Hidden in Snow

[Sir_Dr_D]

Lazy_perfectionist. Very well said. Hidden in Snow does work well with certain strategies. And you also gave all the reasons why I researched in the enchamnet school.


Are people on here arguing that the spell is bad because it is random, and there is a chance of a bad casting? OR are they arguing that even at its max it is sub par. I am biased towards it because I had good luck in its casting.

[PvK]

Zath said:
...PvK:

I am afraid that what you perceive as narrow is to me just getting to the point. Hidden in Snow is a poor spell for solely troop summons, and a poor spell for solely mage summons. Bundling two poor functions together in this case does not produce a good spell, because the effort put into this spell could be better spent in its specialized counterparts instead for greater overall gain.
...

To reduce a spell like Hidden in Snow to one point (as in "just getting to the point") is what I mean by a narrow perspective. I'm not saying it would be wrong to choose that perspective, but I see others that seem equally valid, and are more compelling to me.

I don't see how "the effort put into this spell could be better spent in its specialized counterparts instead for greater overall gain", unless you choose to weigh the pessimistic result more than the optimistic result. Either perspective is valid, but it's a choice, not an absolute value.

So Hidden in Snow casts 55 Water gems and requires W3D1, and gives 0-2 mages with W0-3, D0-3, E0-3, and some number of unique pretty good undead warriors and often a commander/thug.

Your suggestion if I understand it is instead of casting Streams from Hades a few times (possibly once, average twice, _if_ your goal is to get E2+:

Cast Streams From Hades for 40 Water gems with a W_4_D1 mage, to get exactly one W3D3 mage.
Somehow, as a nation without Earth magic, get 80 Earth gems to empower someone to E2.

And to get the same effect, also:
Cast other spells to get something you consider better than the unfrozen warriors and commanders.
Cast other spells or hire other mages to get more mages to match the ones that didn't have E2 that you would likely have got from casting Streams From Hades.

So versus an average of 110 water gems by a W3D1 mage for a bunch of troops, commanders, and mages with mixed WDE magic, you spend 40 water gems, 80 earth gems (that you probably don't have), and whatever other mage-time and gems it takes to get whatever makes up for the other undead and mages you won't get.

Seems to me you are spending considerably more because you focus on the pessimistic possibility that you'll not get the mages you think you want. Which is a valid perspective, but not necessarily more valid than the optimistic perspective that you could get several likely multi-path mages plus troops and commanders for less investment, D3 rather than D2, that even extra D2 mages are nothing to sneeze at, etc.

PvK

[Wyatt Hebert]

Zath: I, also, believe you are looking at it narrowly. Without the extra experience of the others, I will restrict my comments to things I know I'm working with.

First of all, sticking 2E on KO's pretender is not always the optimal choice. If it's a rainbow pretender, it would be fine, but if Earth magic was that critical to your gameplan, you should have put that on in the first place. Also, working on that plan, if it's a combat pretender, you have to tie up your pretender to use it for non-combat work.

Second of all, your statistics, while accurate as stated, can be considered misleading. The possible results of the spell, assuming even probabilities, using your focus, are as follows:

33% No mage.
33% 1 Mage (12.5% 0E, 37.5% 1E, 37.5% 2E, 12.5% 3E)
33% 2 Mages (Each at probabilities above).

So, what are the chances per cast of getting a 2E+ mage. Well, it would be 33.3%+16.7%, or 50%, as stated.* Very good. Now, the question: What's this mean? You have a 50% chance, per casting, of getting a 2E+ mage. However, simply stated that way, you ignore the other point. The other option is simply not getting a 2E+ mage, NOT getting no mage or a useless mage.

PvK's point is that there are some people who have no problems taking risks. Also, some of the alternatives provided take more time. Claymen may well be more effective, in general. However, they either take (1) more mage time, or (2) a rather high level caster in Water (which typically means a lot of investment or your pretender). Also note that there is better than a 50% chance, I believe, of getting a mage who can cast Claymen. Possibly the best use of it is when you are sieged, and gambling on getting enough help to not lose the castle. Lack of time can do that.

