Am I not understanding Magma Eruption?
 

I think I am missing something. Since 2.14, I am wondering if Magma Eruption has somehow gotten a flag "magic resistance negates". I have noticed M.E. hitting but doing no damage to low-protection units (3, 5 and 8) at all. With a 4+ earth caster, that should be impossible. Or does the graphic (showing where M.E. hits) not necessarily reflect where the spell has actually targeted?

Re: Am I not understanding Magma Eruption?
 

Could it maybe be battle replay inconsistency ?

Maybe you updated to 2.15 already while your host didn't update to 2.15 yet ?

Or was it a SP game replay ?


Other possibilities that come to my mind :

-Did the targeted units have mirror images ? A recent thread implifies that mirror image is buggy and seems to make hitting the mirror image unit with AoE spells difficult

-Maybe magma eruption now allows a defense roll to avoid the damage , like falling frost and the description was forgotten to be updated .

Re: Am I not understanding Magma Eruption?
 

Hm, thanks.
No, no mirror images.
It was SP testing.
Just normal units. One set was against Storm Demons, who refused to take damage despite 5 protection, so I figure it is a hidden MR roll

Re: Am I not understanding Magma Eruption?
 

I've been badly surprised recently with ME ineffectiveness..
I also wonder if Fire resistance protect againt it- I suppose it shoudln't as it is an Earth spell basically.
Once I had a mage, guarded by Statues, attacked by a Succubus, and scripted to ME repeteadly. The statues were killed on the 3rd cast, but the succubus was unhurt ... :shock:

Re: Am I not understanding Magma Eruption?
 

Storm demons are ethereal. ME is probably not a magic attack (same as flying shards and blade wind). Thus no dmg at all.

Re: Am I not understanding Magma Eruption?
 

Ditto - I'd thought of ME as one of the heavy hitting spells, which according to the description and stats it should be. In actuality, even bladewind seems to do damage more consistently which shouldn't be the case.

Re: Am I not understanding Magma Eruption?
 

well, i've used it to good effect, and i just had a good part of an army of sacred troops devastated by it. One thing though, it's accuracy is not great, and i believe it is one of those situations where the graphics are slightly misleading as to who is hit.

that it is a non-magical attack makes sense as well.

Re: Am I not understanding Magma Eruption?
 

OK, that explains the Storm Demons -- although 25% of them should have taken damage, right? (I suppose just bad luck.)