Vengeance of the dead, what the hell

[Kuritza]

So, if we agree upon #3 (I sure do), who's going to submit it to bug list? I dont know how it's done.

[llamabeast]

I've done it!

[Digress]

On this whole doubling the horde of undead after each successful casting of VotD - should undead kills count for this spell in the first place ?

The spell isn't Vengeance of the Undead. Do mindless zombies have souls which need to be avenged ? I don't think so.

[Wyatt Hebert]

Having read all of this thread, I would tend to agree with Edi. However, a few points I have thought of:

1) VotD, Dreams of Rl'yeh. Do these work like Arena fights? (If so, this would explain why Immortals still die.) If not, then auto-destroy at turn limit killing Immortals seems like a bug.

2) Assuming a 4% chance to work (and this may be high), odds are it will take 16 castings for VotD to affect the target (0.96^x=0.5; x*log 0.96=log 0.5; x=(log 0.96)/(log 0.5)). This, therefore, requires 16 mage-turns of, what, a SSSD or DDDS or whichever it is, which is, in itself, 96 Research, as well as the upkeep of those mages. Assuming it's not even a threat to a SC with less than 100 kills, well, it seems rather fair. That's 16 times the cost of the spell (2 pearls, right?), 16 mage-turns of a decent mage type, and to have already killed 100+ troops. And, yes, it's a God in this case, so he can be called back. This by Caelum, in this case, which doesn't even have to worry about losing Mage-turns to Call God.

These are the numbers to look at. Is _this_ considered fair? (And, of course, understand that _this_ particular case involves someone without a weapon that can hurt Undead. It is conceivable that with a better Weapon (which I understand the OP didn't have access to) he could have lived through this attack, and caused the number of castings to double.

Any error in the numerical analysis?

Wyatt Hebert

[thejeff]

Part of the problem with this discussion is that the two sides of the debate seem to be talking past each other.

One side, largely, is saying that dying because the attackers don't auto-rout when they should is wrong.

The other side is saying the overall chance of killing an SC is low, so the spell is balanced.

These are different arguments. They're not even opposed. The spell can be balanced, but achieve its affect in an unfair way. I'd say that's where I stand. The balance is likely fine, it may even be underpowered, but losing an SC due to time limits when the attacker should rout first is a lousy way to achieve that balance.

I'd suggest either strengthening or cheapening the spell, but allowing the dead to rout, by giving them a few non-mindless commanders if necessary.

Are there any other ways to get an attack force (either assassination or province attack type spell) without a commander? Phantasmal attack, maybe? (I think that's what it's called. The one that sends phantasmal warriors to attack a province?) Are they mindless?

[Kuritza]

>> These are the numbers to look at.

The numbers lie. I am not sure why, but astral spells with some penetration items work FAR better than beforementioned 4%. In my case it took exactly 3 castings to pass through 25 MR, supposedly without any penetration items on casting mages. Heck, I routinely have my 25-MR SCs paralyzed with the very first casting for 40+ turns, and I have given up hope of ever using a SC against R'lyeh.
Your 16 attempts number looks really, really overestimated.

And in case of Caelum you can count the turns you have to spend recruiting priests for calling back your God instead of recruiting mages and the losses your army will suffer without him now that your God doesnt stand between your mages and enemy sacreds. Probably you will simply lose the game.
Ah, and the mage-turns for equipping your god again.
Oh, and why bother calling him, he still has all these kills on him and will eat VotD again.

And one more thing to consider. This is not just a highly situational SC-removal spell. Most mages dont stand a chance against 40-50 zombies they will likely have to face alone, which is a very good result for 3 astral pearls.

[Reverend Zombie]

How about...removing the turn limit entirely for VotD attacks?

[thejeff]

Highly agreed with Kuritza's last point.
I'd always considered it much more useful against battle mages who've racked up a decent number of kills, than against SCs. I just assumed most SCs would survive it. Hadn't considered the turn limit.

[Kuritza]

Thats the ideal solution to me (there might not be a stalemate in VotD, but default), but all exceptions require the devs to change game code usually, which they hate.
I am not speaking about the Dominions devs now, of course, but I guess there are serious reasons for such trend.

[Valandil]

Removing the turn limit can cause serious problems. Some immobile units might be targetable with VOTD, but unable to kill or be killed by the spirits. (Eg only deals cold damage). Upon hosting, computer go boom!