Spells that arguably break the game
 

I want to pose the idea of removing specific types of spells from the game and would welcome others opinions as to the likely out come of such a removal.

Specifically, the removal of some very powerful and devastating globals, Burden of Time and Astral Corruption for example.

Infact offensive globals in general.

The removal of globals that return gems.

The removal of remote unrest spells.

The removal of assassin spells.

My reason for this is that isn’t it more fun to contest a game of dominion through battle?

I see the clash of vast armies with kitted out thugs, powerful mages and SC’s far more interesting that simply killing them from afar with Mind Hunts and Earth Attack etc. Some nations have assassins – shouldn’t that be an advantage to be leveraged through that nations units? Instead we have a few gem a pop spells spammed at a province removing the best part of a players imaginative efforts and gem and time investments over the last 10 - 15 turns?

Some globals are ridiculous! I’m playing in a newb game now and a Burden of Time has gone up which has more or less decimated my old mages which I have invested so much time and gems into. Just one spell – through no real effort, has effectively put me way behind the 8 ball. I could have handled it no problem if it occurred on the battlefield, but in this case bam all gone. It doesn’t make very engaging game play.

Remote unrest spell spam can shut down castle recruiting and take out capitals – economically damaging to say the least – no cap only recruiting… does this really represent strategic gaming or is it just a mundane exploit?

The point is, these types of spells require no strategy, no skill – just point and shoot!

What do others think? I just want my units to be bested in battle not in these cheesy no skill manners.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Burden of Time shouldn't be an issue. You can Dispel it. You can also probably get everyone but Atlantis, Ermor and such long lived races to contribute so you can cast it with an additional 999 gems and be sure it's dispelled. You can also try to kill the mage who cast it, for instance by spamming earth attacks and other assassination spells on the province the caster is in.
You can also use boots of youth, rituals to resuscitate your D mages to simply counter some of the effect.

As for the general suggestions, there's a game called threeforts running with settings that look like this. But even then, the most gamebreaking spells are master enslave and all the teleport-like spells.

Offensive globals: Not really a problem. People who cast it will get ganged upon, enchantments will be dispelled. Even a lot of Armageddon wishes doesn't ruin the game. These are good imo, as they can help end the game faster.

Gem rituals: Well, they give a boost to the nation that can cast it indeed but it's an investment, and can be dispelled. The players who can put them up and keep them deserve the gems. They are somewhat unabalanced because if you get a capital revenue like MA Mictlan you're less likely to cast such a spell than if your revenue is all nature for instance, but nations can be balanced in other ways.

Remote unrest spells are about the only way to shut some capitals, and you can put up domes to prevent these. That's really easy to counter in important provinces (domes) so it's not an issue.

Assassin spells are a pain but bodyguards, bottles of living water, domes, all help. Assassin spells targetted at a SC that just conquered a province are much more painful. This is the only suggestion that I might agree with. Even then, there are counters (teleport/cloud trapeze a SC and then give orders to attack to 10 scouts into that province so the scouts get targeted, not the SC).

Overall, there are counters to all spells. There is strategy in countering them. There is strategy in researching them, making sure you don't spend your gems on something else, making sure you have a caster that can cast them (Flames from the Sky's not everyone's spell for instance), making sure you spend enough gems to not get dispelled, or that the dispellers will waste more than what you invested...

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Just tested it, Boots of youth or Elixirs of Life do absolutely nothing to prevent the global aging effect of BoT. So, if you're abysia, even a single casting of BoT will be pretty much GG as all your mages that can do something worthile get diseased pretty much instantly.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Yep boots of youth do nothing to stave of BoT... there is no recourse. Thats what is rubbing me about it. Through no superior skill, my effective game is over.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

My point is these spells propose a gamey element not that they can't be used or countered.

So what is the point of having the spell if every one will jsut band to gether to dispel it? Isnt that just a micromanagment issue? When the game is humming along nicely out comes BoT - great, now we have to organise a caster and gems etc... It doesn't add to the game experience it detracts from it and forces players to go through the hastle of getting rid off it. Mean time a player with a half decent start enjoying a competitive war gets crapped on and all that potential evaporates becasue of one spell.

Removing the gem gens in CBM removes a few head aches and micro issues, but the real benefit of it is that to get more gems you have to conquer more lands. Globals just provide gems for nothing really. Sure you have to make a sacrifice to put it up, but they pay for themselves quickly so its not that big a risk.

The issue of the games finishing quicker is moot if you adopt different ending conditions. I don't believe there needs to be full domination - 50 or 60% of capitals will suffice for victory. Pulling out big globals and remote spells is a crap way to finish a long strategic struggle.

