Raise / Lower land Mana Cost-- Too High or Too Low

In my always humble opinion, 10 mana seems just right and even 15 would be acceptable....

This spell is problematic because only the human can use it well. I often raise land my way to a sneak attack or to avoid monsters. The only reason I can see to make is so cheap is to help out players that get an island starting location. But really that kind of stamp placement is what needs fixing.  Having such a low cost will lead to some very bad balance. 

Here are some ways I now plan to abuse this spell:

Land bridges to get to sneak attack an enemy.

Seas to block off my territory and create only one choke point.

Putting hills everywhere to block guerrilla tactics and then adding caltrops so that every tile costs 4 moves if you can't use my roads. 

Trapping large monsters on islands.

Trapping enemy Sovs on islands.

Creating a ring around the entire map and using land bridges to connect to areas I want to invade.

Okay that last one would be pretty cool, but you get the point. This spell is just too easily abused at 5 mana. At 25 or 50, at least we have a cost to brutally gaming this mechanic. I would bet that this low cost is intended to show off the feature to new users, but since the AI can't use it, it needs to cost more for the human player to basically cheat.

Maybe it would be possible to scale the cost with the level of difficulty? That way novice players would get to go nuts with the spell but as they moved up in difficulty they would have to rely on it less & less.

5 mana is a bad joke. 50 was good, but I'd prefer at least 100. Terrain has to count alot, espaecially in early and mid game. 

It's also exploitive vs the AI. Last thing; it's not fun to use if it's so cheap, no real trade offs.

I think the cost is just right at this point (50 mana)  If anything, I would make it 25 mana to move between hill/plain, and 75 to move between sea/land and mountain/hill.

This is an extremely powerful spell, and if the cost is too low, it gives too much of an advantage to the player.

The AI just needs to be taught a few tactics and counter-tactics using these spells.

Edit: If the spells could also be used to create and destroy obstacles on the tactical map (raising and lowering land) battles would be more interesting too.

Have you ever used Lower Land? It takes 6-12 casts to do anything. So that's 30-60 mana anyway. Only if it had a radius of 3 would it be worth more then 50.

I think of games like populous and i simply don't believe that it would be hard to teach the ai how to control land. All you need to do is set an ideal for each sov how hilly they like their terrain, give them an ability to recognize the terrain height, and teach them to notice when it changes. To give them the ability to build a land bridge you give them the ability plan a move that uses a certain amount of mana within a certain number of turns while the rest of the settlements are protected. If they can't make to the target area within a resonable time they dont do it. They would most likely do this if they deem an are too dangerous to approach, so they go around it.

You also need better sight range range compared to movement so you can prevent people from moving into your land and casting Volcano.

I thnk somewhere between 25 to 75 mana per cast of the spell is acceptable. 

50 is perfect. Otherwise, I would be too tempted to abuse it.

I think they should leave it at 5 and let us Beta test it.  Let's find out if we abuse it or not.  Maybe we won't.  Maybe we will.  That's why this is a Beta.  It takes more than 1 shot to significantly modify the land with this spell so a 5 mana cost is really about 15-25 mana.  Do you want to use up 25 mana to make a little hill or cast Blind 6 times.  Oops, I hope I didn't awaken the "Blind is OP!" herd.

Totally disagree, guys.  Mana is a precious, precious resource that I find I need a lot of during wars.  If your sovereign and champions have useful spells to tip the balance in tough battles or you add enchantments to your heroes and units then mana is quickly drained.

Any sort of terraforming generally seems to take quite a number of casts to achieve the tactics described above.  I mean, how many casts does it take to make a land bridge or open a valley to an isolated area? 

My vote would be 10 mana cost would make it useful but not too cheap.

Cheers,

Sword

Those spells shouldn't be lower than 25 per cast.

IMO, 50 per cast was a really good balance. It was enough not to abuse it, but it you really needed it or wanted to gain a strategic advantage, than it was there to use.

Players should easily have enough mana in the game (yes even Gilden) to use the spell at 50 per cast if they needed to. Afterall, that Alchemy spell is straight abusive.

