Tactical Combat Spell Balance

Now that we are starting to look beyond simple stability issues and into the new 1.1-1.2 horizon, it's time to start digging around in all the various systems to balance and polish them up.

 

Tactical Spells is one of these areas that needs help, particularly in terms of damage.

 

Let's look at the Three primary main book spells; Arcane Arrow and Spell Blast

-Arcane Arrow; Range; Infinite, Cost; 8 Mana, Damage; 50% Int

Consider that most people with any desire to cast spells are going to start with 10 Int (5 Damage), and in my own case, I generally put 2 int per level into my sovereign. By level 5, that's 20 Int (10 Damage) for 8 mana.

 

Spell Blast; Range Infinite, Cost; 27 Mana, Damage; 30% Int, Radius Spell

Again, people who want to make magic a priority are going to go Int-Heavy and it is really not difficult to get your sovereign above 20, where they do 6-8 damage to everything in the area of effect of this spell for 27 Mana.

 

Touch of Entropy; Range; 1, Cost; 64 Mana, Damage; 30 damage

A little spendy, perhaps, but 30 damage, bang, no resist, nor reduction is pretty powerful.

 

I am of the opinion that these spells are actually pretty well balanced for what magic is supposed to be and do

Other spells, however, are pretty off kilter balance wise. They require tech to unlock the book for research. They all require at least one shard. Shards are supposed to be the fonts from which magic enters this world, they are the drivers of all arcane power, and add 3 whole damage to blizzard spells (what?!?).

 

Fire Spells You would think that fire would be the most damage intensive element. It does have the most options, including two over world spells, but I would never cast any of them.

 

Burning Hands; Range 1; Cost; 1 Mana; Damage 8 - Requires 1 Shard

Yeah, so its a touch spell. It's dirt cheap, and does 8 Damage. By the time you get the fire book and research this spell, you can probably also have a war staff (and definitely a spear) which will put you into about the same damage range, and you aren't limited to one spear attack per turn.

(50% Int*1/Fire Shard) for 1 mana and we can talk.

 

Flame Dart; Range Infinite; Cost; 8 Mana, Damage; 5 Requires 1 Shard

So, this spell takes time to research the book, time to research the spell, requires one fire shard to cast, and is only worth casting if your Int is 10 or less. It costs the same as Arcane Arrow, requires more, and damages less.

 

Fireball; Cost; 12 Mana, Damage; 8 + 4 per Shard

Considering that the caster of this spell has to have 1 shard to cast it, you are looking at at least 12 Damage per cast, which is pretty good until your sovereign gets Int 24 or better (which again, is pretty easy, and more universally worth it since you already have Arcane Arrow Researched, right?), and is less valuable once the sovereign gets Int 20 because of diminishing returns with mana expenditure.

It could scale well with the shards, but how often to you have more than 1 fire shard? Maybe one game in 3?

 

Air Spells Lightning! Sounds pretty sweet, doesn't it?

 

Storm; Range; Random, Cost; 27 Mana, Damage; 5-8 +2/Shard - Requires 1 Air Shard

For the exact same cost as a spell blast, you get to hit one random enemy, once, for at least the damage of an Arcane Arrow cast by someone with Int of 14. All for the low, low cost of 3.5 times as much Mana, and additional Tech research.

This spell has good cost, and decent damage for the concept, but really needs to have a duration with several random bolts over time if it is to retain the same numbers.

 

Water Spells This one is really the icing on the cake, as it were.

 

Blizzard; Area Effect; Cost; 64 Mana, Damage; 3-5 +3/Water Shard - Requires 1 Water Shard

This guy does damage equal to an Int 18-24 Spell Blast at over twice the cost. If it had an additional effect like making the area it is cast on slow movement across it, or the possibility of effected units losing a turn it might be worth it's cost/damage.

 

 

In short, we need these spells which have additional requirements to obtain (spell books), and additional requirements to cast (elemental shards) to be worth our time to use. They should be at very very least slightly more powerful than our standard "combat" book spells in their basic incarnation, and dramatically better if we are fortunate enough to have a second or (however improbable) third shard of a given type.

24,802 views 12 replies
Reply #1 Top

Great post and i think Stardock should balance the magic and the stats before 1.1 is released:

- INT should improve all spells

- The shard bonus should be much higher

- Spells should have different elemental effects

- The stat points / level should be reduced to 1 to reduce the stat difference and every stat point should be more important

Reply #2 Top

Quoting Wizard1200, reply 1
Great post and i think Stardock should balance the magic and the stats before 1.1 is released:

 

They've said repeatedly that 1.1 is pretty much just stability only at this point. However for early 1.1 patches we absolutely NEED to get this stuff addressed.

 

Otherwise I agree with you on all points (except the stats. I like the 3 per and relative balance of character creation at the moment).

Reply #3 Top

generally i think elemental spells should always be more effective per mana than their basic spellbook equivalents. always.

i think they need to get in clear in their minds whether INT or shards (or both) determine spell power and apply that rule consistently across the damage formulas. you could give shards another role like reducing mana costs. there also needs to be a compromise between spells scaling and simply making more higher level spells. i can't see why there should't be a higher level equivalent to fireball that does more damage and requires more mana. this way i'd actually have something to research later on. you can't just scale the same spells from early game to late game because sometimes you want to cast a weaker spell. if the damage/unit mana changes too much over the course of the game then the spell will always be out of kilter with those that don't scale. i'm not saying no spell scaling with INT, but there needs to be a balance.