A big part of the fun in dominions is watching the battle replay - seeing if your tactics prevail - hoping your heros survive another battle, These spells ensure that the outcome of the game is determined by impersonal mechanics - I am struggling to see how their inclusion benefits the game.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

I have to agree on burden of time, if only because its so easy to cast. For such a powerful spell to only require level 5 research is a little ridiculous.

Everything else though is easily countered, astral mages to block mindhunts, domes to block unrest spells. Even astral corruption is little more then an inconvenience with proper scripting and bodyguards.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Even with victory conditions, endgame can be long and hard. 50-60% of capitals is not at all easy to achieve in a good size game. Remember how hard well-defended forts are to take in the late game. Defender advantage is enormous when he can buff his troops and dump army killing spells on you before you can cast anything.

SCs should be able to handle most assassin spells. And without Mind Hunt, how do you handle stealthy raiding SCs? Makes them invest in MR, at least.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Look for sure it can be countered - but look at the micro involved to have to do that.

Manuvere a sneeky thug into a prime spot attack the province - win - mind hunt - dead. It is not always possible to have an astral unit on hand - especially Tir who dont have astral.

If you are a non astral nation up against an astral one, then you will be mind hunted to hell. And besides mind hunt, what about Earth Attack? Not very easy to counter that one - devastating spell.

These spells just seem like an intrusion upon the game whereby the finese of the strategy gives way to uninspired heavy handed drugery. Being forced to counter said effects (and indeed some times it cant be countered), introduces extra micro that doesnt enhance the experience at all.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Hmmm... not that i can speak much about the end game, but it would seem that if you are atop someones capital its almost game over. Besides, why do you need to attack? Starve them out, or let them break the seige - then the advantage moves to the attacker.

On the point of stealthy raiders... wouldnt you hope that you were capable of raiding your opponent as well? Wouldnt it then be more of a game of cat and mouse limiting your opponents moves, defending what was important? I don't know, but surely reaching for the mind hunt is a bit well, unimaginative?

It just doesn't seem right - SC's mages and thugs should kill SC's mages and thugs on the battlefield not from a 5 gem ritual.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

That sounds broken...

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

I agree that BoT is slightly powerful, but the reason it is so powerful is that it hurts everyone. It just hurts some nations more because they have old mages. Rings of regen is a good counter to disease, btw.

But no, I don't want them taking any of that out. That "4 gem ritual" usually has to be spammed, making it...what, a 20-gem ritual? Plus 5 mage-turns that have at least 3 astral, plus hopefully some +pen items (or more astral). I love the "sit-back and wait for people to attack me so I can teach them the folly of doing so" tactic.

And yes, your capital should be nearly unassailable, I usually have Dome of Flaming Death (or the ice one) and at least one other dome up. That means that anyone that tries to hit it usually gets hit themselves.

You can always script your mages with returning...1S gem for complete assassination protection seems more overpowered than all your assassinate spells.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Your sneaky thug ignores Earth Attack. He also ignores teleporting other thugs/mage teams on top of him. And maneuvering him into place usually involves casting Cloud Trapeze, at least for Tir/Vanheim. Fighting someone with with stealthy, teleporting, recruitable thugs is really hard if you don't have the same. You can raid with your own thugs, but if they aren't stealthy they're vulnerable to teleporting attack squads, which means you're losing yours faster than he is.
Mind Hunt is one of the few actual counters that works on hiding commanders. It requires spamming to be effective, assuming thugs have decent mr, which means many high S mages, probably using boosters and/or penetration items. And the risk of teleporting a S mage in to feeblemind the hunters.

It's a raiding counter. That's all mind hunt is really for. By mid game it's not really hard for even non-Astral nations to have an astral mage or 2 (or domes) in every research center/castle and send them out with major armies.
If you get it early and spam it on an unprepared enemy, you can do serious damage, but that's true of many things.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

The "arguably" was well placed in the subject.
I have seen complaints that the late game is decided more by magic than by armies, but I think that is on purpose. There are plenty of games available which are decided by armies. So I wouldnt want to see the game changed that way for everyone.

However, Im not against it as an option (which it is). I can see the idea that it would be fun to see a Dom3 game settled by armies. There have been some dom3 games which did that. There is a setting to make research difficult. And various mods for cutting out spells. In fact, the developers did create two mods. One limits all research to level 6, and another limits all research to level 4. Id be willing to host such a game on Dom3Minions.com if you wanted (for a direct connect game) or you can host it on LLamaserver.net (for a pbem game).

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Gandalf: I tested one of those mods recently, and it seemed to be broken :( So any such game would need a fixed mod to work.


