| Author |
Topic Search Topic Options
|
Kumomoto
Postmaster General
Joined: 19 Oct 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 2224
|
Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 21:29 |
Shrapnel wrote:
bartimeus wrote:
I disagree, seeking spell is awesome if you get attacked by thieves. They never attaque you again after that. |
Agreed. I used to think seeking runes were useless, but I'm more likely to be hit by theives than anything else, so they make sense, but if a war should occur, then I can switch to death runes. |
In war, the seeking spell vs. assassins is also extremely useful...
|
 |
Shrapnel
Wordsmith
Joined: 01 Jun 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 180
|
Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 21:22 |
bartimeus wrote:
I disagree, seeking spell is awesome if you get attacked by thieves. They never attaque you again after that. |
Agreed. I used to think seeking runes were useless, but I'm more likely to be hit by theives than anything else, so they make sense, but if a war should occur, then I can switch to death runes.
|
 |
bartimeus
Forum Warrior
Joined: 09 Jul 2010
Location: Right behind U
Status: Offline
Points: 222
|
Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 20:02 |
|
I disagree, seeking spell is awesome if you get attacked by thieves. They never attaque you again after that.
|
|
Bartimeus, your very best friend.
|
 |
Brids17
Postmaster General
Joined: 30 Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 1483
|
Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 20:00 |
|
Fear runes aren't completely useless. I use them until I can get my mage tower to 15, which takes quite a while. So they're good for low level players. I think even if you made changes to the spell people are going to to favor the ward of destruction anyway. I'd rather simply kill my opponent rather then send them back to their city. The seeking runes are kind of useless too as they're too limited. Sure I could take out 400 of something but it's only one type of diplo.
|
 |
Dervious Jhyris
New Poster
Joined: 25 Jun 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 19
|
Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 19:32 |
|
SC, if you want to keep things simple, I see two options
1)Keep the diplos in the party, but don't let them attack. Hold them back like the army in siege. This "splits them up", but still only allows 1 diplo group.
or 2) go with the other idea, make the fear rune NOT have charges and only break if beaten, but make it slightly larger and have it completely fail if its taken down.
The second is obviously a lot simpler to set up and would still be a perfectly reasonable method of increasing the runes versatilty - by not being charge based, and lasting until its trumped either way, it carves out a very nice niche for itself.
|
 |
Shrapnel
Wordsmith
Joined: 01 Jun 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 180
|
Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 18:53 |
Zangi and Ethelion,
Excellent ideas, but it gets away from the main topic of this thread, making fear runes useful. If your ideas are implemented, I still would never want to use the fear runes, because I'd always want to charge my killing runes. In fact, I think that'd make seeking runes useless too.
So we need something that makes fear runes useful, but doesn't let the system change the status. How about changing the effect of the rune? Right now the rune just makes the attacking army return. How about if it not only makes the attacking army return, but basically paralyzes the army for a period of time? That army returns, but then you cannot send it out or make any changes to that army for a period of a couple hours or so? Or maybe the army doesn't return, but camps outside making it vulnerable to attack from other parties? Maybe a fear rune gives a combat penalty to an attacking army? Fear runes would have the benefit of affecting whole armies instead of having charges, but still wouldn't kill the troops. Would this create a strategical enough choice that some people may opt for fear instead of killing?
|
 |
Ethelion
New Poster
Joined: 16 Sep 2010
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 34
|
Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 18:15 |
Stormcrow,
I understand what you are saying. What about a line of magic research that would allow you to manually recharge partially dimished spells? Puts the player back into the mix, but allows for getting spells back to full power without have to cancel it, wait the cool off time, and then recast.
I'm thinking it could work something like this:
1) Have three levels of recharge spells that could apply to any spell that has a charge.
i.e. Gift of Mana: recharges up to 25% of charges, cool-off time 8 hours
Minor Mana Flare: recharge up to 50% of charges, cool-off time 16 hours
Major Mana Flare: recharge up to 100% of charges, cool-off time 32 hours
2) (Possible addition, but adds complexity) Cool-off time applies to both the recharging line and the target magic school
|
 |
Zangi
Forum Warrior
Joined: 15 Jul 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 295
|
Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 18:04 |
|
Ok, what about a player recharge spell? To recharge runes? More cows and less cooldown?
Like... Level 1 Recharges 10 charges. Level 2 Recharges 50 charges. Level 3 Recharges 150 charges.
Limited by 'Max' charge of the original spell.
Though, this is not in my interest if implemented alone... considering my suggest for longer cooldowns to the kill ward spells, specifically Ward of Destruction...
And instead of just 'scrying', why not allow advanced Spies to find this information out also?
|
 |
GM Stormcrow
Moderator Group
GM
Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Location: Illyria
Status: Offline
Points: 3820
|
Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 17:57 |
Ethelion wrote:
I think that spells with charges should regenerate at a rate of max charges/cool-off period. |
Again, the "confuse" factor is possible here. We have ideas in mind for a school of "Scrying". This might tell you the number of charges remaining. But generally, once a number has been reported, we're against changing it. Players need to know what they're fighting against. For example, if your scouts hit an NPC camp and you get a report back, if you send an army out then and there - regardless of the time or distance to that NPC - it doesn't suddenly transform from a Handful of Wolves to a Legion of Arakvar (as that would be unfair). ie, if there's an army inbound, the system doesn't change that fact. I'm all for *players* changing facts (by reinforcement, or by dropping and recasting spells, or whatever), but I'm generally against game facts that the system changes itself (ie regenerating spells). They only lead to player confusion which manifests itself (from our perspective) as Petitions called "My report said X and the reality was Y", which we'd prefer not to have! Best, SC
|
 |
Ethelion
New Poster
Joined: 16 Sep 2010
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 34
|
Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 17:18 |
|
I think that spells with charges should regenerate at a rate of max charges/cool-off period.
|
 |