PDA

View Full Version : Lightning Spell (keeper not creature) - Should it be nerfed?



Skyman
March 29th, 2011, 16:50
Hi,

As we all know the raper of armies is the Lightning spell. Got money? got a stack of 30 enemies attacking? Cast a few 3000 gold lightnings and they are all dead.

This makes the spell superduper powerfull. For this reason it is often disabled ingame by campaign &map editors

Would it be desirable to change the spell so that it will not longer be so ridiculously overpowered so that it can be used more often (standard)?

I suggest some of the following options:
- Change Damage to 66% for all levels of the spell
- Decrease radius of effect to 66% for all levels of the spell
- Increase gold cost by 50% for all levels of the spell
- Set an affect max creatures for this spell (e.g. may only harm at most 4 creatures).

This topic is meant to start discussion about the spell and wether or not it is overpowered and how it should be changed if common opinion is that it is indeed overpowered.

thanks!! :)

Mothrayas
March 29th, 2011, 17:43
The AOE damage should be nerfed to 74 damage or something instead of whatever ridiculous amount it is now. Maybe do some extra damage on the "sweetspot" and give that a bit more radius so it's possible to land it by hand, for compensation. No other changes are needed.

DragonsLover
March 30th, 2011, 19:36
In the changes I brought, I have slightly reduced the power of the spell so that instead of:

3 - 4 - 5 - 7 - 9 - 12 - 14 - 16 - 30

it's:

3 - 4 - 6 - 8 - 10 - 13 - 16 - 20 - 25

I may also try to alter the GOD_LIGHTNING and GOD_LIGHTNING_BALL damages slightly if you think it's a good idea. However, if we nerf the spell too much, then it will become a costy and not so damageable spell and I don't think people would like that. Feel free to discuss.

Krizzie
March 30th, 2011, 19:45
I think the spell is just fine.

It might be imbalanced when you have easy gems near by and thus have tons of money, but it's to the map makers to allow you those at the same time or not.

Cave-In has the same "problem" if you have tons of gold it's easy to kill a lot of enemies with it.

Mothrayas
March 30th, 2011, 19:59
Except Cave In doesn't instantly kill all lesser creatures and seriously damage most other creatures in a 100 foot radius with just 3000 gold.

Lotex
March 30th, 2011, 22:07
yeah, but all in all cave in should be more effective on many enemies because they're often crowding on their spawn spots, so you only have to use cave in every 10 seconds to lead them back to that spot and than spam it like hell and everyone should be done pretty fast.

i think for myself that lightning does not need to be nerfed - i'm willing to own that it's pretty strong, but it's up to you if you use it - if you think it's the cheap way to bash some heroes and other keepers, feel free to not use it, if you like spamming that spell...well, than go for it.
most maps don't have that spell available because it is THAT strong, but as i said...it's up to you to use it or not.
i use it as some kind of a backup plan

Krizzie
March 30th, 2011, 22:39
Except Cave In doesn't instantly kill all lesser creatures and seriously damage most other creatures in a 100 foot radius with just 3000 gold.

Cave-In costs 600 and if you lure the hero's/creatures right, you can kill a lot with 5 clicks. (is 3000 gold) If they get clumped up you do more damage than with one maxed lightning strike.

Metal Gear Rex
March 30th, 2011, 23:42
I think the spell is just fine.

It might be imbalanced when you have easy gems near by and thus have tons of money, but it's to the map makers to allow you those at the same time or not.

Cave-In has the same "problem" if you have tons of gold it's easy to kill a lot of enemies with it.

You seem to think everything is fine as it stands unchanged. :/ You can't set the blame on a mapmaker just because a gem was given...

Cave-In doesn't have the same problem at all, it doesn't even have the same range as Lightning. Overall, it'll end up costing more than Lightnng. It's only more useful when there's Heroes or Creatures invading your Dungeon and they're walking through a narrow passage.

The only problem it suffers from is how Creatures will then begin heading back to their Lairs/spawning Hero Gates once they're hit by it... which is totally abusable.

Krizzie
March 31st, 2011, 09:19
Yes I think that most things are fine as the way they are. I have stated this many times before, fixing bugs (real bugs!) no problem, making the game more stable no problem, offering better graphics etc. Fine. But keep your (as in everyone who is changing the crap out of the game) hands off the original gameplay! (and by that I mean the KeeperFX releases, if you want to change everything fine, but do it on your own install)

In single player none of these changes make real sense to me, only that some people can't resist an easy win. If people want a challenge, play Ancient Keeper or some other campaign which is insanely hard. Or remove all the gem blocks in the original campaign and see how often you can spam Lightning then. The game is perfectly playable with the normal values.

And yes, the mapmaker is also responsible for how spells act. If you don't have much money to spend, you wont spam Lightning or Cave-In as much, it's that simple.

In multiplayer this could be different of course, but since the Internet support and the gamespeed/stability isn't very good yet, there is no proper way to test imbalances. I don't mind some nerfs or buffs there if things get out of hand.

If you think lighting is "cheap" or overpowered, don't use it as much..

Mothrayas
March 31st, 2011, 09:24
I do agree that the original DK settings should be on KeeperFX rather than DL's patch. Or rather, that there's an option to toggle between the two.

I don't think DK is balanced enough on itself, though, which is why DL is making a patch in the first place. It just shouldn't be the only option for KeeperFX.

