PDA

View Full Version : Spellcasting Currency



Sire
May 3rd, 2010, 22:24
Decides what will be used for spellcasting within WFTO. Poll closes in two weeks.

NOTICE: All results are not final, but are used to see about public opinion. Just because the polls reflect a side does not mean the developers will use it. In the end, the developers have the final say.


1: DK I (Gold)

With this option, Gold will be used as the power source for spellcasting.

2: DK II (Mana)

With this option, Mana will be used as the power source for spellcasting. Mana is gained via Mana Vaults or land under your control.

Mothrayas
May 3rd, 2010, 22:26
I'm a DK1 purist. Guess what I voted. :p

Evi
May 3rd, 2010, 22:32
I think Mana is a great addition to the Dungeon Keeper series, so I'm putting my vote there.

kyle
May 3rd, 2010, 22:39
Gold, It will restrict people from using spells constantly.

dotted
May 3rd, 2010, 22:40
Gold, It will restrict people from using spells constantly.

Uhm no, or rather mana does that too.

kyle
May 3rd, 2010, 22:41
Why not, Mana just recharges and is generally only used for one thing, spells. While gold is used for rooms,training, Pay day and magic. So using gold will mean people will use spells less than they would if they had mana.

Mothrayas
May 3rd, 2010, 22:42
Uhm no

Uhm yes.

I'd be less willing to throw out whatever powerful spells there are if it makes me go low on gold, which is vital for other things (e.g. training), than if I have nothing to lose anyway and the resource comes back for free.

dotted
May 3rd, 2010, 22:47
Uhm yes.

I'd be less willing to throw out whatever powerful spells there are if it makes me go low on gold, which is vital for other things (e.g. training), than if I have nothing to lose anyway and the resource comes back for free.

Then make mana more expensive

Evi
May 3rd, 2010, 22:47
There's not much of a limit when players get themselves a/ alot of Gem blocks, or just mainly focus on digging out about half the gold in the entire map.

I recall in one map of DK1 where you're just given a Gem Block, making that map so pitifully easy.

kyle
May 3rd, 2010, 22:49
Gem blocks on maps generally are scarce, and take longer to mine from. If a player just mines everything then eventually that money is going to run out.

Mothrayas
May 3rd, 2010, 22:52
Then make mana more expensive

And how does that fix anything?

Evi
May 3rd, 2010, 23:06
Gem blocks on maps generally are scarce, and take longer to mine from. If a player just mines everything then eventually that money is going to run out.

Scarce/slow or not, they can still just camp with it.

And making the Mana more expensive will slow down the spell spam, seeing how that is stops at a certain number, whereas the gold does not.

Mothrayas
May 3rd, 2010, 23:09
Scarce/slow or not, they can still just camp with it.
Which is why good maps, such as my multiplayer maps, only place gems at places where it's not possible to camp them.


And making the Mana more expensive will slow down the spell spam, seeing how that is stops at a certain number, whereas the gold does not.

And it promotes camping, except this time there's no way the map stops you from doing that.

Hapuga
May 3rd, 2010, 23:11
Making gold as currency for spells is an bad idea, leading a player into a stalemate, when there are no workers and you are unable to create any more because you have no gold, and no one can dig it for you. Gameplay-wise, this is a serious drawback.

99% of games have 2 separate currencies (mana/gold) and it makes perfect sense.

No need to reinvent the bicycle. Unless you are some kind of a pervert.

Mothrayas
May 3rd, 2010, 23:13
Making gold as currency for spells is an bad idea, leading a player into a stalemate, when there are no workers and you are unable to create any more because you have no gold, and no one can dig it for you. Gameplay-wise, this is a serious drawback.

And of course, there are obvious and easy ways to fix this problem.

Like, free of charge Create Imp when you are really low on / have zero imps.

dotted
May 3rd, 2010, 23:16
And of course, there are obvious and easy ways to fix this problem.

Like, free of charge Create Imp when you are really low on / have zero imps.

And then you are on the road to an extremely complex game that noone but the creater are able to play.

Evi
May 3rd, 2010, 23:19
And it promotes camping, except this time there's no way the map stops you from doing that.

Who said that WftO's Mana will be like DK2's hyper regenerating crack Mana?

But still, Campers will find ways, that not even most people would of known.

Hapuga
May 3rd, 2010, 23:19
Mothrayas,

one-currency system leads the player in rather NOT USING the spell at all. Why should I use a spell when I can hire more creatures?

This is an Either/Or situation. This rolls us 10 years back. Flexibility is key.

kyle
May 3rd, 2010, 23:19
I don't see whats so complex about giving somebody a free imp because they have none?