Back when I was a newer player, I would have agreed with some of your proposed spell removals. But having played a decent number of games now, I just can't agree with things like removing mind hunts, etc. For one thing mind hunt really IS a pretty easy spell to defend against. And those tir thugs that were being talked of earlier can easily have 20+ MR, which drastically ups the number of mind hunts required to kill them. And is really one of only a very few ways they can be killed. Most of these sorts of spells are almost necessary in the late game to allow you to actually kill the other surviving players, who may have well over a hundred mages and a significant gem income that would make a normal sort of war between the two of you go on forever.

The best way to handle spells you don't want in a game is just to agree beforehand that they are banned. Plenty of games do that and that's fine. But you'll never get the community to agree to remove most of those spells. And I think you are overestimating (or overstating) the effectiveness of some of them by a fair margin.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

And if you want to ban them for a particular game, it's easy to make a mod that removes them, which is usually better than just agreeing to ban them.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Burden of Time is only really useful for a few nations, and they'll wait to have enough death gems so it can't be dispelled easily before casting it. If you hoard your D gems instead of, say, summoning tartarians, you certainly deserve the result.

Sitting on top of a capital and trying to starve people does not work. You want to break in very fast. In 2 of the games I'm playing, someone's capital was besieged and the attacking army had to leave because of another nation intervening. also try to starve out MA C'tis while sitting on top of their capital. Your army will die in a few years while C'tis will just be unable to build more assassins. Those already inside the fort might have killed a few of your commanders in the meantime.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

I think BoT is too early and too cheap. It should be lvl 8-9 spell and should be much more expensive. The argument that it is powerful not against all nations is not really strong, because it is always powerful WHEN you cast it. Because you cast it exactly when it's going to affect your closest neigbour(s). When your opponent have no weakness to this spell, you just don't cast at all. So it is either unused or it's a real nuke. And BoT is a really ballance-breaking spell. One nation casts it and all the map is divided on those who go down, and those who feel happy long lives.
As for dispell - the mechanics of dispel makes dispell very risky,and mostly benefits initial caster rather then dispeller.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Dispel is risky when dealing with arcane nexus. With burden of time? Not so much. Say you get everyone in the game who wants burden down to pool 10-15 pearls. In a game of decent size this should easily be enough to bring down burden of time. Burden of time does most of its damage in the first 2-3 turns it's up anyway. Overcasting it much at all is generally not that useful.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

You don't cast Burden of Time to affect your closest neighbors. It's declaring war on the entire world. (Except for a few nations and those probably only if you've already allied and cleared it with them.)
It may cripple your neighbors, but if everyone else piles on with remote attacks, teleporters and pitches in to Dispel that's not going to help you much.

It may come to early, but only in the sense that you won't be ready to make use of it when you first research it.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

So you're saying there's no way, in world, a mage couldn't contact a powerful being and send it to kill an enemy commander? Or try to find his mind from afar and snuff it? Seriously, they make as much sense as anything else...

Diplomacy. Diplomacy is the point of the spell. If you can't get the requisite gems together it means: (1) Your opponent is winning anyway and the spell lets him do it faster, this is good. (2) Your diplomacy failed. He has too many allies who'd rather have his spell stay up (possibly because you or someone else is scarier), and thus won't contribute to dispelling it. If neither of those is true, you should be able to bring it down. Its not micromanagement though, diplomacy is a critical aspect of the game, and you should be forced to conduct it to deal with sufficiently dangerous threats.

Gems from globals are (1) not invisible and (2) are vulnerable to 'attack', either by being overcast or by killing the caster or by being dispelled. And if you put it up with more gems than minimal, the risk of not making back your investment is very real.

So put them up first? If your opponent manages to distract you from the big picture by complicating the little picture, and then throws up a game changing global, whose fault is it that you weren't prepared to deal with it? Oh right, yours. You can pre-emptively occupy all the global slots to prevent people from throwing up globals, you know.

Because a lot of these spells fill necessary niches. Stealth raiders would be pretty broken if not for mindhunt. Oh no, the horrors, it makes you forge AMAs for all those stealth raiders. Making raiding more costly over time is a good thing - your opponent should be able to fight back, after all!

Finally, a lot of these spells add a real strategic element to the game. Some of us enjoy the strategic aspect at least as much as the tactical aspect. Wars are not just fought with armies, they are fought with propaganda, information, morale, production, key leaders, etc... all of these things should be open to attack.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Damn, those really seem like a cop-out to me Gandalf. Why in the world would anyone play such games?