Skyman
March 31st, 2011, 09:50
I disagree 100%

I want DL's patch to be included into the game because it improves gameplay. It doesn't make the game more easy.

It's a simple fact Lightning is horribly overpowered. Anything except Bile Demons, Horned Reaper, Knight, Avatar, Giant, Dragon or Avatar take insane amounts of damage.

I want Lightning to be used bot not te be a game ender like that.

Metal Gear Rex
March 31st, 2011, 10:35
I want DL's patch to be included into the game because it improves gameplay. It doesn't make the game more easy.

It's called a "patch"?

DL's patch is based off of things he thinks are more balanced. And he is not perfect.


It's a simple fact Lightning is horribly overpowered. Anything except Bile Demons, Horned Reaper, Knight, Avatar, Giant, Dragon or Avatar take insane amounts of damage.

Erm... you forgot the Barbarian. Giants have less Health and less Armor than them, they can't take too many hits from Lightning. Bile Demon takes a lot of damage from Lightning too, so what are you talking about? Bile Demons have pretty low armor.

Skyman
March 31st, 2011, 10:43
I never said DL is perfect bro, I just agree with his views on gameplay most of the time ;)

Bile Demons have low armor but very high health

Metal Gear Rex
March 31st, 2011, 10:49
Bile Demons have low armor but very high health

And therefore he'll take a lot of damage, and will get killed faster than a Dragon. You listed him in groups that won't take an insane amount of damage.

Krizzie
March 31st, 2011, 10:55
I disagree 100%

I want DL's patch to be included into the game because it improves gameplay. It doesn't make the game more easy.

I think it doesn't improve gameplay. I think it removes the gameplay as it was meant to be.


It's a simple fact Lightning is horribly overpowered. Anything except Bile Demons, Horned Reaper, Knight, Avatar, Giant, Dragon or Avatar take insane amounts of damage.

As I said, it's only "Overpowered" when you have tons of gold and even then it's still up to you to use the spell or not. So basically you want someone else to stop you from spamming the spell?


I want Lightning to be used bot not te be a game ender like that.

For what do you want to use Lightning then? If you make it weaker and cheaper it becomes useless or people start to spam it even more. If you make it more expensive it again becomes useless cause it's too expensive and if you make it stronger and more expensive it's too overpowered again..

Lightning becomes imbalanced when the map has:

-Easy gem acces
-Easy map exloration
-A lot of Heroes/AI Keeper creatures

If you cross out the gems or the exploration (no Sight of Evil, No Conseal or creatures with Sight to counter them) it's much harder to use the spell.

Is Speed + Conseal on an Imp also overpowered btw? You can kill a Keeper/ with 100 level 10 creatures without even going to battle. Or is that just 'a way of playing' ?

Skyman
March 31st, 2011, 11:05
Surely it is possible to tweak this spell

Bullfrog never tweaked balance after reelase.

Imagine blizzard releasing Starcraft Broodwar without ever patching it. Would it then be stupid if fans make patches to build on the initial release? No game is perfect when there are no continuous patches to be released.

I get what you mean about the gold but getting 3000 or 9000 (for 3 blasts) is really ez, even without gems. When Archers or low tier enemies attack me and I click lightning 3 times, is it fair that 9000 gold kills whole armies. that is what I'm trying to point out.

Making Lightning a bit weaker doesn't harm gameplay.

=-==-=-


One thing I agree on with you is that the patch of Keeper FX doesn't necesarilly mean it is what people want. Perhaps there should be an option on the installer where you can choose to install the custom files or the original. I cannot judge what your taste or opinion is because it is yours ;)

Krizzie
March 31st, 2011, 11:25
Surely it is possible to tweak this spell

Bullfrog never tweaked balance after reelase.

Imagine blizzard releasing Starcraft Broodwar without ever patching it. Would it then be stupid if fans make patches to build on the initial release? No game is perfect when there are no continuous patches to be released.

Funny that you mention Starcraft (I'm a big fan of that too ;) ) But they balanced the game from the multiplayer point of view, the Singleplayer uses different settings, most of them are the same as the first day the game came out. Cause the AI and the maps were built around those settings.
That's why I don't mind it that the Multiplayer from KeeperFX gets balance changes, it will ruin the game if you can wall in and lighting eachother to death. But in Singleplayer that's not the point. Than it's up to you to decide do I want a challenge or do I want to set back and buzz away.


I get what you mean about the gold but getting 3000 or 9000 (for 3 blasts) is really ez, even without gems. When Archers or low tier enemies attack me and I click lightning 3 times, is it fair that 9000 gold kills whole armies. that is what I'm trying to point out.

Making Lightning a bit weaker doesn't harm gameplay.

That is true, but it's you which decides to shock them to death instead of charging into battle with your creatures. So as I said, you want the spell to be nerved so you wont use it anymore (or as much).


One thing I agree on with you is that the patch of Keeper FX doesn't necesarilly mean it is what people want. Perhaps there should be an option on the installer where you can choose to install the custom files or the original. I cannot judge what your taste or opinion is because it is yours ;)

I would prefere something like that aswell. But I woud like it even more that people who want to change things, change it in their own installation or make a campaign around those changes. So they only affect that part of the game and not the full game.

DragonsLover
March 31st, 2011, 15:41
I do agree that the original DK settings should be on KeeperFX rather than DL's patch. Or rather, that there's an option to toggle between the two.