Wyatt Hebert

* I believe the probability is slightly lower than 50%, actually. Probability of getting at least one mage of 2E+ is 0% (No mage generated)+ 33% (One mage generated) * 50% (getting 2E+)+33% (two mages generated)*75% (at least one of the two mages has 2E+)=41.667%, or less than 50%.

[Kristoffer O]

> If I am not mistaken, Hidden in Snow is not accessible to MA Mictlan's national mages. This would indicate to me that you are likely casting Hidden in Snow with a pretender or a mage summoned by your pretender, and that this spell was only available to you after some diversification in magic was achieved. With that in mind, I think you would have been better off just sticking 2E on your pretender instead of going in a circle and risking vast amounts of water gems for access to earth magic.

55 is not vast amounts. A lot cheaper than empowering a mage from scratch. I think I tend to empower a lot though.

My pretender had neither earth nor water. I decided to use death gems to empower an ordinary rain priest after I got a magical plague event that gave me a boost in death gems. Now I have greater access to both earth and death than before.

I did not plan to cast the spell when I made my pretender, but as the game has turned out it is quite useful. I have not researched that high on conj, so ench is a nice way to spend gems not used on items or empowerment.

[mr_Logic]

never tried it, but such extreme variation in pay off makes this spell a gamble, and everyone knows you should gamble with funds you cant afford to miss.

if you have water gems to spare, but are in need of earth/death magic however...

(oops, forgot how old this thread was)

[Lazy_Perfectionist]

An admittedly rare situation...

In Veturi, there's only three players remaining. Currently,
Ermor was duking it out with Tien Chi whilst I cast Maelstrom, Sea of Ice, Well of Misery, and Riches from Beneath. Obviously, I wasn't going to be able to remain neutral for much longer. So in one of my border provinces and one turn...

5 Castings of Hidden in Snow got me 12 commanders, including mages. I averaged about 4 to 7 Unfrozen Warriors, maybe 14 to 17 Unfrozen per cast.

I spent maybe 275 water gems, plus a water bracelet for each mage. 320 something... Not a small expense- certainly not economical.

Admittedly, it was a surprise attack, this squad faced off against 153 undead and lost 19 (of 107) in return. They were scripted to cleansing water but I probably could have done better. I got a few 2,2,2, but nothing better. Since this is late game, I should have given one earth boots, and scripted, perhaps, Earthpower -> Army of Lead. Though I wasn't there quite yet, I could have been if I focused my research which is near 600 a turn. That alteration path would have also opened up quickening, which I would have been able to cast.

More practically aiming, Strength of Giants is on the Enchantment path, though there isn't much reason to bring that into play against Ermor. I can cast that with just two gems, even with a E1 mage. I could have pulled out some skelly spam of my own to even the odds. I could have cast Legions of Steel (construction 3), to buff my squads protection. Alteration really doesn't have much to offer me for a low research investment.

So, my first real fight was hardly a fair test of their value, but it did get me thinking how I'd make the most use of them, instead of using the mages to cast spells capable of friendly fire.

If I were to adjust the spell itself, I'd do one of two things...
Make it less expensive at 30 gems, making it summon five Unfrozen Warriors, 10 Unfrozen, 1 Unfrozen Lord, and 1 Unfrozen Mage with 1W1D1E 100%, with a 50% shot each at one additional level of water, death, and earth.
This would make it a) more consistent b). guarantee the ability to cast earth buffs, though I would need boosters/gems, along with other spells, and c). make it something I can dream of casting twice early on. If there was still some random factor, this would allow me to compensate for a bad roll.

Make it more expensive, say, 70 or 80 gems. As well, I'd get a minimum of 20 or 30 unfrozen, possibly as much as 60.
This way, instead of five castings getting me 105 unfrozen, I'd get that amount in four casting or less. I'm not going to hammer out exact numbers, but I'm thinking making the per gem roughly the same or somewhat better, but making an individual casting cost maybe 50% more, and be 50% more effective, plus somewhat reliable.

As it is, you may cast Hidden in Snow, and get around ten units- hardly enough to use as part of a fighting force, especially considering their weaknesses compared to wights. If you know you're getting at least 25, or so, you've got an additional strike force you can summon up in a pinch. They're not elites, but with some buff spells, their hardly a laughing matter, and could carve through unprepared armies. And you at least get greater numbers to differentiate them from a legion of wights. I've always thought from an unreasoning standpoint that a tribe should be forty units. I mean, I hardly see less when fighting independent wolf tribes. And while I don't see a reason for this, some banefire bows might be interesting.

