happen. I suggested this and other improvements in Dominions3 wishlist thread a couple of months ago. No result.

I have a feeling it may be (at least partially) intentional. Turns could last forever if we were, for example, allowed to set first 10 moves.

Re: Suggestion - Black/Whitelist for Battlespells
 

Probably wont happen, but there is a hardcoded blacklist in dom3 that wasn't in dom2. I *think* that vortex of returning and breath of winter are on it, and touch of madness should be, but I'm not sure.

Re: Suggestion - Black/Whitelist for Battlespells
 

If you turn on logging you can actually see it thinking its way thru the list. Its a long list.

Re: Suggestion - Black/Whitelist for Battlespells
 

I would be happy if the Developers just added touch of madness to the black list. That spell drives Me mad.

Re: Suggestion - Black/Whitelist for Battlespells
 

It's supposed to ... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

.. but I second the notion, and add "berserk" to the list

Re: Suggestion - Black/Whitelist for Battlespells
 

Isis bleeding! Let me point out that it's not "a couple of months ago" - this has been requested every since Dom2 came out. Probably before that. Historical evidence says - ain't gonna get fixed, thanks for your money though.

Re: Suggestion - Black/Whitelist for Battlespells
 

Well, this idea has popped up some 4 years ago IIRC, and was never considered for implementation (at least IW didn't communicate on it), but by repeatedly requesting we won't lose anything, so let's go ! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Re: Suggestion - Black/Whitelist for Battlespells
 

I absolutely agree with you and Jack.

Re: Suggestion - Black/Whitelist for Battlespells
 

Ancient Runic stones dated atleast to the early 18th century indicate that Vikings in America actually came up with this idea first, but the authenticity of the stones remains in question.

Re: Suggestion - Black/Whitelist for Battlespells
 

It's a good idea

Re: Suggestion - Black/Whitelist for Battlespells
 

I hope you mean 8th Century.

Re: Suggestion - Black/Whitelist for Battlespells
 

nope...

Re: Suggestion - Black/Whitelist for Battlespells
 

Example from one of my mp games:

After scripting my pretender (4E/4F) with Summon Earthpower, Phoenix Power, Flame Bolt, Flame Bolt, Flame Bolt (i was fighting niefel giants) and 'cast spells' in battle turn 6 he started to cast the level 0 Spells Fire Flies and Flying shards. Fatigue was below 20. The spreading level 0 spells kills mainly my own troops, the enemy giants didn't notice anything. I don't know why not 1 flame bolt or something equal was cast by ai, it costs the nearly same fatigue and works a way better then the level 0 spells against fire susceptible giants.
Even the stupiest battle ai should be able to choose a spell at random. This is even better then to choose the worst possible spell!

After some Fire Flies/Flying Shard battle rounds later my army rout and my pretender flees with a very low fatigue value. Maybe i'm the 4721st person who say this but: thats just stupid!

Re: Suggestion - Black/Whitelist for Battlespells
 

I don't know the inner workings of the AI, apart from the fact that it simulates few "what would happen if I did this" few times and chooses the best option, but this is what I suspect happened:

The AI checked what a Flame Bolt might do:
1) It could cause 22+ (at least 25) AP (+fire vulnerability) damage to one target
2) It could miss
3) It could hit a friendly unit, although it isn't likely

The AI checked what Fire Darts would do:
1) It would fire 7 (at least; your god had Fire 5 and you get at least one more Dart per exta level) darts, each doing 10 AP (+ fire vuln.) damage if it hits.
2) Some or all could miss
3) Some or all could hurt own troops

After checking both spells (and probably all other ones you had researched), it decided that Fire Darts was the best choice? Why? Perhaps Fire Darts dealt more hp damage in total, just divided among the Niefel giants more evenly so that the net effect is weaker (esp. if they have regeneration). Perhaps the friendly fire was considered just as effective as the damage caused on the enemies, and the fact that this had much worse relative effect on your own units than on your enemies wasn't considered.

In short, I think the AI calculates the amount of damage dealt in total, not how much the spell will help in killing the enemy. Most often, the first is equal to the second, and the first is much, much easier than the second.

Re: Suggestion - Black/Whitelist for Battlespells
 

The AI didn't cast Fire Darts (it was researched), it used Fire Flies and Flying Shards.

Re: Suggestion - Black/Whitelist for Battlespells
 

I don't know how the AI calculated the result, but in that case, Fire Flies was found to have done better results than Flame Bolt or Fire Darts. I don't know why or how. The host didn't happen with debug on, right? The log file would help a lot in trying to find out the why.