I don't think DK is balanced enough on itself, though, which is why DL is making a patch in the first place. It just shouldn't be the only option for KeeperFX.


One thing I agree on with you is that the patch of Keeper FX doesn't necesarilly mean it is what people want. Perhaps there should be an option on the installer where you can choose to install the custom files or the original. I cannot judge what your taste or opinion is because it is yours http://keeperklan.images/keeperklan/smilies/wink.gif

*Sigh* Yeah, I agree too, but I asked Mefisto about that. Here's our discussion:


Also, I told you that you should keep the original stuff from Dungeon Keeper and Deeper Dungeons. This is because people don't seem to really appreciate the changes I brought to the game. They wanna play the game the "original and a bit bugged" way. Simply, returning like before for me: creating an unofficial patch that people could use if they wish. Chr!x even suggested to do two campaigns of the original game : one with normal stuff, and one with patched stuff. Same thing for Deeper Dungeons levels. I also slightly improved some campaigns: Ancient Keeper, Post Ancient Keeper and Evil Keeper. For these, I don't think they'd require alternative campaigns because it would take too much files. Tell me what do you think of all that.


Noone will really play multiple versions of same campaign. I'm not planning publishing any duplicates. I want one version which gives best game experience. If someone prefers unmodified levels, he can get them somewhere else and replace the version in KeeperFX.

I also won't support any idea of playing with two sets of settings (original/modified). If someone wants it, then sure - he can create such set and update if for every new version of KeeperFX, but it will be a separate download. I have enough work with one set of settings.

So, apparently, my patch will still be used in KeeperFX. It will be up to you to bring the values by default and replace the modified levels by the original ones. And it doesn't bother me to do everything for you already and make a pack of it, it's not that hard. Afaik, there's nothing that forces you to use my stuff.

However, I keep the idea to make further releases of my unofficial patch to be downloadable separately.


I want DL's patch to be included into the game because it improves gameplay. It doesn't make the game more easy.


DL's patch is based off of things he thinks are more balanced. And he is not perfect.


I never said DL is perfect bro, I just agree with his views on gameplay most of the time http://keeperklan.images/keeperklan/smilies/wink.gif


I think it doesn't improve gameplay. I think it removes the gameplay as it was meant to be.

Oh dear... Sure, my patch isn't perfect. But afaik, no f***ing game is perfect. By the way, MGR, some changes were ideas from you, so it's not totally me. Anyway, I already explained everything, I spent a lot of time to figure out things that could be improved. My patch was indeed made to improve gameplay and correct bugs, correct bad level design, avoiding to complete levels easily, balance the game a bit, making the game fun to play... krizzie, you said that it removes the gameplay as it was mean to be. What if the original gameplay was bugged and rushly made? Take the examples of level 18 where there's no Locate Hidden Realm crate, or some Deeper Dungeons levels where you foolishly start with the Destroy Walls spell, or some traps, rooms or creatures that aren't of the good owner, the missing Vampires in Elf's Dance, the script problems... Wanna play that bugged way? FINE!!! Just bring the original stuff back and play.

I do my best to ensure the changes aren't too much drastic. Otherwise, if you disagree on some things, then please, PLEASE, tell them to me.

Thanks for the understanding.

Krizzie
March 31st, 2011, 17:09
@DL

I have absolutely no problem with the fixed levels and scripts, I have never argued about that.

My point is the added/changed spells to creatures, changed spell/Door/Trap values. Those are personal touches and not actual fixes.

Trotim
March 31st, 2011, 19:05
@DL

I have absolutely no problem with the fixed levels and scripts, I have never argued about that.

My point is the added/changed spells to creatures, changed spell/Door/Trap values. Those are personal touches and not actual fixes.

Anything in any game is just personal touches, some turn out to be fun for many and some don't. I think people are just opposing this because they're changes - if you didn't know what the stats were like before the patch, would you still disagree with some of these? I wouldn't.

I think people overestimate the original developers. They made a lot of mistakes and multiplayer wasn't balanced in the slightest either

DragonsLover
March 31st, 2011, 20:54
My point is the added/changed spells to creatures, changed spell/Door/Trap values. Those are personal touches and not actual fixes.

Okay, so everything from the "creature.txt" and "dd1creat.txt" files? That's true, most of them are personal touches, but for most of the creatures, I left 95% - 99% of their stats intact. I just altered a few things on them. Some of them were mistakes which I immediately corrected, some of them are temporary until a particular bug is fixed (I'm talking here of the Slow spell bug particularly), and a few others were good ideas (or at least, I thought they were).

Krizzie
March 31st, 2011, 22:56
Anything in any game is just personal touches, some turn out to be fun for many and some don't. I think people are just opposing this because they're changes - if you didn't know what the stats were like before the patch, would you still disagree with some of these? I wouldn't.

I think people overestimate the original developers. They made a lot of mistakes and multiplayer wasn't balanced in the slightest either

I don't know the exact values, but I do know what spells (and when) every creature has and how they react, train etc. If that gets changed I notice it. With some I agree, but others are just weird (A Knight with Word of Power for instance??)

Fixing mistakes is fine, bad scripts or map glitches should be fixed indeed, no arguement there. But it's not a bug that a Warlock has no reflect, it was added with the reason "bad" creatures don't have that spell.. Well Heroes don't have flame breath.. In my eyes that's just a useless change with no real reason or purpose.