Mothrayas
May 3rd, 2010, 23:22
Mothrayas,

one-currency system leads the player in rather NOT USING the spell at all. Why should I use a spell when I can hire more creatures?

Last I checked, spells are used without any problem in DK1.

Hapuga
May 3rd, 2010, 23:23
I didnt use them, because they were pretty useless. and ate all your cash in seconds. especially call to arms.

dotted
May 3rd, 2010, 23:25
I don't see whats so complex about giving somebody a free imp because they have none?


Create Imp
Creates an Imp costing W gold, the cost is increased by X as you create Imps.

When you have Y Imps or lower, the cost is reduced to Z


Just imagine having several of these "conditional" spells, no one will be able to figure the game out in their life time. All this just to avoid a currency that has been used in virtually all other games that involves magic?

dotted
May 3rd, 2010, 23:26
And how does that fix anything?

Well if mana is expensive you will hesitate spamming spells. Which is what you wanted right?

Mothrayas
May 3rd, 2010, 23:31
I didnt use them, because they were pretty useless. and ate all your cash in seconds. especially call to arms.

If call to arms eats that much cash from you, you need to use it correctly.

And Lightning was far from useless, as were several other spells.


Create Imp
Creates an Imp costing W gold, the cost is increased by X as you create Imps.

When you have Y Imps or lower, the cost is reduced to Z


Just imagine having several of these "conditional" spells, no one will be able to figure the game out in their life time. All this just to avoid a currency that has been used in virtually all other games that involves magic?
That's far from hard to remember, even when you have several of these spells. Unless you have a monkey's IQ.

Well if mana is expensive you will hesitate spamming spells. Which is what you wanted right?
Except it's not working, since people still have nothing to lose and will just stall more to be able to use their spells.

Hapuga
May 3rd, 2010, 23:33
Several other spells :D like, 3 out of all?

Well, I see the debate going nowhere, as you are a DK1 fanboy. I'm outta here. Good luck, dotted.

P.S.
Mothrayas, I will not tolerate insulting others.

dotted
May 3rd, 2010, 23:34
That's far from hard to remember, even when you have several of these spells. Unless you have a monkey's IQ.

It's a slippery slope, an unneeded complexity when mana (when done correctly) solves all of the problems.

Mothrayas
May 3rd, 2010, 23:39
Several other spells :D like, 3 out of all?
Possession, Create Imp, Sight of Evil, Speed Monster, Heal, Lightning, Chicken, Destroy Walls and Call To Arms are all useful spells. Conceal Monster and Disease also have their uses. That's 11 out of 16 spells.


Well, I see the debate going nowhere, as you are a DK1 fanboy.

Says the obvious DK2 fanboy.


It's a slippery slope, an unneeded complexity when mana (when done correctly) solves all of the problems.
Which is more an unneeded complexity, a whole new secondary resource with a vague formula that monitors its income, or a minor side effect of a spell's cost in certain (rare) cases?

dotted
May 3rd, 2010, 23:43
Except it's not working, since people still have nothing to lose and will just stall more to be able to use their spells.
Care to elaborate? If spells are useful to you, but they are expensive to use you achieve the same result as you want do you not?

Mothrayas
May 3rd, 2010, 23:45
Care to elaborate? If spells are useful to you, but they are expensive to use you achieve the same result as you want do you not?

Expensive on a resource that has few negative points when running low, unlike gold.

dotted
May 3rd, 2010, 23:49
Which is more an unneeded complexity, a whole new secondary resource with a vague formula that monitors its income, or a minor side effect of a spell's cost in certain (rare) cases?
It is way less complex because the mana mechanic is understood by the entire video game player base. Anyone who has played Diablo, DK2, Warcraft, Any MMO and the list goes on will immediately know what mana is.

The key thing is that the details are not as important, they are when you have conditional spells. If you make spells more important and more expensive you achieve the same result without all the complexity, why are you so much against it?


Expensive on a resource that has few negative points when running low, unlike gold.
No mana, could mean that for the next 30 seconds you would not be able to produce lightning. You are trying to make the game overly complex, when the real problem can be solved by mere tweaks.

Mothrayas
May 3rd, 2010, 23:56
The key thing is that the details are not as important, they are when you have conditional spells. If you make spells more important and more expensive you achieve the same result without all the complexity, why are you so much against it?


No mana, could mean that for the next 30 seconds you would not be able to produce lightning. You are trying to make the game overly complex, when the real problem can be solved by mere tweaks.

Oh good, I'll just stall for 30 seconds and I can use spells again. Again, there's little drawback.

And I don't get how I'm making the game overly complex by saying there should be one central resource instead of two. A second resource would make the game more complex, not less.

dotted
May 4th, 2010, 00:07
Oh good, I'll just stall for 30 seconds and I can use spells again. Again, there's little drawback.