[Burnsaber]

I'm very dissapointed in this spell. I have casted it 5 times (in MP nonetheless!) and hit no mages. It's simply not fun. I had Enchnament bonus site, but still those could have been spend elsewhere.

A bit of randomness is cool, but I just don't think that Hidden In Snow is anyway near it's appropiate gem cost, if it can backfire this much.

[Lingchih]

Lazy_Perfectionist said:
An admittedly rare situation...

In Veturi, there's only three players remaining. Currently,
Ermor was duking it out with Tien Chi whilst I cast Maelstrom, Sea of Ice, Well of Misery, and Riches from Beneath. Obviously, I wasn't going to be able to remain neutral for much longer. So in one of my border provinces and one turn...

5 Castings of Hidden in Snow got me 12 commanders, including mages. I averaged about 4 to 7 Unfrozen Warriors, maybe 14 to 17 Unfrozen per cast.

I spent maybe 275 water gems, plus a water bracelet for each mage. 320 something... Not a small expense- certainly not economical.

Admittedly, it was a surprise attack, this squad faced off against 153 undead and lost 19 (of 107) in return. They were scripted to cleansing water but I probably could have done better. I got a few 2,2,2, but nothing better. Since this is late game, I should have given one earth boots, and scripted, perhaps, Earthpower -> Army of Lead. Though I wasn't there quite yet, I could have been if I focused my research which is near 600 a turn. That alteration path would have also opened up quickening, which I would have been able to cast.

More practically aiming, Strength of Giants is on the Enchantment path, though there isn't much reason to bring that into play against Ermor. I can cast that with just two gems, even with a E1 mage. I could have pulled out some skelly spam of my own to even the odds. I could have cast Legions of Steel (construction 3), to buff my squads protection. Alteration really doesn't have much to offer me for a low research investment.

So, my first real fight was hardly a fair test of their value, but it did get me thinking how I'd make the most use of them, instead of using the mages to cast spells capable of friendly fire.

If I were to adjust the spell itself, I'd do one of two things...
Make it less expensive at 30 gems, making it summon five Unfrozen Warriors, 10 Unfrozen, 1 Unfrozen Lord, and 1 Unfrozen Mage with 1W1D1E 100%, with a 50% shot each at one additional level of water, death, and earth.
This would make it a) more consistent b). guarantee the ability to cast earth buffs, though I would need boosters/gems, along with other spells, and c). make it something I can dream of casting twice early on. If there was still some random factor, this would allow me to compensate for a bad roll.

Make it more expensive, say, 70 or 80 gems. As well, I'd get a minimum of 20 or 30 unfrozen, possibly as much as 60.
This way, instead of five castings getting me 105 unfrozen, I'd get that amount in four casting or less. I'm not going to hammer out exact numbers, but I'm thinking making the per gem roughly the same or somewhat better, but making an individual casting cost maybe 50% more, and be 50% more effective, plus somewhat reliable.

As it is, you may cast Hidden in Snow, and get around ten units- hardly enough to use as part of a fighting force, especially considering their weaknesses compared to wights. If you know you're getting at least 25, or so, you've got an additional strike force you can summon up in a pinch. They're not elites, but with some buff spells, their hardly a laughing matter, and could carve through unprepared armies. And you at least get greater numbers to differentiate them from a legion of wights. I've always thought from an unreasoning standpoint that a tribe should be forty units. I mean, I hardly see less when fighting independent wolf tribes. And while I don't see a reason for this, some banefire bows might be interesting.

Nice. I've never spammed Hidden in Snow, but it sounds effective. I assume that would give you a fairly nice undead attack force, with fairly high HP, along with quite a few mages. I'm not sure I could ever replicate that in a real game, but it sounds interesting.

[Kristoffer O]

I got a D3E3W2 and a D2 W2 mage on my first casting. But that is probably ridiculously rare.

[Caduceus]

Kristoffer O said:
I got a D3E3W2 and a D2 W2 mage on my first casting. But that is probably ridiculously rare.

I think the game is playing favorites. FAVORITES, I SAY!!