Mark of fear.
Printed From: Illyriad
Category: Miscellaneous
Forum Name: Suggestions & Game Enhancements
Forum Description: Got a great idea? A feature you'd like to see? Share it here!
URL: http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/forum_posts.asp?TID=1079
Printed Date: 17 Apr 2022 at 13:45 Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Mark of fear.
Posted By: col0005
Subject: Mark of fear.
Date Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 12:22
|
Hey I was just wondering if anyone actually found the fear runes useful, the ward of insanity in particular seem useless as it only has 50 more charges than with a re-cast 4 hrs sooner, yet the player can seend all 300 units right back at you.
So I was thinking that this spell could be a lot more useful if rather than dissapating like the other spells if the ward of insanity was a permanent ward that sent say 100 units back home, not even close to as good as the ward of destruction yet would block small attacks indefinitely so very useful against many opponents.
|
Replies:
Posted By: bartimeus
Date Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 12:49
You are rigth in saying the fear rune are currently useless. but your solution seams to make it to potent in my oppinion. unless the dev give us some way to crack the spell (mage unit?).
------------- Bartimeus, your very best friend.
|
Posted By: Zangi
Date Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 13:18
So, you are saying, this fear ward would have infinite charges and not dissipate when overwhelmed? No to that.
It would be more useful and balanced if... for example, it has 50 charges left and the attacker/thief sends 100 units. 50 of those units run back home, while the other 50 keep on their mission. (And get themselves killed.)
|
Posted By: col0005
Date Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 13:26
|
maybe.... what about if it was a new fear spell that required level 18 mage tower and only worked against military units, remember it would then only be useful against a co-ordinated military assault. And by that stage a loss of 100 troops (which just get sent home) Shouldn't affect a battle to too great an extent. Also the cost of the spell is the one off ability to instantly slay 250 troops rather than send say 1000 troops home against 10 opponents.
|
Posted By: Dervious Jhyris
Date Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 15:13
|
I think it shouldn't have charges at all... simply a "break" point. If it's overwhelmed, its destroyed (while still sending those units back!), but otherwise it lasts forever.
|
Posted By: bartimeus
Date Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 15:19
I'm totaly for your Idea Dervious
------------- Bartimeus, your very best friend.
|
Posted By: Zangi
Date Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 15:27
Dervious Jhyris wrote:
I think it shouldn't have charges at all... simply a "break" point. If it's overwhelmed, its destroyed (while still sending those units back!), but otherwise it lasts forever.
|
I'm good with that.
|
Posted By: GM Stormcrow
Date Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 15:34
Dervious Jhyris wrote:
I think it shouldn't have charges at all... simply a "break" point. If it's overwhelmed, its destroyed (while still sending those units back!), but otherwise it lasts forever.
|
Is this not what it already has, with the exception of "allowing the units to carry on" vs "sending them back"?
Or are you saying it should send back X units who were "feared" but allow Y to carry on, thus breaking the attackers force...?
Best,
SC
EDIT: re-read it... Oh, you're saying it should never reduce charges unless it breaks. Interesting.
|
Posted By: Strategos
Date Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 15:39
|
It's an interesting idea, the first thought that comes to mind is that this might be fair, given the rune doesn't kill any units.
My second thought however is, wouldn't this make it very difficult for a group of smaller players to band up against one larger player?
------------- Postatem obscuri lateris nescitis
|
Posted By: Shrapnel
Date Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 15:53
Strategos wrote:
It's an interesting idea, the first thought that comes to mind is that this might be fair, given the rune doesn't kill any units.
My second thought however is, wouldn't this make it very difficult for a group of smaller players to band up against one larger player? |
What if the breaking point is based on how many units attack within a certain time period? For example, say a rune has 100 "charges" before it breaks and army A attacks with 50 troops, 5 minutes later army B attacks with 40 trroops, then another 5 minutes later army C attacks with 50 troops. The rune then breaks because more than 100 "charges" were used within 10 minutes, but say army C didn't attack until 10 hours later, then the rune doesn't break. Maybe the fear runes will still have charges, but the charges regenerate over time?
|
Posted By: Strategos
Date Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 15:54
Some very interesting ideas Shrapnel, definately worth looking into.