And I don't get how I'm making the game overly complex by saying there should be one central resource instead of two. A second resource would make the game more complex, not less.

Who says you can stall?

The thing is, mana as i've already explained is an already understood mechanic. You don't really have to read anything to understand what it means. And it applies to all spells.

Conditional spells only work on a spell by spell basis, you dont have the same universal understanding, it is not immediate apparent that Create Imp is an initial free spell, but starts costing when you reach a certain threshold.

Just look at the Create Imp spell example, the last bit could be removed, becuase it isn't needed when mana is used, and the same applied to any other conditional spells that would likely all have different conditionals.

Mana: I have X mana, the spell cost Y mana, therefor i will be able to cast Z spells.
Gold: I have X gold, the spell cost Y gold, therefor i will be able to cast Z spells. However assuming A i can do B, otherwise i can do C.

It is simply much much much more complex to have conditional spells like this, then to simply use the mana mechanic.

MeinCookie
May 4th, 2010, 01:08
DK I gold worked perfectly, but DK II mana makes more sense and was probably the best addition of DK 2.

My opinion and I am entitled to it.


And I don't get how I'm making the game overly complex by saying there should be one central resource instead of two. A second resource would make the game more complex, not less.

Things can be complex, as long as they make sense than everything is dandy and the game is easy to pick up.

Metal Gear Rex
May 4th, 2010, 01:49
Oh look, I broke the tie.


Making gold as currency for spells is an bad idea, leading a player into a stalemate, when there are no workers and you are unable to create any more because you have no gold, and no one can dig it for you. Gameplay-wise, this is a serious drawback.

99% of games have 2 separate currencies (mana/gold) and it makes perfect sense.

I have to agree with Hapuga (:eek:) with this one.

No offense dotted, but I don't think you're fighting as best as you could.


No need to reinvent the bicycle. Unless you are some kind of a pervert.

lol


DK I gold worked perfectly, but DK II mana makes more sense and was probably the best addition of DK 2.

There were some other stuff, like in DK1 that exploit where you could get the computer to torture or sack some of his creatures? DK2 fixed that.

Jeez, neither of you are going anywhere. You're fighting for which game you like better, not which idea is more practical.

I obviously do not like DK2 and prefer DK1. Yet I prefer the mana, even though I'm very much used to DK1's gold system.

Why?

There were so many more possibilities with the mana. In the gold system, you have to be careful about giving the player a gem rock because that gives him the ability to build with ease, train, and all that. But this also gives the player the ability to own all enemies with the spells.

Mana is generated differently.

This allows the map maker to have more freedom as to which the player can become more powerful in, and allow more strategic moves depending on the situation at hand. Gems = win, period.

Without the mana system, you can place infinite traps, and have over 9000 Imps. (Well if there wasn't a creature limit)

Not to mention you're either struggling to make payday or sitting around like a fat (not-) jolly happy (or pissed) king since if you have the gold, you have all.

Recall that traps cost mana, I'd be pretty pissed off if my gold was dropping because I'm building traps. And I'd also get annoyed when every step I take into the enemy dungeon sufficates me with gas. Yeah that's the two possibilities with the gold, can't avoid either of them without some kind of trap limit which makes absolutely no sense at all. (Thus forcing the best traps)

When I sell doors that means MORE MAGIC!!! Why? Who knows, I guess wood is made out of magical elves.

Imps cost mana, otherwise they'd run around and explode. This kept a limit on your little Imps running about in the dungeon and building and peeing on your walls. This limit increased as you grew in power and land.

Without mana, you can make more and more Imps to keep mining.

If Imps cost gold, then if you find a gem rock you could make more Imps to find and mine even more gem rocks.

With Mana, if you find a gem rock you could begin mining it. However, this slows down your activities. Well I'll create more Imps! This costs you in other ways, like Traps and Spells. If you cannot afford said price, then it doesn't allow you to camp as much as you could and then pawn all.

Mana and Gold combined allowed a more creative gameplay, as you gain both sepperately you can obtain more power in different sections. If it was all gold, well that means if you have gold you have everything.

There's also a limit on max mana, if you recall. Gold is limited on how many treasuries you have, which can be alot. Not to mention a max mana gain.

No the +500 doesn't mean +500 mana every turn. Look next to it, there's a minus sign. Do the math. +500 -246 = 254 mana every turn.

Imps, Traps, and Spells all cost Mana and bring it down too.

Taking out Mana effects alot more of gameplay than just spells.

natchoguy
May 4th, 2010, 02:17
mana was comfortable since with a gem block you are unstoppable making it unfair so mana limits you and makes the game much more fair