Re: Suggestion - Black/Whitelist for Battlespells
 

Which is quite frankly, impossible, since the spell is strictly inferior to fire darts.

Re: Suggestion - Black/Whitelist for Battlespells
 

That's why my answer was followed by "I don't know why or how. The host didn't happen with debug on, right? The log file would help a lot in trying to find out the why."

I don't know how the AI works. I don't know how it got result saying Fire Flies is a better choice.

Re: Suggestion - Black/Whitelist for Battlespells
 

I replayed one more and here a complete battle spell review (i've overseen 2 times the use of Fire Darts):

First 5 Battle Turns like i scripted: Summon Earthpower, Phoenix Power, Flame Bolt, Flame Bolt, Flame Bolt
Battle Turn 6 / Fatigue 16: Ironskin
Battle Turn 7 / Fatigue 17: Flying Shards
Battle Turn 8 / Fatigue 20: Fire Darts
Battle Turn 9 / Fatigue 21: Flying Shards
Battle Turn 10 / Fatigue 24: Fire Flies
Battle Turn 11 / Fatigue 25: Flying Shards
Battle Turn 12 / Fatigue 28: Flying Shards
Battle Turn 13 / Fatigue 31: Fire Flies
Battle Turn 14 / Fatigue 32: Flying Shards
Battle Turn 15 / Fatigue 35: Fire Darts
Battle Turn 16 / Fatigue 36: Flying Shards
Battle Turn 17 / Fatigue 39: Fire Flies
Battle Turn 18 / Fatigue 40: Flying Shards
Battle Turn 19 / Fatigue 43: Rout & Flee

Instead of using mainly fire magic (because of Fire Susceptible) there was an use of:
7 x Level 0 Flying Shards
3 x Level 0 Fire Flies
2 x Level 1 Fire Darts
1 x Level 3 Ironskin

Alteration 3 and Evocation 2 was researched.

I would never choose the level 0 spells, the level 1 Fire Darts is better in all cases. Especially for regenerating giants i would like to see flame bolts which costs just a little more fatigue (20/4=5).

To be on my suggestion: I had blacklist Fire Flies, Flying shards and Flare (because giants are big so bolts are better vs giants) and whitelist flame bolts.

Re: Suggestion - Black/Whitelist for Battlespells
 

We have gone over this time and again. The result is always the same: the developes do not want to do it. Heck they do not even want to include a "repeat last spell" which would be far easier to include from a development point of view.

Re: Suggestion - Black/Whitelist for Battlespells
 

"Have not included" is'nt the same as "do not want". It could be either, or some third choice. I don't know, but I doubt you know either.

Re: Suggestion - Black/Whitelist for Battlespells
 

There's several big issues/suggestions where the community could use a short official statement from the devs of illwinter. The community doesn't need to know the reasons for the decision whether it's a technical, personal or time issue, but the quick answer would provide closure for many of these debates.

Re: Suggestion - Black/Whitelist for Battlespells
 

I wouldnt say that it was never considered for implementation. After all, we did get it. We got it for the AI which has improved the game immensely, but have not gotten it for player control.

But then we havent gotten many things for player control so Id say rather than "not considered" that would be more "decided against it". Not quite the same thing. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: Suggestion - Black/Whitelist for Battlespells
 

Incorrect. They have posted before ( on the DomII boards ) that they did not want to do it. Pretty much case closed, no matter how good of an idea it is.

Re: Suggestion - Black/Whitelist for Battlespells
 

Sorry, I didn't remember any comments in this. Case closed, then.

Re: Suggestion - Black/Whitelist for Battlespells
 

I understand why they don't want to allow player control on white/blacklist : it would give human players anoterh way to outsmart the AI, unbalancing more the single player game.

What I think could be a good compromise would be a simple way to mod a blacklist (there is already an internal blacklist in the game, meaning that some rare spells won't be cast if not scripted too, but sme spells should be added to it, such as touche of madness)

Note that this is a global blacklist, meaning that both humans and AI players use it, so no advantage for neitheir.

Of course there's already a way to do it by modding the spells (Of course a way to configure this in the game settings would be easier to use that making a mod.
) :

- remove a spell and it will never be cast (even if you want)
- or, if you still want to be able to cast the spell in specific situations, another solution would be to add a gem cost of 1 to the spell.

What if I made a mod addding 1 gem cost to berserk spells (berserk and touche of madness) and maybe some others ?

What spell(s) others that those 2 seems like tthey shouldn't be cast unscripted ?