10 per cast is laughable.  With that cost, one could cut land bridges, close mountain passes, ford oceans, and basically run circles around the AI.  Yeah, it sure should take more mana to cast a Flame dart than to erect a mountain.

Yes, to safely close a three tiles wide land-bridge it takes 300 mana. Sounds about right to me.

Having it take more mana makes the spell feel more powerful. A cheap cost makes me feel cheap when I use it.

Re: Trojasmic

I don't need to beta test this particular feature. I just made the change myself and guess what, it got abused and reused. Much like narcotics and alcohol, a high cost prevents excessive abuse to a reasonable degree.

Correct me if I'm wrong people, but raise and lower land can't make mountains, and can't create oceans.  There are two seperate spells for that.

Unless the spell descriptors are wrong.....

Raise land, turns water int plain, and plain into hill, but NOT hill into mountain.  Lower land turns mountain into hill, and hill into plain, but NOT plain into ocean.

So all this terraforming stuff you guys are takling about would actually require the much more expensive spells (create mountain is more than 50 per cast).

making everything hills as someone said would be doable though :)  still an expensive use on mana even if you only do the border 3 deep.  And it will still hinder you, although the road will help combat that.  3 deep by 50 tiles of border = 150 tiles.  150 x 5 mana = 750 mana.  That is a HUGE investement.  and if properly supported would give you 3 turns of warning for your entire border.   I hope you don't have any mages.....unless you like them hitting enemies with their sticks instead of magic....

The spell descriptions are half way wrong.  You can make mountains, which is enough to close paths, and you can drain oceans, which is enough to make paths.

Spells that level and raise hills can cost 10 mana for all I care.  I may even use them to surround all of my border cities with hills, so that I can use the roads while the enemy pays double.

A series of spells would be usefull.

such as flatten land to make travelling easier: 2x2 area

make a hill to slow people down: 2x2 area

place a mud stamp to slow people down

then a more powerful version to make a mountain from hills or flat land

I'm not sure how customizable making spells are, however I do intend to play with it to find out. I want much more magic variety with some available only as quests, some hero specific and some unlocked through research, as well as more unlocked by skills.

Post a bug report on the raise land spell if it can create mountains (as it doesn't fit the description, nor is there any reason to have create mountain as a seperate spell).  I'm not at home to test this, but I assume you have created maountains with raise land.

I wuold actually classify blocking paths, and creating paths as two very seperate beasts.  IMO creating paths should be easy and cheap.  Undoing paths and blocking off areas should be a large investment.

Therefore, assuming lower land and raise land can NOT create UNPASSABLE terrain, then they should be cheap.  However, if the desciption is wrong, and the intended effect is that the spells CAN create UNPASSABLE terrain, then they are under priced and I wholly agree with peoples' sentiments on the issue.

If the description is right and the ability to create impassable terrain is a bug, then I still think this whol issue goes away.

basically the crux of my opinion lies in whether the spell can/should be able to create terrain which is impassable.  If yes, cost increase +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

if no, then cost can be cheaper cheaper

Yes, I think Raise Land should not be able to create mountains (as the description text says).  Then you can prevent human players from having a sometimes insurmountable advantage of being able to close off paths to the AI.

Either the AI needs to learn how to use the spells, or it should be removed and replaced with something the AI can use.

Preferably the former- the AI needs to learn when it is sealed off at a minimum so Curgen's Volcano isn't an auto gamewinner.

Good Survey question, Parrottmath !

            and you received a great answer, early on:

This spell is too powerful.  It is potentially a game-breaker, given the limitations of the AI.  A cost of less than 50 mana (or at least an average of 50 mana) is simply too little.  It certainly would be mis-used, by all but the most self-disciplined human players.          I don't think there's really time to beta-test a much lower cost; and almost no value in doing so.    Just MHO ...      

I'd like to see this as a seldom used spell, both by the AI and the player. It should only be used when you really needs it. Otherwise terrain loses it's importance, and the gameplay arround it gets trivial and boring.

Now that we are supposed to spam the raise/lower land, I hope there comes more attention to how it looks, thats why I currently have no problem with it

Sincerely
~ Kongdej