(12-22-2016, 02:13 AM)Ry Vor Wrote: The backdrop for combat spell density is that players felt combat spells were not relevant in mid to late game in 2nd Cycle. So we introduced battle density for combat spells in 3rd Cycle. Now battle spells are once again relevant. Damage spells are based on a value x Power level, and now x density. I think it makes sense and makes the spells again meaningful.
But to your previously written point about too many Earthquakes, etc, now you can only have one per group. More imagination will be required in planning spell casting.
I understand the consideration for greater spell selection but I just think that making an effective counterspell available for all kingdoms at an earlier level would be a better way of solving the issue.
Then you won't have to impose a new game rule that restricts one spell per group (and the complexity of having that rule in the game) but allow players the flexibility to choose whatever they wish for a battle: cast an offensive spell for themselves or protect against an opposing kill/death spell with a counterspell.
The game will need new counterspells to combat fear and death and any others that are not currently covered. If future games show that these counterspells aren't solving the problem then the concept of having the restriction of only one spell per group can be introduced in a subsequent release like Maelstrom but I would try the counterspell approach first since it's a cleaner solution to the problem.
So an earlier dispel dome spell to help the dome problem, new counterspells for summon death/fear/others?, and move forward with your plans of making higher level wizards more expensive in order to prevent multiple pwr-7 liches flying around the realm.
I would also adjust spell lists for kingdoms in not allowing them to cast certain spells -- like the Druid in not being able to create a lich. In fact, since the Druid is more of a positive lifeforce type, all undead spells should be removed: wraith, lich, ghouls, wights, etc. Druids would still be able to cast rock golems, minotaurs, and perhaps a new type like sprites or such but not any of the undead spells.
So what does everyone else think? Ry Vor is asking our opinions on this matter so now is the type to chime in or live with the proposed change. As a player, do you really want to be forced to cast different combat spells and only one fear/death against an opponent? Would that make the game more fun or more restrictive? Or should the game solve these issues with low level and easily attainable counterspells?
I would also adjust the death spell even further to have a percentage based on wiz level rather than always being 100% effective. That combined with an effective counterspell and raising the summon death spell to be a higher level spell in the wizard spell lists (and only wizards, not gnome/elves/rangers will be allowed to cast death), should make summon death more manageable to defend against than forcing a new rule mechanic of only a single spell per group which could end up being problematic during gameplay.
Since Ry Vor is asking our opinion, now is the time to speak up or live with the proposed change of only one spell per group rule...