Metal Gear Rex
April 1st, 2011, 00:13
As I said, it's only "Overpowered" when you have tons of gold and even then it's still up to you to use the spell or not. So basically you want someone else to stop you from spamming the spell?

That proves that the spell is not properly balanced. When there are too many strong spells that are balanced by high prices, that's when Gem Rocks become overpowered as well.

I don't even have to spam it for it to be overpowered, I can try once per battle or even once every 3 battles, which is identical to the enemy Keeper. Fact is that there are a lot of Creatures that will be a lot of Creatures that end up in a dying state if not getting one-shot killed.


For what do you want to use Lightning then? If you make it weaker and cheaper it becomes useless or people start to spam it even more. If you make it more expensive it again becomes useless cause it's too expensive and if you make it stronger and more expensive it's too overpowered again..

You seriously don't know how to balance a game do you? You're not supposed to nerf it to the extreme. Lightning's current attack power is far too high, at least, its max attack power. It should be reduced so it doesn't achieve such great attack power because that's what makes it so abusable.


Is Speed + Conseal on an Imp also overpowered btw? You can kill a Keeper/ with 100 level 10 creatures without even going to battle. Or is that just 'a way of playing' ?

That's more like an exploit that was never fixed and should be fixed.


So, apparently, my patch will still be used in KeeperFX. It will be up to you to bring the values by default and replace the modified levels by the original ones. And it doesn't bother me to do everything for you already and make a pack of it, it's not that hard. Afaik, there's nothing that forces you to use my stuff.

Problem is that not everyone knows how. There are some things that aren't easily changed, such as the data inside the fxdata folder. (Spells, etc) Other data can easily be taken from the Ancient Keeper campaign.


Oh dear... Sure, my patch isn't perfect. But afaik, no f***ing game is perfect. By the way, MGR, some changes were ideas from you, so it's not totally me. Anyway, I already explained everything, I spent a lot of time to figure out things that could be improved. My patch was indeed made to improve gameplay and correct bugs, correct bad level design, avoiding to complete levels easily, balance the game a bit, making the game fun to play... krizzie, you said that it removes the gameplay as it was mean to be. What if the original gameplay was bugged and rushly made? Take the examples of level 18 where there's no Locate Hidden Realm crate, or some Deeper Dungeons levels where you foolishly start with the Destroy Walls spell, or some traps, rooms or creatures that aren't of the good owner, the missing Vampires in Elf's Dance, the script problems... Wanna play that bugged way? FINE!!! Just bring the original stuff back and play.

Jeez, calm down DragonsLover.


By the way, MGR, some changes were ideas from you, so it's not totally me.

If you're trying to send some blame towards me, sorry, it is ineffective. The ideas that came from me in the last thread you made about them are pretty much old. Even I disagree with some of them once I had more testing. As for the later ideas you recieved from me through PM, they're just that. Ideas. I haven't had the time to actually test them, they're based off of some thinking I did while playing.

Also, I'm not sure if all of your changes through the level are correct. Some of the things you changed I think should have been changed, but you headed in a different direction than what I think was meant. Also, I didn't give you the idea to change the Giant into a tank. The Giant is not a tank unit.


I think people are just opposing this because they're changes

Well, that would be Krizzie.


I think people overestimate the original developers. They made a lot of mistakes and multiplayer wasn't balanced in the slightest either

Yes, exactly. They didn't even have the time to fully test everything.

---------- Post added at 16:13 ---------- Previous post was at 16:11 ----------


But it's not a bug that a Warlock has no reflect, it was added with the reason "bad" creatures don't have that spell.. Well Heroes don't have flame breath.. In my eyes that's just a useless change with no real reason or purpose.

This is at least one thing I can agree on. Just because one side lacks certain types of magic doesn't mean they should obtain it.

Krizzie
April 1st, 2011, 08:59
You seriously don't know how to balance a game do you? You're not supposed to nerf it to the extreme. Lightning's current attack power is far too high, at least, its max attack power. It should be reduced so it doesn't achieve such great attack power because that's what makes it so abusable.

Of course I know how balancing works, I was exaggerating a little bit, would've been obvious... But I presume you got the point.


That's more like an exploit that was never fixed and should be fixed.

Why would that be an exploit? Cause it's a lame tactic? There is only one way to see this "fixed" and that would be by improving the AI, Cause a human player would know how to counter something like that. Another option might be to give Sight of Evil the ability to see Invisible units, but you don't have that spell in most maps.

Skyman
April 1st, 2011, 11:30
MIght I add that you don't HAVE to play Keeper FX? I really love the remake and those few changes to unit abilities that I may not 100% support do not bother me. I like 99% of the changes to units, maps, new campaigns, scripting etc.

I think it's really cheap and also unkind to attack the good people that made this all possible. Surely you can bring something to their attention without complaining about it as much...

Honestly I find it a bit 'mean' to take cheap shots at them for not being perfect. They have put a lot of work in it to make it available to us. If they wouldn't have done that you would have to use DosBox to play the exact same game from 1997 again and again...

Just felt like expressing myself this way.

Metal Gear Rex
April 1st, 2011, 11:34
Of course I know how balancing works, I was exaggerating a little bit, would've been obvious... But I presume you got the point.

Considering how strong Lightning is, I think it is overpowered to begin with. As I said before, it can one-shot a lot of Creatures, or damage them heavily. Even when I don't use it often, it is still powerful. That's why I want to lower its attack power a little. Abusing it to the extreme will still be pretty broken I'll have to admit, but it could be used without it feeling so broken cheap.


