Master Of Magic

Anyone else still hoping that Stardock will make a sequel to this?


Seems like it could run on the same engine as GalCivII with some (albeit fairly major) modifications.
42,797 views 26 replies
Reply #1 Top
Unfortunately the negotiations for that did not work out, so it won't be happening. But we are working on a new fantasy strategy game of our own. You'll see a few comments referring to it here and there (such as, some parts of the code were ported back to DA to improve performance in the 1.6 beta patches), but we haven't released any real details yet.
Reply #2 Top
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo



Well, as sad as that makes me... feel free to rip off as much from the Master of Magic as you guys can eh?





Edited to add:

That is pretty cool that you guys are working on your own fantasy strategy game btw. I am sure it will be excellent! After all, GalCiv (I and II) are great games. Let me know if you guys want someone who has played just about every fantasy strategy game out there in search for something better or as good as Master of Magic.
Reply #3 Top
What we're working on won't be using the GalCiv II engine. We needed a much more advanced graphics sytem for handling land and the game has totally different game mechanics from Galciv.
Reply #5 Top

Unfortunately the negotiations for that did not work out, so it won't be happening.


You want us to go round and break their legs for ya?

Any idea when we'll be getting more than teasers for this new fantasy game?


Also, is it going to be called Magic of Masters?
Reply #6 Top



Also, is it going to be called Magic of Masters?


Or Adept of Abracadabra?
perhaps Honcho of Hocus-pocus?

Reply #7 Top
Viceroy of VooDoo?
Reply #9 Top
Crap, I can't find another good combo.
Reply #10 Top
Sorry to resurect an old thread but I searched and couldnt find anyting newer. Still I wanted to confiorm this.. In the November 07 issue of Game Informer it has Brad qouted as they are releasing a sequal to MOM in 09???

Page 56 if anyone has a copy.
Reply #11 Top

i don't know where they got that idea.

We are working on a fantasy strategy game that is in the same vein as Master of Magic but it isn't MOM.

Reply #12 Top
Sorry Wolfgang...that article is wrong   As Brad said, we're working on something, but it's definatly not MoM2.
Reply #13 Top
I just wish it wasn't going to be Tolkienesque fantasy (inspired by the Silmarillion). There's already just so much of that. Stradock is in the position to be able to self finance and make a much more interesting game setting.

I vote for Steam Mechs! Customizeable, like in the ship builder!
Reply #14 Top
I've always been interested in what a fantasy version of space travel would be like. Throughout a lot of the fantasy genre, you have all of the basics of what is needed to survive in space already in place. It would be interesting to see these elements brought together and made into a cohesive whole. It would also be interesting to see what you guys could do with it.

Still, I look forward to it. It's been awhile since I've seen a fantasy strategy game that actually captivated me.
Reply #15 Top
If you make a successor or a similar game like Master of Magic, please make sure that you don't make the same mistakes Age of Wonders 1 & 2 did. Although the graphics and music were pretty good they ruined the game play by dumbing down the game in several aspects:

1.) MOM had units which consisted of up to 9 members. This way weak troopers could be still pretty good, simply because you had 9 members of them in one unit. This had serious consequences for the gameplay. You could heal or regenerate those troops and mass destruction attacks could damage regiments pretty badly. Regiments also had one attack for each front trooper. This was skipped completely in AOW 1 & 2 and made the combat system pretty dumb compared to MOM.

2.) You could design your mage in MOM very good to play specific strategies. In AOW 1 & 2 several elements like spells or troops were suddently randomized and made a planned strategy almost impossible while you could pick specific spells in MOM to play a certain strategy. (For example the ghost strategy with all death books)
I tried to play a summon strategy in AOW but it failed because I didn't get a summon spell. A direct consequence of the stupid spell randomization.

AOW 1 & 2 bored me to death although they are very similar to MOM which I still consider the best fantasy TBS game ever made. I found that very surprising the time I played AOW 2 because it was so similar to MOM that I couldn't say what exactly was different. Since I wasn't sure if the game was really bad or I just didn't like the genre anymore, I played MOM again for a comparison. And there were indeed a lot of differences. In short words, a lot of good MOM stuff in AOW was removed, not selectable anymore, randomized or simply dumbed down. Actually I don't think that the designer crew of AOW 1 & 2 really understood MOM.
I played HOMM 5 a while ago and I was again bored to death. And I saw the same mistakes again: Graphics exchanged for gameplay! 90% pre-dictated strategies with almost no choices of how to play a game. Lots of chaotic and randomized hero skills with almost no possibility to support specific strategies. Simple unit spam of the most primitive type. Instead of forcing the player to create certain unit combinations, you are forced to take all units and throw them at the enemy. There's not even a limit for the stupid unit stacking.
The only good fantasy TBS games I've seen in the last years was disciples 2 and dominions 3. To be honest, I have to thank the stardock team because they sent me an info mail with a hint that dominons 3 was released. Although the game has graphics which were already outdated 15 years ago, it's probably the most deepest strategy game I've seen so far. Although it could be still improved in a lot ways it's really addictive and offers lots of playstyles and strategies. Something very rare those days...