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Its not my choice. But as I understand it, they get tired of late-game always being decided by who has the strongest magic. There are some people who really enjoy the early game (explore, expand). And some who really like mid-game of armies meeting armies. I have no problem with people setting up such a game on a larger scale to extend those anymore than I would with no-diplomacy, not having certain nations in the game, or any game changing mod.

As long as its not considered as a permanent change to the entire game then its no problem. Variation in individual games = good. But "fixing" the game in a way that knocks out someone elses variation options = bad. IMHO of course.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Rdnoj:
"Burden of time does most of its damage in the first 2-3 turns it's up anyway. "

Why is that ? I don't understand why do you say here. Why 2-3 turns? I think it's effective every turn it's up.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

I think that is it... where the 'preference' lies in the context of the conflict. I like the thug / SC / Army component of the game (at this point) i guess. Deciding the out come of a conflict by spells that deliver very real results for very little effort isn't clicking with me yet.

I'm going to try my hand at modding a set up such as this and see what happens. I don't think its so much a case of removing the capacity for nations to use powers such as this, it would be to look at the means in which they are able to affect it.

EG, remote assasin spells could be replaced by actual summon spells providing Assasin units...

Rain of toads replaced by an item - muchlike the bane venom charm

Gem gem globals replaced by a unique summons maybe, providing the same gem outputs but providing misfortune or death or reduce dominion as a consequence...

Yep Gandalf, it was important that i snuck arguably in there becasue it is simply that. At this point my premise has become, that, whilst it is important to retain the capacities these spells provide the player interms of drawing games to a conclusion, the means in which they (spells) are able to be brought to bear on an opponent is perhaps too easy and of consequence, significant damage can be done with minimal effort, which in my mind undermines the strategy and tactics of the game.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

The most potent effect of the burden of time is the killing off of national mages. Especially those that start off pretty old. But the best human mages in general tend to start close enough to old age that just a few turns of burden of time are enough to ensure that they'll die. That can be a LOT of mages. After you've killed off, say, 100 mages worldwide, relatively the rest of the turns are a lot less destructive... But sure, burden of time would be happy staying up and killing off the world's population.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Amadamus - You are saying that assassination spells are too easy. But are they? Let us take earth attack as an example. This is a level 8 spell, so you're not going to see it until pretty late in the game unless someone is making a pretty concerted push up conjuration. And then you actually have to find someone who can cast it. With only one real earth booster in the game (unless you're playing vanilla) getting to level 5 earth magic is no easy task for most nations. There is pretty much no good way around at least 1 empower no matter what nation you are playing, and for most you'll probably need to summon troll kings to do it. That's over 100 earth gems, with little chance of cost reduction. So it's a significant investment you're putting into the ability, derailing your ability to build hammers, equip thugs, or cast other earth spells. All this, and you can stop them pretty easily with just a bottle of living water. Manifestation is basically the same, but with more boosters and a 50% chance of you being attacked instead unless there's a horror marked commander you're sending them at. Disease demons are the only ones that are *maybe* too easy, but I think those are a lot easier to stop with bodyguards than the other two.

Unrest spells are a bit different and can be very powerful in the early game, but are easily stopped by domes....

And I'd rethink the gem gen global replacement thing. For one thing it's not any better. In fact it is worse, because no one knows you have the gem generating thing, and can't do anything about it until they figure out where it is. Then they have to march an assassin all the way across the map to *attempt* to kill it? That is ridiculous. And there's nothing you could do about it now with the assassination spells gone. It then becomes a nearly perfectly safe investment, unlike gem generator globals which are clearly visible, show up in the score graphs, and can be taken out via a dispel or an assassinate. They are much more of a gamble as they are now.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Do boots of youth save again BoT? Ive read somewhere that not, but why it could be?

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Perhaps by somewhere you mean the second post in this thread? It does seem buggy that they don't protect against it. Which would make casting rejuvenate the best bet for keeping your mages alive while BoT is up.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Actually, it's pretty easy for EA Agartha but some people keep saying they're a weak nation. Otherwise I agree, the spells are NOT cast without effort. They require research, forging, often empowering or summoning an able mage or designing a specific pretender, and then getting enough gems to actually cast the spells and keeping them up in the case of enchantments.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Good points - swayed me alot!.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

This was part of an MP Game thread (that I believe spawned this thread), but:

Just tested:

Lycanthropos' Amulet removes Disease affliction and cures "old age" when it activates.

Any mage you use it on becomes ritual-only due to the "Gone Berserk" effect, but since the disease disappears when it activates it actually makes a more robust ritual caster mage. I was using these on Crones with MA Man. The non-disease afflictions remain after transformation, so you might eventually want a healer, but this would make old age less of a concern for nations like Abysia. 2N required to make means that if all you have is Wolf Tribe Shamans you might have to empower nature by 1, but very worth the time. Any mage with a disease gets an amulet.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Most sincere apologies on that last comment! I made an error in my experiment.