Why would that be an exploit? Cause it's a lame tactic? There is only one way to see this "fixed" and that would be by improving the AI, Cause a human player would know how to counter something like that. Another option might be to give Sight of Evil the ability to see Invisible units, but you don't have that spell in most maps.

Oh really? How do you know that Bullfrog intended this? What if Imps were supposed to become visible if they were trying to claim land but Bullfrog didn't notice it or had the time to fix it?


Okay, so everything from the "creature.txt" and "dd1creat.txt" files? That's true, most of them are personal touches, but for most of the creatures, I left 95% - 99% of their stats intact. I just altered a few things on them. Some of them were mistakes which I immediately corrected, some of them are temporary until a particular bug is fixed (I'm talking here of the Slow spell bug particularly), and a few others were good ideas (or at least, I thought they were).

It feels like this post was completely ignored. It wasn't there yesterday. :/

Krizzie
April 1st, 2011, 12:43
MIght I add that you don't HAVE to play Keeper FX? I really love the remake and those few changes to unit abilities that I may not 100% support do not bother me. I like 99% of the changes to units, maps, new campaigns, scripting etc.

I think it's really cheap and also unkind to attack the good people that made this all possible. Surely you can bring something to their attention without complaining about it as much...

Honestly I find it a bit 'mean' to take cheap shots at them for not being perfect. They have put a lot of work in it to make it available to us. If they wouldn't have done that you would have to use DosBox to play the exact same game from 1997 again and again...

Just felt like expressing myself this way.

Let me point out that my intentions are not to bash or trash people ideas. It's al in a healthy discussion. And I just have another opinion than others. ;)

In my opinion the game has to stay as close to standard as it is, only with better OS support, bug fixes and Internet compatibility. So no I'm not a fan of so called balance changes for the Singleplayer part of the game. For the Multiplayer I fully understand that there are things that need balancing. But that's not the point here since the Multiplayer is far from usuable now.

So yes Lighting is powerful and probably too powerful when playing a multiplayer game, so something has to be done about that. In Singleplayer I honestly see no reason to change the spell, The AI doesn't really spam it (Not fully charged anyway) and as a player you can perfectly tell yourself not to use it 20 times in a row.

Another option that was mentioned, was to only allow Lightning on your own ground, so it becomes a defensive spell. That would also make it a lot less overpowered. Same goes for Spell usage through Sight of Evil


Oh really? How do you know that Bullfrog intended this? What if Imps were supposed to become visible if they were trying to claim land but Bullfrog didn't notice it or had the time to fix it?

I can turn that question right back at you of course, you don't know that either. Maybe it is a bug cause you can't claim land when you are in 1st person without getting visible again. But maybe it isn't, cause you don't have an actual claim land spell. I do find it a little odd that you can let Imps dig while Invisible.


Okay, so everything from the "creature.txt" and "dd1creat.txt" files? That's true, most of them are personal touches, but for most of the creatures, I left 95% - 99% of their stats intact. I just altered a few things on them. Some of them were mistakes which I immediately corrected, some of them are temporary until a particular bug is fixed (I'm talking here of the Slow spell bug particularly), and a few others were good ideas (or at least, I thought they were).

I did like some changes you made, for instance:

-Spiders are far more useful now since they get Hail at a lower level, but they might also be a little overpowered now cause of the shotgun effect of Hail, a couple of them almost rape everything which doesn't have Rebound.
-Vampires with Hail, since they would only use Drain past level 6 and that doesn't do much damage, maybe it can be replaced with Wind cause Vampires never use that spell cause of their Gas imunity.
-Trolls and Spiders train a little faster (?)

Things that in my opinion need to go back to normal:

-Knights have to lose the Word of Power Spell, they are no spell casters
-Warlocks and Rebound just looks weird and it's not really a spel Evil Creatures use (except for the Ghost)
-Horny with Projectile and Armor (Or is that out already? I'm not sure :p ). I know you did this cause of the Slow bug but I'd rather see Slow gone than a ranged spell added to make him use it. He is the fasted Creature in the game so he wouldn't need slow anyway.

Lotex
April 1st, 2011, 22:55
This is at least one thing I can agree on. Just because one side lacks certain types of magic doesn't mean they should obtain it.

that's true, but it's not really balanced if one side has such a powerful spell and the other side just don't have it...for example wizard <--> warlock
did you ever try to kill an avatar with a warlock? and once more, kill him with a wizard?
i did it with a wizard yesterday easily while playing the conquest of the arctic campaign just because of rebound....not only because of rebound, to be honest, but it was such an important skill because the flying crybombs (always forget the name, but not these bouncing ones) are reflected by rebound and much more important...the freeze.
he was just frozen for nearly all the time and when he wasn't, most of his spells were just reflected...only drain was really useable and that was compensated by heal.
lower the duration of rebound would also be ok, it's not necessarily needed to spread overpowered skills.

Metal Gear Rex
April 1st, 2011, 23:38
So yes Lighting is powerful and probably too powerful when playing a multiplayer game, so something has to be done about that. In Singleplayer I honestly see no reason to change the spell, The AI doesn't really spam it (Not fully charged anyway) and as a player you can perfectly tell yourself not to use it 20 times in a row.

As it stands now, using it 3 times in a row is overpowered. We're not gonna nerf every single level of Lightning, just the higher levels to reduce the maximum damage it does within a single use of it.


