Conceptual Balance (Discussion)

[Twan]

I don't want to hijack the thread with my impressions so I'll stop after this explanation.

My analysis was mostly based on common/no gem consuming battle magic. With the kind of very big armies you encounter in dom 3 (at least in sp against mighty+ AIs, as my mp games are around turn 10 I can't say how players will use their extra gold, perhaps armies in mp games will stay closer to what they were in dom2), a spell like pillar of fire (aoe 1) is not that good (especially with precision 0, and your nation perhaps not having access to precision buffs), as well as all lower levels elemental damage spells (falling fire/frost with their bigger AoE being the most useful).

In a battle between two 300+ soldiers armies, to use an earth buff spell with all the AoE full of troops (say legion of steel, SoG etc...) looks better than to make a little hole in ennemy ranks with an AoE 1 spell of air or fire (spell you have with the same path and research level and not using gems). And in early era, earth is also one of the best schools for killing armies (blade wind power).

But as the new army sizes make spells affecting the entire battlefield more powerful too, the balance may be preserved after mid game, especially in mp games. So better to forget my message after all.

[FrankTrollman]

Spells like Firebolt are actually much better now that your opponents come in really big piles. A little deviation no longer counts as a miss, it still nails someone. Little Witchdoctors with fire magic dumping firedarts and the like kill many more people than they used to. The relative effect of this may be smaller, but the absolute effect is larger. And since Witch Doctors haven't changed much in price, that means that their fire pokeys are more meaningful per pound of gold spent.

It will take a lot more analysis before I could tell you if a fire mage is "worth it" now, but changes in the base gamemechanics have made him a bit better over all I think.

-Frank

[Zen]

Twan said:
I don't want to hijack the thread with my impressions so I'll stop after this explanation.

No need to fear that. Don't stop unless you want to.

My analysis was mostly based on common/no gem consuming battle magic. With the kind of very big armies you encounter in dom 3 (at least in sp against mighty+ AIs, as my mp games are around turn 10 I can't say how players will use their extra gold, perhaps armies in mp games will stay closer to what they were in dom2), a spell like pillar of fire (aoe 1) is not that good (especially with precision 0, and your nation perhaps not having access to precision buffs), as well as all lower levels elemental damage spells (falling fire/frost with their bigger AoE being the most useful).

This is true to a very large extent. However, you have to also consider the path of the spells. 2Fire for Pillar of Fire makes all low-end casters able to put holes in the opposing army. Assuming you are dealing with human sized creatures (Size 2), you will kill 3 units per turn, per casting. With 10 F2 mages casting Pillar you will be killing 30 units (20 if cavalry) a turn (10% of the force).

I'm not saying these spells don't need to be looked at, because they do, but lowpath spells like Frozen Heart/Ice Strike/PoF that have visible results with lowpath casters are a nice addition. Unfortunately you usually have to wait 7-8 research levels.

Magic for the mostpart in Dom3 has much less of an earlygame impact and hold consistant to the midgame then comes full force in the lategame. Definitely something I am waiting to see the full spellmodding capabilities to address. Especially considering the nature of "magetime" or RP's being a huge factor of balance.

[Xietor]

Could not read whole thread, i read the few few pages.

1. MA Ulm, nothing about Ulm warrants the curse of their units and commanders having 9 mr. This defect was remedied, in Aarlens, black steel Ulm mod, which i think made them more viable.

2. MA Pangaea's Pans are good, no old age, but Pangaea is severely limited on research with only a 350 gold mage for 8 research. The limited access to magical paths, combined with expensive research, a 30 admin, castle,and paying a penalty to get mercenaries, more than make up for the recuperation and strong units. MA arcosaphale also heals afflictions, has tough units, but has much better research, astral mages, access to many branches of magic, better castles, no mercenary penalty, and is a much better race endgame.

I would suggest giving the pan 1 additional
research point or dropping the cost to 300 gold.

[RamsHead]

You shouldn't be recruiting Pans for research. Use Dryads and Black Dryads for that instead.

[Xietor]

Ram,

I specifically said MA Pangaea who does not get black dryads. As for the White ones, they get a whooping 3 research for 110 gold! Though technically 3 for 110 is cheaper than 8 for 350,You are not going to win many research races getting 3 research a turn. Man's daughter of Avalon gets 4 for 80.

I could live with 4 research for 110 gold. But I would rather just pay the 350 gold and get 9 research with the pan, even though you can get 9 for 330 with 3 dryads as it presently stands.

The point is, pangaea's research could use a slight boost.
It is not like Pangaea is overpowered in MA in the least.

[Graeme Dice]

I specifically said MA Pangaea who does not get black dryads. As for the White ones, they get a whooping 3 research for 110 gold! Though technically 3 for 110 is cheaper than 8 for 350,You are not going to win many research races getting 3 research a turn.

I'm doing quite well in a MP game where all my research was performed by Mictlan priests in a drain 2 dominion, who give me only 2 research points per turn. You don't just add three research per turn, you add 9 research per turn out of three castles for the same upfront cost, and less than half the long term costs. The Dryad costs you 3.67 gold per turn, the Pan costs you 23.33 gold per turn. If it's just for research purposes, then you can afford to have 6.4 Dryads for every Pan over the long term. The Dryad is always cheaper on a gold cost/RP basis.

[Xietor]

That is true, but early in the game, you have 1 castle. And initially, i like to produce Pans, until I get one with death bonus. I have several other reasons why i like having the pans
that are not related to research.

But the thrust of the thread, and my point, is not to debate the relative merits of researching with a dryad v Pan, they both could use some help in the research area. Yes, the dryad is slightly better than Pan at research, but they both are below average.

Conceding your point, then bumping the Pan to 9 research will not affect game balance at all.