Is magic worth it?!?

General_Jah · #1 June 14th, 2007, 05:28 PM

So if I am understanding some of you right... LA magic has less of an impact on the game... In your opinions does minimizing this huge dynamic of the game (magic) in the LA and to lesser extent MA, make the game less strategically complex? If I am wanting a more strategically complex game do you recommend sticking with EA?

What are most MP games played with?

Any recommendations for a good SP experience?

thanks!

Jazzepi · #2 June 14th, 2007, 05:30 PM

The only difference I've noticed of magic in the game is that EA, by default, has a higher random magic site level.

I guess the nations are suppose to have less access to good mages, as well.

Jazzepi

Shovah32 · #3 June 14th, 2007, 05:48 PM

Magic has a strong impact in every age. Certainly there are some very strongly magical early nations(abysia gets F4+randoms on a mage, caelum A4+randoms ect) but LA has some decent mages too(check out patala) and in any game lasting a long time magic will probably be the main factor. As gandalf said small maps, weak independents(7-9 is most common) and many opponents all lessen the effects of magic and limit the time and resources avaliable to develop your magic.

Play a single player game with the minimum reccomended ai players, indies set to 8 and other settings on normal and you should get to use some magic.

LA Arco isnt really a good choice for seeing the powers of battle-field magic when your just starting. Astral is mainly single target up until the end game and nature isnt really a combat path either. Try the game setting i reccomended with EA Abysia and hire a bunch of mages(trying to get atleast a few annointed of rhuax for later) to quickly research evocation(up to atleast falling fires). You national troops are fire-immune so they wont take damage from your fireballs and falling fires which should decimate the enemy.

General_Jah · #4 June 14th, 2007, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Shovah32 said:
Magic has a strong impact in every age. Certainly there are some very strongly magical early nations(abysia gets F4+randoms on a mage, caelum A4+randoms ect) but LA has some decent mages too(check out patala) and in any game lasting a long time magic will probably be the main factor. As gandalf said small maps, weak independents(7-9 is most common) and many opponents all lessen the effects of magic and limit the time and resources avaliable to develop your magic.

Play a single player game with the minimum reccomended ai players, indies set to 8 and other settings on normal and you should get to use some magic.

LA Arco isnt really a good choice for seeing the powers of battle-field magic when your just starting. Astral is mainly single target up until the end game and nature isnt really a combat path either. Try the game setting i reccomended with EA Abysia and hire a bunch of mages(trying to get atleast a few annointed of rhuax for later) to quickly research evocation(up to atleast falling fires). You national troops are fire-immune so they wont take damage from your fireballs and falling fires which should decimate the enemy.

thanks i will try that!

MaxWilson · #5 July 3rd, 2007, 01:18 AM

Quote:

Shovah32 said:
LA Arco isnt really a good choice for seeing the powers of battle-field magic when your just starting. Astral is mainly single target up until the end game and nature isnt really a combat path either. Try the game setting i reccomended with EA Abysia and hire a bunch of mages(trying to get atleast a few annointed of rhuax for later) to quickly research evocation(up to atleast falling fires). You national troops are fire-immune so they wont take damage from your fireballs and falling fires which should decimate the enemy.

I thought Arco had access to mystics in all ages. If so, you've got great battle magic because all mystics have access to Communion at Thau-1, and with the great variety of elemental magics mystics have you should be able to cast most of the good battle spells up to E3/W3/F3 or so, depending upon which mystic you pick to be the Communion master.

-Max

-Max

Ironhawk · #6 June 14th, 2007, 05:50 PM

Yeah, i think that is a valid statement. Magic has less impact in LA cause your mages arent as powerful / dont have as good randoms. But I think the extent of the impact is highly debatable.

If you are looking to maximize the dynamism of a game you should play EA. There will be, on average, more summoned units, more interesting battlefield spells, and more globals due to the prevalance of magic.

Forrest · #7 June 15th, 2007, 12:25 AM

If you can't stand to piecemeal it then Mass protection is for you. Suddenly those lizards that C'tiss puts out become hard to kill. Don't forget your healing light or Skull staffs.

My personal favorites Flaming arrows and rain, depending on which side I am on.

Desiccation or Curse of the desert seems petty but I have seen it rout mean armies. Your troops just grind to a halt.

Got water? Bottles of living water are great. One water elemental is pathetic. Five or ten is something else. That wimpy scout is a one shot SC. Put him in the front with a say behind troops order and he is a fire and forget weapon.

SlipperyJim · #8 June 15th, 2007, 01:53 PM

Wishing for dominion is one of my favorite tricks. It's great to help score that end-game dominion kill against the stupid Sphinx hiding in his fortress, or against the water nation when I don't want to bother with Thetis Blessing.

One of the best things to do with magic is build stuff. Nature has some great construction potential, especially in the Misc category. Wineskins and Cauldrons will end all of your supply woes, Rings of Regen are good insurance for valuable commanders, and a Barkskin Amulet is a cheap way to protect a mage from the occasional stray arrow.

In a MA Man game once, I had a standard outfit for my Mothers of Avalon. Every Mother got a Robe of Missile Protection and a Barkskin Amulet. It was cheap & effective, and they could self-forge the gear. No, it didn't make my mages unkillable, but it sure helped keep the casualty rate down as low as possible.

General_Jah · #9 June 15th, 2007, 03:18 PM

hrmm perhaps i'm missing somethere here too...

In single player it seems like it's more of a game of mass smaller battles so to speak instead of these titanic end all battles... The computere usually has his forces relatievly spread out and I am forced to do the same to some extent to keep my borders from being invaded...

How does this play out in MP? When fighting human opponents are the battles typically more decisive?

Shovah32 · #10 June 15th, 2007, 03:24 PM

There is generally even more raiding in multiplayer than in single player but, as humans also tend to hold less back there are usually more decisive battles too.