Another option that was mentioned, was to only allow Lightning on your own ground, so it becomes a defensive spell. That would also make it a lot less overpowered. Same goes for Spell usage through Sight of Evil

Removing its usage through Sight of Evil is something that I think should be done but changing it to a defensive spell only seems to be too big a change. Also it is a question of how AI will handle it.


-Vampires with Hail, since they would only use Drain past level 6 and that doesn't do much damage, maybe it can be replaced with Wind cause Vampires never use that spell cause of their Gas imunity.

One good example that you don't know what you're talking about. Vampires shouldn't have such a strong offensive spell like that, it doesn't fit their unit type.


that's true, but it's not really balanced if one side has such a powerful spell and the other side just don't have it...for example wizard <--> warlock
did you ever try to kill an avatar with a warlock? and once more, kill him with a wizard?
i did it with a wizard yesterday easily while playing the conquest of the arctic campaign just because of rebound....not only because of rebound, to be honest, but it was such an important skill because the flying crybombs (always forget the name, but not these bouncing ones) are reflected by rebound and much more important...the freeze.
he was just frozen for nearly all the time and when he wasn't, most of his spells were just reflected...only drain was really useable and that was compensated by heal.
lower the duration of rebound would also be ok, it's not necessarily needed to spread overpowered skills.

Warlocks and Wizards are entirely different units. They're not supposed t have the same spells. They don't function the same.

Lotex
April 2nd, 2011, 00:16
seems so, but why? they're both caster, have nearly identical stats (wizards are slitghtly more expensive and have less luck) and they both do the same stuff (research, don't train on their own and so)
the main difference between them in my opinion is, that the warlock has invisibility and can see invisible units and the wizard is much better at ranged combat because of the "stronger" (once more MY opinion) skills - so warlock has the wind spell and nothing else to survive and on the wizard on the other hand has his slow and freeze stuff

seems like you see the warlock as some kind of caster stealth assassine

edit: forgot to mention that wizard has 5 in research and warlock 4.

Metal Gear Rex
April 2nd, 2011, 00:34
seems so, but why? they're both caster, have nearly identical stats (wizards are slitghtly more expensive and have less luck) and they both do the same stuff (research, don't train on their own and so)

With ths logic, Monks, Priestesses, Fairies, and Vampires will all be the same.


the main difference between them in my opinion is, that the warlock has invisibility and can see invisible units and the wizard is much better at ranged combat because of the "stronger" (once more MY opinion) skills - so warlock has the wind spell and nothing else to survive and on the wizard on the other hand has his slow and freeze stuff

seems like you see the warlock as some kind of caster stealth assassine

...I'm not even going to bother.

Lotex
April 2nd, 2011, 00:49
With ths logic, Monks, Priestesses, Fairies, and Vampires will all be the same.

vampires have scavenge as the primary job, so their working environment is different (not to mention that they're way stronger and don't die that easily above a specific lvl)
monks have another style of fighting like fighting in melee if the enemy gets too close
i'm not sure about priestress and fairy, what is their main area of operation, except of being weak and easy to kill?




...I'm not even going to bother.

try it, i just wanna understand what the differences are in your opinion. flaming people and starting an argument or something like that is not my intent

Metal Gear Rex
April 2nd, 2011, 07:05
i'm not sure about priestress and fairy, what is their main area of operation, except of being weak and easy to kill?

Reminds me of this wiki I found a while back. It was pretty poor in providing accurate information. The wiki also said Fairies were useless. Very laughable.


try it, i just wanna understand what the differences are in your opinion. flaming people and starting an argument or something like that is not my intent

I would but it is best if you create a new topic or PM me if you really want to know, then I'll reply and also tell you about the Fairy and Priestess' purpose. Why? Well, we're really drifting off topic.

Krizzie
April 2nd, 2011, 09:55
One good example that you don't know what you're talking about. Vampires shouldn't have such a strong offensive spell like that, it doesn't fit their unit type.

I know that a level 8-10 Vampire (on level 6 and 7 he also uses his melee attack often) only uses drain and thus takes a huge amount of time to kill strong enemies, especially if they got heal. So Hail is a nice adition to make them stronger in combat. What other spell would fit better in your opinion?

I would like it that you wouldn't be so demening with things you see different, you really have a trolling atitude when it comes to saying people are "wrong" and then not telling why they are.

Mothrayas
April 2nd, 2011, 10:01
(on level 6 and 7 he also uses his melee attack often)

Wrong


I know that a level 8-10 Vampire (on level 6 and 7 he also uses his melee attack often) only uses drain and thus takes a huge amount of time to kill strong enemies, especially if they got heal. So Hail is a nice adition to make them stronger in combat.

Except Vampires are TANK units, not offensive units. They're not supposed to deal a lot of damage. They're supposed to stand there, use Protect, take damage, heal with Drain and Heal, and when they finally do die, return to their lair at the cost of 1 level.

Additionally, hailstorm does multiple small hits, which helps get a lot of experience quickly by fighting. Sometimes Vampires become pretty much immortal because they level up faster than they go down. That's another reason why hail is a bad idea.

Metal Gear Rex
April 2nd, 2011, 12:28
I would like it that you wouldn't be so demening with things you see different, you really have a trolling atitude when it comes to saying people are "wrong" and then not telling why they are.