Reply #16 Top
Interesting post.
I am too much 'computer-disabled' to think about searching, installing and playing old DOS games, even when they are rated as the best there ever were: MOO1, MOM and X-COM.
The other day, I even bought the UFO Trilogy (Aftermath, Aftershock, Afterlight, all 3 in one CD) though websites say they are a far cry (rated 6-8/10, ouch! But I like the theme and plot) from the magnificent X-COM.

Intersting because, after letting it on a shelf for many years, I re-installed Age of Wonders (the 1, though I own the 2 also) and I am having much fun with it these days. Different strategies are doable. But I won't contradict you on this, I'll just hope Stardock make a new game on par with MOM.

Does Frogboy maintain a thread to talk about his next game? As you said, Dominions 3 is great (I own Dominions 2; not very different) and perhaps they could make Dominions 4: they can take the races, units, spells, weapons, heroes, but completely remodel the game mechanics to look more 4X-fantasy? That would save much time and need to re-invent the wheel for Stardock, and give justice and more appeal to the product of the 2 Dominions developers.
Reply #17 Top
Does Frogboy maintain a thread to talk about his next game?


No, he's being annoyingly quiet about it. ;)

He has unleashed a few tidbits here and there on the internet about it. There was a rather lengthy post he made on another site's forums last year where he described the features and design decisions that he thinks should go into a game like that. It would be natural to conclude that Stardock's game will incorporate all of them, though he didn't explicitly state that. ;)
Reply #18 Top
A new turn-based Fantasy Strategy Game from Stardock?

Seriously?
Honestly?
Really?
I Need it Now!

More information! We crave news! We crave feature sets!

Please.

Pretty Please.

Pretty Please with whipped cream?

Pretty Please with whipped cream and a cherry on top?

Ah go on ;-)
Reply #20 Top
Sovereign of sorcery


LOL


Actually I like that one.

Reply #21 Top

Sovereign of sorcery

LOL


Actually I like that one.


Me too. I'm sure Stardock already has a name, but this is fun. How about:

Ace of the Arcane

Sultan of Spells

Mistress of the Mysterium (hey, why not rope in a few more female players?)

Nabob of Necromancy



Reply #22 Top
I for one played that game from the start. It was full of bugs I was mad because at the time I had never heard of the internet and I had no way of getting the patch. When I finally got the patch it played a lot better. I still have it on my PC with Dosbox.

If Stardocks makes a game similar I for one will PRE order and buy it as soon as I can. I always loved fantasy more then science fiction. One reason I tried Galactic civilization eas because it was suppose to be one of the best strategy game out there and it is. I can only imagine a fantasy game will be just as or better.

Keep up the good work.

And please let us know more when you guys hear of it.

S
Reply #23 Top
Here's Brad's post on the Quarter to Three forums from last year.

I don't want to hijack the thread here with an tangential discussion on what should be in a fantasy strategy game. But here's my 2 cents on that:

1) Character building. The player is a character in the game. Nearly all magic in the world actually flows from the player. If you've ever read The Silmarillion (Tolkien) all the magic in Arda basically comes from the spirit of the things created by Eru. So in this sense, the player is a kind of Valar of sorts who can choose to invest their growing power into their creations/minions or into themselves (or a bit of both). That's an over simplification but the point is, part of the game mechanics is having to choose between making your forces more powerful or actual character.

2) The game is very spell-centric. The 3D engine is being designed so you can do Populous style spells to the world. Since it's turn-based (as opposed to real-time) that also means you can have some ridiculously fancy spell effects.

3) Very distinct magic schools.

4) You cannot build heroes. They have to be recruited and there's no Inn. Ones ability to attract heroes is one of the game mechanics and "interesting choices" players have. Those heroes can be wimpy or powerful depending on how the player chooses to use and invest in them.

5) There is massive scaling in this. At the beginning of Fellowship of the Rings (the movie edition) you could see just how powerful Sauron is. In this, if you manage to get a dragon, that dragon can wipe out hundreds of units. And by scale, we mean there's thousands and thousands of troops. One ancient dragon is taking out hundreds of troops.

6) Cities are built and improved and local geography matters. I won't say more on this right now. ;)

7) Multiplayer will involve all players moving at the same time.

8) Battles zoom in so that tactical combat can occur which is also turn based.

I do want to stress that the goal for this isn't to be a MoM clone. It has its own game mechanics, many of which are in common with MoM since, in a sense, both want to have a lot of Civilization-style elements.

One advantage of being designed in 2007 is the hardware requirements are probably going to be higher than our other games. I want to see large battles. I want to see creatures that can wipe out massive numbers of foot soldiers and such. I want to see magic spells that can flood terrain, raise mountains, ruin worlds. I want to see the land sicken and die when evil takes it over.

If we'd done a MOM2, we would have been faithful to the Master of Magic mechanics. But since we're doing a new game, hopefully we'll be able to make a game that combines favorite elements from many games plus adds our own on innovations to the genre. But it'll be some months before we start putting up any previews or anything (or even announce the game officially).