did you mean to reduce the average number

[Edratman]

I too thought I was getting less gems now, but simply ascribed it to the normal variations of the game. I've only played two new games since the patch so I didn't catch on until this thread.

I like magic. I like gems. I only play SP and I like to forge everything I can get and cast every spell I can. No such thing as too many gems for me. I spend enough energy working with the constraints of the gold and gem budgets.

I have a question. If I add magic sites in a map edit, do they count against the percentage of magic sites in the setup or are they not counted in site allocation and therefore considered extra?

[Edi]

Random sites are determined at game creation. AFTER the sites are allocated, the game reads the map file and adds province defenders, implements poptype changes and manually added sites. If a province already has 4 sites, any #feature and #knownfeature commands are ignored.

[Saxon]

Edi,

You are better at the game than me! I think this has a real influence on gem use. Also, I just don’t play that much, so when I get a chance to cast a new spell or summon a new creature, I do it, just to see what happens. BC (before child) I played more. I also drank more, went out more and had more friends. On the plus side, I now have more dirty diapers…

Edratman,

I am with you, more magic! Especially diaper cleaning magic.

[Meglobob]

I always play SP games with 75% magic sites, I love a magical rich world. I still never have enough gems... Also I do not empower mages usually unless I am desperate. Nature gem shortage is always a particular problem.

Having said that I have'nt really noticed much of difference. I have a tendancy to be lazy in SP and cast Arcashic Record to find my gems.

I can't see it giving too much a advantage to blood, it takes alot of micro to get 100 - 300 blood slaves and ties down alot of mages.

I think its a very minor problem overall.

[Edi]

Saxon said:
Edi,

You are better at the game than me! I think this has a real influence on gem use. Also, I just don’t play that much, so when I get a chance to cast a new spell or summon a new creature, I do it, just to see what happens.

Hardly. I know more about the game from an encyclopedia perspective, but in a multislayer game I'd be likely to get squashed flat. Since I mostly play SP, I like having bit more of a challenge, which is why I prefer hard research and sites at 30 or 35.

I need to figure out how to have time enough to start an MP game and then the new to intermediate players can get to play "Whack the sage". The veteran crew would have me for breakfast before moving in on each other for lunch.

[Velusion]

As someone who enjoys the aspect of army/troop tactics I welcome the lower gem income.

[Micah]

Blood slave availability has been tied to site frequency ever since version 3.00.

Maybe so, but 0 site frequency gave me about half the blood slaves that max sites gave me, so the setting has a drastically lower effect on blood income than on gems.

[HoneyBadger]

A solution to the problem that strikes me, is to make special sites automatically searchable for mages with three times the level they'd need to find the site normally-so you've got a fire 3 mage auto-finding fire 1 sites, but able to search for fire 2, 3, etc.

And

Then to make the number of 0 level sites not count towards the total percentage. They should have their own chance of popping up, dependent on a map command that you can set when you choose or create a map, so that you can have random or created maps which are naturally more or less rich in terms of easily discoverable resources.

The appearance of rarer sites would still be determined at the beginning of the game.

The auto-searching I've describe might also motivate slightly the addition of level 5 sites (15/3=5, a potential upper limit), which I think would be interesting, as well as making empowerment slightly more strategically rewarding.

To offset the auto-search ability: perhaps a relatively low-level, ubiquitous magic item could be added which would allow blood mages, *only* when they blood-hunt, to automatically find 1 blood slave for every three levels of blood magic they have, *in addition to* whatever blood-slaves they might randomly find otherwise, in the course of a normal blood-hunt.

A level 3 blood mage using the magic item would automatically find atleast 1 blood-slave per turn, plus however many random ones.

Example: "Blood Diadem" Helmet, prot 2. Requires 5 bloodslaves to create, also Blood path 2/Const 0. Carved from the hip-bones and finger-bones of atleast 5 young virgins, the Blood Diadem allows the experienced blood-mage to harness the power of his own blood and actively call out to suitable blood slaves, who cannot resist his call while any portion of the moon is in the sky. Blood hunting is increased dependent on the power of the mage.

Moon Talisman. Misc. Requires 5 bloodslaves to create, also Blood path 4/Const 2. This strange little charm is created in a ritual which opens a gate between the temporal and astral planes, allowing a small moon-rock to fall through. The rock is polished, bound in delicate silver chains, and then soaked in the blood of virgins until it turns from white to dark red. The moon-rock may be used to summon any suitable blood-slaves in the area, via the well-established thaumaturgical law of "Like calls out to like". (This is to allow blood-fountain Pretenders to take advantage, and increase the utility of the whole practice, since you can choose whether you want to use a helmet slot or a misc slot.)

This would both stabilize the "blood magic economy"-useful especially for "cottage-industry" blood economies that might be based on the Blood Fountain, for instance, while at the same time not enormously increasing the power of blood magic, since you'd still be committing atleast 1 powerful (path 3 or above) magic user to forging an item, using a slot, spending slaves, and then producing slaves.

Ofcourse, the rest of the details of blood-hunting would stay as random as they are now.

[DrPraetorious]

HB, much of what you propose would require an engine rewrite of epic proportions .

Actually, myself, I think lvl 4 sites are too hard to find already. Basically, you only find them with spells, since it is never worth the time of an actual lvl 4 mage (with a bare few exceptions, annointed of rhuax maybe since they're guaranteed an earth) to wander around looking for stuff.

At that reate, a lvl 5 site might as well be lvl 9. Both options are supported under the current mod script, by the way - you can also add a bunch of common sites that make extra gems, if you think the current mix is income poor.

[Rathar]

Statistically speaking, if the chance to have a site be a common site is X(say 50% or whatever) then the chance is still X no matter how many possible sites there are to choose from. The same holds true for uncommon/rare site. One can achieve a higher or lower average gem production value (phew, say that 15 times fast.. while not sober..) in this case only if the mean production of the sites has increased or decreased. I.E. if the average common used to make you 1.3 gems and now it makes you 1.5 gems you have a gain.

All I am saying there is that having more sites to choose from doesn't really matter, it's the percentage of occurence that matters most.

Now as to blood production..

If the rate of blood slave capture remains the same while the average rate of return from gem producing sites changes then blood becomes either greater or lesser in a way that should be obvious.

I am not taking site frequency into consideration as supposedly it is tied to blood as well so it is thus a constant.