*sigh* And you're helping your arguement by saying I have a trolling additude how? You could at least try and defend your point more often instead of making a personal remark, it really makes you look like you're unable to handle being in the discussion.

If you do think Vampires should deal more damage, well, look at DK2. They're broken because they're hard to kill and deal SO much damage. (The 666 damage joke would have been more amusing if it wasn't higher than a Lord's damage)


Except Vampires are TANK units, not offensive units. They're not supposed to deal a lot of damage. They're supposed to stand there, use Protect, take damage, heal with Drain and Heal, and when they finally do die, return to their lair at the cost of 1 level.

Also to add, they have Slow which makes using a Melee unit very ineffective. They also have Word of Power to knock enemies away from them but unfortunately that doesn't work since they have Flight.


Additionally, hailstorm does multiple small hits, which helps get a lot of experience quickly by fighting. Sometimes Vampires become pretty much immortal because they level up faster than they go down. That's another reason why hail is a bad idea.

Oh god I still remember how long it took for 3 Dark Mistresses using Lightning/Drain/Speed to kill this enemy Vampire in Dixaroc at the end cause it kept on leveling up after I killed it. Annoying Hailstorm is annoying.

Krizzie
April 2nd, 2011, 21:46
*sigh* And you're helping your arguement by saying I have a trolling additude how? You could at least try and defend your point more often instead of making a personal remark, it really makes you look like you're unable to handle being in the discussion.

This is exactly what I mean. ;) The *Sigh* most of all..


If you do think Vampires should deal more damage, well, look at DK2. They're broken because they're hard to kill and deal SO much damage. (The 666 damage joke would have been more amusing if it wasn't higher than a Lord's damage)

DK2 Vampires are totally different than the DK1 Vampire so I don't see how you can compare those. In DK2 he is a melee fighter with (very) high damage, but relative low health/Armor. In DK1 he's a ranged fighter/caster with high melee damage and more than average Health. He doesn't use the Melee attack that much, but if he did, hail would make him too strong indeed. Bit like a Monk but much stronger. I do agree with Mothrayas that Hail makes him level up fast when he dies, but this can be fixed by making him loose his spells when he dies. If the Vampire was level 10 and he dies to level 3 for example he still has all his spells from when he was level 10. I don't know if this was intended (in DK2 he looses his spells again I believe) but that would mike him not that strong anymore. A Vampire lower than level 5 would be easy pray then cause he will loose heal.


Oh god I still remember how long it took for 3 Dark Mistresses using Lightning/Drain/Speed to kill this enemy Vampire in Dixaroc at the end cause it kept on leveling up after I killed it. Annoying Hailstorm is annoying.

I played that map earier this week and with a couple of Spiders (5 of level 10 I believe) he was dead in seconds, the poor guy didn't stand a chance since he got Frozen most of the time. Bit of Mirco-ing with the Spiders was al that was needed, so they didn't got killed by close range Hail attacks. I didn't even use the Heal spell on the Spiders. Actualy the spiders took out most of the units on the map, only the Knights and the Wizard I did with the mistrisses cause of the Rebound.

DragonsLover
April 3rd, 2011, 00:05
Problem is that not everyone knows how. There are some things that aren't easily changed, such as the data inside the fxdata folder. (Spells, etc) Other data can easily be taken from the Ancient Keeper campaign.

That's not my problem. Mefisto wants it that way. And like I said, to make things easier, I can do a pack that restores EVERYTHING to default.


Jeez, calm down DragonsLover.

Sorry then, perhaps it's because of my pervasive developmental disorders. :(


If you're trying to send some blame towards me, sorry, it is ineffective. The ideas that came from me in the last thread you made about them are pretty much old. Even I disagree with some of them once I had more testing. As for the later ideas you recieved from me through PM, they're just that. Ideas. I haven't had the time to actually test them, they're based off of some thinking I did while playing.

Also, I'm not sure if all of your changes through the level are correct. Some of the things you changed I think should have been changed, but you headed in a different direction than what I think was meant. Also, I didn't give you the idea to change the Giant into a tank. The Giant is not a tank unit.

Sorry again then, it wasn't my intention to send the blame towards you. I just somewhat didn't like the comment where you're saying that my patch is based on things I think is more balanced. I remember that you also agreed on some modifications and it's why I said it wasn't totally me. :( But you're right they were just ideas. And no, the Giant isn't a tank unit. I just wanted him to tough a lil' bit more and I overexaggerated the health value.


MIght I add that you don't HAVE to play Keeper FX? I really love the remake and those few changes to unit abilities that I may not 100% support do not bother me. I like 99% of the changes to units, maps, new campaigns, scripting etc.

I think it's really cheap and also unkind to attack the good people that made this all possible. Surely you can bring something to their attention without complaining about it as much...

Honestly I find it a bit 'mean' to take cheap shots at them for not being perfect. They have put a lot of work in it to make it available to us. If they wouldn't have done that you would have to use DosBox to play the exact same game from 1997 again and again...

Just felt like expressing myself this way.

Thank you!


Considering how strong Lightning is, I think it is overpowered to begin with. As I said before, it can one-shot a lot of Creatures, or damage them heavily. Even when I don't use it often, it is still powerful. That's why I want to lower its attack power a little. Abusing it to the extreme will still be pretty broken I'll have to admit, but it could be used without it feeling so broken cheap.