Reply #4 Top

They could do something as simple as the following:

Shards always reduce the mana cost of their element by a % (10-20).

Int Always increases damage of the spell.

 

For buff spells, Int could increase the effect of the buff (% increase or pt increase) per point of Int.

 

Reply #5 Top

Shards increase the mana efficiency of the spell by adding damage. Reducing costs by a percentage makes balancing far more difficult -- imagine something like blizzard reduced by 60% mana, in other words three water shards! Shards adding damage rather than reducing cost is also better from a turn compression point of view -- more DPT is better than a weaker spell cast over multiple turns.

If simplicity is the goal of any changes, int should act exclusively as a gateway to using spells (you need x int to cast y) and shards should be the sole source of additional spell damage. Arcane spells could receive 1/4th the bonus an elemental spell picks up, but from any shard. 

That said, I'm pretty content with the system as is. Or I would be if it were moddable -- currently modded spells cost their standard price plus the modded price! 

Reply #6 Top

Quoting Malsqueek, reply 2

Quoting Wizard1200, reply 1Great post and i think Stardock should balance the magic and the stats before 1.1 is released:
 

They've said repeatedly that 1.1 is pretty much just stability only at this point. However for early 1.1 patches we absolutely NEED to get this stuff addressed.

 

Otherwise I agree with you on all points (except the stats. I like the 3 per and relative balance of character creation at the moment).
Much of this is merely the changing of a few specific numbers, which I am pretty sure is within the range of what they're willing to do at this point.

Reply #7 Top

Unfortunately, its more than just about changing a few specific numbers. If it were just tweaking a couple spells here and there it wouldn't be much of an issue. The problem lies in the fact that the entire system is simply out of wack. There needs to be a serious reassessment of the various damage levels and powers of spells of each level vs. how they stack up against equivalent conventional forces at the same relative point in the game. I.e. a level one spell should in general consume x amount of mana to do x% damage to a soldier normally encountered in the first 100 turns of the game. A level 2 spell should do y% of damage etc. Level 1 buffs/debuffs should provide x% improvements to speed, defense, attack etc. Level 2 should provide y% etc. Level one strategic spells should provide minor benefits to city production/prestige, do minor amounts of damage to enemy forces, or improve the mobility of troops slightly, as spells scale up there should be progressively better rewards. This in turn needs to balanced with some stat, such as intelligence that will then in turn maintain the relevance and scaling up of magic as the game progresses. All mana costs need to be assessed to ensure that mana always remains somewhat scarce to encourage strategic decision making and resource conservation as spells improve. All the books need to be looked at to ensure there is both diversification and relevance for each one at all levels, ensuring that difficulty of acquiring is in some sense reflected in the spell power, and this needs to be balanced in relation to both tech costs and arcane costs at various levels of progression and economy development.

Unfortunately, all of this is more than just balancing a few numbers. Unless someone is willing to go into this sort of level of detail concerning the magic system, I'm worried that it will always remain an extremely flawed portion of this game. Tweaking the cost and damage of arcane arrow and fire dart is not going to get us there.

Reply #8 Top

   Been following the thread, not much of note to add. Any ideas I did think of were covered by you guys so I'll simple say magic needs to be epic...

I want to pledge my soul to chaos & mutate into a winged greater demon and eat my enemies essence; raw!

Reply #9 Top

I'm hoping Derek pulls out a "big checklist of things to go over" (TM) and uses it to bang heads together until they get it right. Too much of the left hand didn't know what the right hand was doing has affected this game. Magic research has become so slow i have never gotten to the point where i could compare the spells to each other. By the time i get anything worth using in combat the game is over.

Magic has been completely nerfed in the game in every way at this point.

*IF* you are going to make it so that you can only cast one spell per turn in combat, why the heck does HEAL only cure 6 damage with no scaling.... ....

 

 

....

 

 

 

 

 

...

 

 

 

.

 

:no:

Reply #10 Top

And it's threads like this that make me somewhat glad I still only have v1.09e and magic isn't yet nerfed. 

 

But so far it really isn't the game that I paid for... 

Reply #11 Top

the purpose of the thread is to try and improve the situation. I had more written message, but i erased it and decided not to share my thoughts.

I've already had my say on certain things and don't need to repeat myself.

Reply #12 Top

The Tactical AP consumption code, for spells, is bugged/whacked/busted whatever.

If I don't move and cast, I consume all my AP points. But, if I move say 3 of 4 AP's worth, then I can still cast, what had been, a moment earlier, a 4 AP spell? Something definitely wrong.

The idea of having to have a Shard to even cast a Spell of it's Book type is killing the Magic game. Gives us the Fire Spells from the Book but at a Base level for crying out loud. Shards can be hard to get, so hard that in many games by the time one is had after the first, the enemy AI is at your door with 136 ATT and 90 Def troops.

Kudos to stability though. 1.09u never CDT and I played many many turns. I am testing 1.09V now. ;)