The Crone in question did, indeed, lose her "Diseased" affliction when she transformed into a werewolf. She also regained all of her hit points. However, I forgot that I had also cast "Gift of Health" which is a probable source for the loss of the affliction.

I will retest momentarily....

Retest complete. The transformation neither cures the disease nor restores any lost hit points or alter the age limits of the commander.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

BoT could certainly go, it's an incredibly powerful spell under the right circumstances, it's very difficult to counter effectively (especially since overwriting doesn't help outside of then being able to kill the caster which then leaves an empty global slot...), and it doesn't serve as a vital counter TO anything (like mind hunt vs stealth.) Sea of Ice could also be given the axe.

Both these spells are able to effectively shut down the games of certain nations without necessarily painting a target on the caster's head from unaffected nations, which is a bad play mechanic (though great strategy...divide and conquer.) Most of the "balance" of these spells comes from the circumstances they need to be effective being rare, but they're both kind of stupidly overpowered in the right situation. The fact that they can't be overwritten REALLY makes it worse as well, since Dispel is a loser's game.

Everything else on the list adds a good amount of tactical depth to the game.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Why is Dispel a loser's game? Just because you don't know how many gems went into it?

I got nailed by Sea of Ice in one game as EA Atlantis. The most frustrating thing about it was that my thugs & SCs could still retreat to underwater from coastal provinces, but were then trapped. No teleport magic on Basalt Kings.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

I find your ideas for modding the game to be very interesting.
I will offer some pros/cons however. Not on the specifics but on the general mod.

To change the way something is done in the game creates an effect curve IMHO. The more a mod becomes "you have to learn how to play the game this new way" the more difficult it is to get into. Its easier to remove them entirely and just set aside those strategies for a few games than to try and create another faction of heavily modded Dom3 followers.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Dispel is bad for a number of reasons.

First: You either guess high and waste gems, or guess low and waste gems and do nothing to the global. Overwriting is always a stronger play in terms of gem efficiency, since you can then guess high and get something out of it in the form of a stronger global. This obviously breaks down when the global doesn't care who cast it, which is why Sea and BoT are particularly problematic. (Ones like Utterdark at least have the distinction of guaranteeing world-hate, Burden and Sea don't have that balance mechanism depending on nation selection.)

Second: Pearls are worth more than other gems (specifically 2:1 once wish is available). Having to use pearls to dispel a non-pearl global at 1:1 is a losing proposition. Sea of Ice is again especially painful here due to using W gems. At low-level casts the low base cost makes up for some of the disparity, but once someone plows 200 extra gems into a global you're pretty screwed in terms of gem trade. Note that this exacerbates the first problem, since in addition to having to use more "expensive" gems you're also virtually guaranteed to waste a good chunk of them in the dispel roulette.

Third: It's reactive. The global has at least a turn to work before you can fling a dispel, meaning your opponent gets something out of their investment no matter what.

Fourth: There's now a big hole where that global used to be, meaning you might find yourself in the exact same situation next turn.

Think that hits most of the main points pretty well. Extra gems in dispels should count at 2:1, but that's a programming change that's unlikely to happen. Makes a ton of thematic sense as well, since breaking a spell down should be easier than putting it up. Regardless, as things stand, dispel is terrible. (Though sometimes still the best option due to being the only option.)

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Allow me to be the first to be included in 'some people'.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

I'll be the second in that category. They have high earth, and that is about it. Oh, and amphibiousness. Yay.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Well, you could always overwrite and then kill your guy off, if you don't want to waste the astral. With death and water, it's not too hard to get a D/W 3 up to D/W 5 with boosters, then cast, take the boosters off, and go kill him into someone's PD...Granted, still not a winning solution, but it could be better than the alternative.

Quick Anecdote: In a recent MP game I was steamrolling the last 2 opponents before I fought the other super-power, and so I put up BoT because I also had a pretty strong Gift of Health and I though I could summon some fairy queens for the difference. Well, after a handful of turns, I eventually realized after reading something on the boards: my enemy was LA R'lyeh. Their mages have thousands of years to go before they get old :doh::doh::doh: I quickly dispelled it (I had AN up too) and won because of my superior global and artifact position (and I think he gave up without really staying to duke it out).

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Well, quoting Micah. Dispel is often the only option. It's not necessarily a good option.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Well, burden of time would kill off province pop before R'lyeh could convert them. Lol.