So yes Lighting is powerful and probably too powerful when playing a multiplayer game, so something has to be done about that. In Singleplayer I honestly see no reason to change the spell, The AI doesn't really spam it (Not fully charged anyway) and as a player you can perfectly tell yourself not to use it 20 times in a row.

Another option that was mentioned, was to only allow Lightning on your own ground, so it becomes a defensive spell. That would also make it a lot less overpowered. Same goes for Spell usage through Sight of Evil

Let's give my viewpoint about the Lightning spell: this is a spell that must be used during a FIGHT only. If you notice the AI players, they only use it when a fight is occuring. No fight = no lightning spell. I guess the same thing should apply here for human players. Here, I was thinking about casting areas on the battle field around each creature you have involving in the fight (somewhat like the SOE area) when they're into the enemy or a neutral territory. For example, if you have a dragon fighting against a Barbarian in a hero castle, you could then cast the Lightning spell only into a limited area around the dragon so that you could zap the Barbarian. We could also take use of the Fight window at the bottom of the screen to cast Lightning straight onto the enemies' icons. And if there's no fights involoved, then you CAN'T cast Lightning spell on the enemy's territory unless you cast SOE spell because it was written into the game code that you CAN use Lightning through SOE with a side effect that the Lightning power is REDUCED when casted through it. Which is a good idea.
All that + the possibility to cast the spell on our own territory and you have quite a balanced offensive spell that can't exploit zapping enemies mercilessly straight into their lairs or in locked rooms.


Oh really? How do you know that Bullfrog intended this? What if Imps were supposed to become visible if they were trying to claim land but Bullfrog didn't notice it or had the time to fix it?


I can turn that question right back at you of course, you don't know that either. Maybe it is a bug cause you can't claim land when you are in 1st person without getting visible again. But maybe it isn't, cause you don't have an actual claim land spell. I do find it a little odd that you can let Imps dig while Invisible.

Conceal spell is somewhat broken for now anyway. Invisible creatures turn back visible back once they attack, making the spell almost useless (excepted for Melee attacking creatures like the Thief). I think conceal should be used to being able for the invisible creature to attack enemy creatures without being attacked back (excepted for creatures that can spot invisible creatures) for a little amount of time, causing the attacked creatures to flee as they can't target the invisible enemy. As for imps, I'd agree that they should turn visible back each time they are claiming an enemy room, but not for the territory. Sounds fair.


-Spiders are far more useful now since they get Hail at a lower level, but they might also be a little overpowered now cause of the shotgun effect of Hail, a couple of them almost rape everything which doesn't have Rebound.

Here's a thing that is temporary like I explained earlier. Because of the Slow bug, the Spider can't shoot it until a ranged attack spell is used. This is why I changed the order of the spells. Once fixed, they're gonna be back to normal, I promise.


-Vampires with Hail, since they would only use Drain past level 6 and that doesn't do much damage, maybe it can be replaced with Wind cause Vampires never use that spell cause of their Gas imunity.

I think Wind should be only used through Possession mode since it's a spell not so much people seem to like. But no, hailstorm was a mistake. I thought it would fit him, but it's not. Sure, they don't do much damage, but they are highly resistant and can even resurrect. This is very powerful and it's the reason why they cost a lot for training and have a high pay.


-Trolls and Spiders train a little faster (?)

I'm still unsure for the Troll. They're not fighters and therefore, aren't suited for fast training, but on other words, I'd like them to increase of level faster for being able to manufacture efficiently asap. I once said I'd like them to "train" while they manufacture since it's what they're good for, but that could be troublesome I guess.


-Knights have to lose the Word of Power Spell, they are no spell casters

True, but I found rather logic for a strong Lord of the Land to have one of the most devastating spells at level 10 since generally, tons of creatures are surrounding him. I thought that spell would fit him.

C'mon, just a single spell...

Anyway, feel free to modify the .CFG file of the Knight to remove it if you want.


-Warlocks and Rebound just looks weird and it's not really a spel Evil Creatures use (except for the Ghost)

I think I know why Bullfrog didn't wanted to give that spell for evil creatures much. Once it is used through Possession mode, you can easily kill enemy ranged attacking creatures with their own projectiles and I think that's the reason why they only gave that spell to the Ghost since he's weak. However, for the Warlocks, I found rather logical for them to have a spell to protect them, because otherwise, the Warlocks are rather weak and vulnerable, especially when heroes have Rebound.
And I didn't give this spell at early level too, Warlocks must train and train until level 9 to acquire it which takes a good amount of time. If you want, I could even make the Rebound spell to be acquired at level 10 and returning WOP to the original level 9. I just thought once again that it was logical for a spellcaster to have a protection.

Anyway, once again, feel free to alter the .CFG file if you want.

*Sigh* Just a freaking single more spell is enough for blaming. :(


-Horny with Projectile and Armor (Or is that out already? I'm not sure :p ). I know you did this cause of the Slow bug but I'd rather see Slow gone than a ranged spell added to make him use it. He is the fasted Creature in the game so he wouldn't need slow anyway.

Sorry, but Bullfrog decided it that way. And like I also explained once, I think it was to MGR, Slow spell only affects a single creature if the spell succeeds to hit him. During the time the spell is charging, he can easily chop tons of heroes into little bits until the spell is ready again. So, it's not such a BIG improvement, but it is. In fact, it can becomes worse if the enemy has Rebound. So, finally, nothing major here.

Finally, I'm sorry if anyone feels offended. Wasn't my intention at all.