------------- Postatem obscuri lateris nescitis
|
Posted By: Zangi
Date Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 16:41
Strategos wrote:
My second thought however is, wouldn't this make it very difficult for a group of smaller players to band up against one larger player? |
Well the thing is, those smaller groups of players will still keep their soldiers, to fight another day. The commander might die though if he is immune, perhaps they can be effected by it too? Or at least be smart enough to turn around if everyone else wet their pants...
But yea, I like Shrap's idea of it not holding under 'coordinated and constant barrage'. Charges could instead recharge over time, like 1 charge every 5 or 10 minutes till it reaches max?
|
Posted By: Dervious Jhyris
Date Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 16:41
Or it could be that dealing with smaller players for a while is exactly what its for?
Since the units survive, it just means you need to be dedicated and build up a larger enough force till you break it.
And
yes, SC, I think it should ALSO send back that many units and split the
force, giving it a little more oomph, as right now despite the higher
charge count a destructo ward is more useful since you can effectively
handle more units with a bit of diplo defense.
If you DON'T have
it split up forces, my proposal for "infinite charges until broken"
should probably be accompanied by a significant increase in size.
Essentially,
wards of destruction become the basic tool of war and fear wards become
the easy low maintainence way to deal with harriers and random thieves,
since only a dedicated attack can overcome it (but it isn't likely to
do much to hurt a dedicated attack).
|
Posted By: GM Stormcrow
Date Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 16:56
Shrapnel wrote:
Strategos wrote:
It's an interesting idea, the first thought that comes to mind is that this might be fair, given the rune doesn't kill any units.
My second thought however is, wouldn't this make it very difficult for a group of smaller players to band up against one larger player? |
What if the breaking point is based on how many units attack within a certain time period? For example, say a rune has 100 "charges" before it breaks and army A attacks with 50 troops, 5 minutes later army B attacks with 40 trroops, then another 5 minutes later army C attacks with 50 troops. The rune then breaks because more than 100 "charges" were used within 10 minutes, but say army C didn't attack until 10 hours later, then the rune doesn't break. Maybe the fear runes will still have charges, but the charges regenerate over time? |
Heart says yes, head says no.
Far too complicated - we're trying to "declutter" things. Players need to be able to see what's what at a particualr point in time, and things should really only shift through *direct* player activity, rather than time-based things (as much as possible).
|
Posted By: GM Stormcrow
Date Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 17:00
Dervious Jhyris wrote:
And
yes, SC, I think it should ALSO send back that many units and split the
force, giving it a little more oomph, as right now despite the higher
charge count a destructo ward is more useful since you can effectively
handle more units with a bit of diplo defense.
|
That was slightly what I was afraid of, but thought was actually the most sensible option too...
Much more coding involved in this (ie handling "non-participatory units who have been feared, but still part of the main force of units who haven't been").
The alternative is to simply send back the other units and let the remainder go on - but that's probably as much code (as you need to explain to the sending player why he sent out one diplo group but now has two coming back).
Will think on it.
Best,
SC
|
Posted By: Ethelion
Date Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 17:18
|
I think that spells with charges should regenerate at a rate of max charges/cool-off period.
|
Posted By: GM Stormcrow
Date 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
|
Posted By: Zangi
Date 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?
|
Posted By: Ethelion
Date 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
|
Posted By: Shrapnel
Date 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?
|
Posted By: Dervious Jhyris
Date 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.
|
Posted By: Brids17
Date 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.
|
Posted By: bartimeus
Date 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.
|
Posted By: Shrapnel
Date 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.
|
Posted By: Kumomoto
Date 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...
|
Posted By: GM Stormcrow
Date Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 21:56
Seeking spells are, indeed, awesome.
But I am interested in "rejuvenating" the generic fear spells beyond the early days, and there are some good suggestions here.
Another interesting thought is to let scouts and spies be affected by fear (in addition to some of the suggestions made here).
|
Posted By: col0005
Date Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 23:06
|
even if you make the fear rune larger it would still be utterly useless from a military perspective i'm not that big but the rune would easily fail under my force.
Could the rune actually target the commander of the army, making him more than aware of his own failings, effectively removing any benefits the commander would normall impart. Would this be easier from a programmimg perspective?
|
Posted By: KarL Aegis
Date Posted: 01 Oct 2010 at 01:27
|
Make them go away and move at half speed as well.
Just reverse engineer the caravanserai bug a while ago and.. hope you can figure it out.
------------- I am not amused.
|
Posted By: col0005
Date Posted: 01 Oct 2010 at 13:53
|
Just wondering if it would be that difficult to split the armies. Surely the explanation to the sending player could be contained in the e-mail they'd recieve when they triggered the ward. And the code could be simmilar to the ward of destruction except the slain units would be duplicated and sent home. (I don't know how hard this would be)
|
Posted By: Illyriad Admin
Date Posted: 01 Oct 2010 at 14:06
col0005 wrote:
Just wondering if it would be that difficult to split the armies. Surely the explanation to the sending player could be contained in the e-mail they'd recieve when they triggered the ward. And the code could be simmilar to the ward of destruction except the slain units would be duplicated and sent home. (I don't know how hard this would be) |
It'd be horribly difficult for many reasons.
To name but a few off the top of my head: What is the new "feared" army name? What is/are the division names? Would we have multiple divisions, mirroring the original armies' structure? What if it no commanders got feared? Armies can't move without at least one commander... What speed does the "feared" army move at?
So definitely another solution needed!
Best,
SC
|
Posted By: GM Stormcrow
Date Posted: 01 Oct 2010 at 14:08
Apologies for posting under the wrong account. It is, indeed, me.
SC
|
Posted By: col0005
Date Posted: 01 Oct 2010 at 14:33
|
I'm sure the coding would be far more difficult than the difficulties you've listed there. After all this is a temporary army.
1 The army would be called a generic racial name "cowardly orcs", ""Saltwart" Dwarves" etc
2 Legion of shame?
3 No it'd be simpler to lump all units into the one division
4 ???? what happens with raids when the commander is killed, perhaps an extra, dead spearman commander is generated.
5 good point, its a bit silly if the cavlery don't make it back before the fleeing foot soldiers, however lets just say that they'd move at the speed of cavlery.
Alternatively could a diplomatic/caravan type unit be generated which upon arrival will deposit the troops into the city like newly created troops.
Again I don't know how your scripting works and i know your all busy working on far more interesting aspects of the game.
|
Posted By: Dervious Jhyris
Date Posted: 01 Oct 2010 at 14:59
SC, why not just hold a portion of them back, like in a Raid? (but with no limits on the other side)
The fear rune doesn't split them up... it just doesn't let them approach.
I mean, it might still be a little work, but I'd imagine it would be a lot less.
|
Posted By: bartimeus
Date Posted: 01 Oct 2010 at 14:59
Illyriad Admin wrote:
So definitely another solution needed!
|
How about:
- if army is smaller than the fear rune capacity, they flee and take longer to return home (twice the travel time) and the fear rune is left perfectly working.
- if army is slightly bigger than fear rune capacity, then the rune breaks, but only after sending some fear into each troops, making them less efficient. The bigger the army the more dillute the fear is and therefor the less effect it has.
For example, (I dont have time to think of a formula to do that, but I'm sure it is possible);
If fearrune is meant for 100 troops;
50 troops come-> they all return home slowly, giving you the time to counter attack the sender. rune stays the same.
101 troops come in-> 100 stay paralysed in fear while 1 courageously overcomes his fear and goes to batlle. They most likely all get slaugthered. Rune is cracked, must be manualy recasted.
200 troops come in-> 50 stay paralysed in fear, 150 courageously attack. Rune is cracked, must be manually recasted. If battle is won by attackers, all units return (including the cowards). In the report, explain that seing others keep on going gave the force to some of the paralysed to overcome their fear and fight. You give a medal to these heroes.
1000 troops -> 1 paralysed, 999 figth.
What do you think? No splitting of armys... only troops not participating. that shouldn't be too hard?
edit; damn, dervious, you bit me to it..
------------- Bartimeus, your very best friend.
|
Posted By: col0005
Date Posted: 05 Oct 2010 at 11:27
|
ooooh under the super spells thread they came up with a very good idea to improve mark of fear, Make the charges build up with the souls of the dead, increasing the charge by 1 each time a unit is slain. Obviously the rune never breaks. However if an army is small enough it is sent home in fear reducing the charge by X amount.
|
|