Non-linear damage of casters

[DaemianLucifer]

Whenever you can,split them.Youll do more damage that way.Buff/curse casters(matriarchs and inquisitors)should be split up to,but not in same size stacks.Split them in one big stack,and few stacks of 1 creature because buffs/curses dont depend on the size.

[Shauku]

Yes, to increase their damage output. But you can't protect them as easily when they are splitted. Loosing any Mages early is not fun, so be careful.

[The Mad Dragon]

So, for Inferno, I should split Succubi and Pit Lords?

[Jolly Joker]

Ah, okay.
Umm, why do you get 6 Druids, but only 3 Gargoyles?

Im sure that you are acting, but anyway.
Ok, Lets modify example. Both of heroes have 6 druids. But one splited them for several stacks and other did not. Moving through neutrals first will not lose anything. Second will. First one wins. Got it now ?

Back again.
Did you read anything at all?
Counter example: Both heroes have a stack of Gremlins and a stack of Gargoyles. The first hero simply keeps two stacks. The second splits his Gargoyles into 3 and covers the Gremlins. The first hero has losses, will maybe even lose the fight, the second loses some Gargoyles but wins.
And don't tell me now, the second splitting is TACTIC. The second splitting is splitting stacks to COVER MORE GROUND which is basically the same thing than splitting stacks to do more damage. Both things is splitting for advantage.

[DaemianLucifer]

As far as I remember,you wont have much chance for splitting pit lords.Dont split shooters.Especially not infernal succubi.

[Shauku]

Only Pit Lords are casters, so only them. Unless you have the ability Hellfire, when you can increase its chances by splitting Succubi (or any creatures)

[DaemianLucifer]

Counter example: Both heroes have a stack of Gremlins and a stack of Gargoyles. The first hero simply keeps two stacks. The second splits his Gargoyles into 3 and covers the Gremlins. The first hero has losses, will maybe even lose the fight, the second loses some Gargoyles but wins.
And don't tell me now, the second splitting is TACTIC. The second splitting is splitting stacks to COVER MORE GROUND which is basically the same thing than splitting stacks to do more damage. Both things is splitting for advantage.

Did you read anything at all?I never disputed that splitting can sometimes win a fight and minimize loses.I however proved that spliting meat shield is not the same as splitting casters.

[The Mad Dragon]

Only Pit Lords are casters, so only them. Unless you have the ability Hellfire, when you can increase its chances by splitting Succubi (or any creatures)

Succubi aren't casters, just shooters?

[DaemianLucifer]

No not "just" shooters,but sexy and deadly shooters

[Shauku]

Here is information on Inferno creatures, and also on every other town too. Succubi are shooters, with very nice abilities

http://www.heroesofmightandmagic.com/he ... ures.shtml

[DaemianLucifer]

Here is information on Inferno creatures, and also on every other town too. Succubi are shooters, with very nice abilities

And you simply gotta love those "abilities" of theirs

[Jolly Joker]

Hmm...

That would make buffs a lot easier to cast than debuffs because the receptiveness of the own troops would - logically - be ALOT higher - and it would stack splitting STILL make beneficious: as a rule of thumb a weekly production of, say, Druids should give Endurance to a weekly production of Emeralds for AT LEAST 1 full turn, but to make it worthwhile 2 would probably be better, What does that leave for 1/8 of them for a weekly Production of Sprites? So much that it may be of use.

Care to tell you what exactly it is on your system that makes it so different from mine that makes the points you raised earlier unvalid?

Corelanis asked me how I would design the magic if I could, and I answered that. It has nothing to do with this thread. This thread is only about whether the current non-linear damage method for 3 units in the game is okay or not.
If I remember right, you came up with that point when I said the buff/debuff casters would have a splitting advantage as well. You then said, well, yes, but you'd want to change tha t as well, in short, you'd want to change the whole system.
That's a bit like in the thread about the Dungeon level 6s, when someone said (or would say), well, the level 6 is too weak, then someone says, no, it isn't because the other Dungeon troops make up for it, and then that someone would say well, yes, but I'd change the whole line-up of the Dungeon anyway.
If you want to discuss the whole magic system, I'm surely not one to defend it and I surely have my own ideas wbout it - I even was against the schools as you may remember.
However, my point stands that the non-linear detail within the current frame fits and a change is not needed - wouldn't change anything actually.
On the other hand I wouldn't like a magic system that regulates everything with spell duration - I'd rather see a system as I described it.

[Jolly Joker]

Counter example: Both heroes have a stack of Gremlins and a stack of Gargoyles. The first hero simply keeps two stacks. The second splits his Gargoyles into 3 and covers the Gremlins. The first hero has losses, will maybe even lose the fight, the second loses some Gargoyles but wins.
And don't tell me now, the second splitting is TACTIC. The second splitting is splitting stacks to COVER MORE GROUND which is basically the same thing than splitting stacks to do more damage. Both things is splitting for advantage.

Did you read anything at all?I never disputed that splitting can sometimes win a fight and minimize loses.I however proved that spliting meat shield is not the same as splitting casters.

You proved nothing. You said - correctly - if I remember right, that you simply do more damage just for splitting without doing anything.
What you don't see is that splitting meat shields is cover more ground - without doing anything more than splitting - which transfers to doing more damage in one way or another.
By the way, the so abhorred "retaliation stealing" is a direct result of splitting as well.
Now don't tell me you are against that as well. That's not the point here. The point here is not that you would redesign the whole game, the point here is only linear damage for damage casters in the game as it is now, leave it or not. The point is not removing linear damage as well because you change the whole system.
What about Hellfire, by the way? With that skill simple splitting will deal more damage as well. So that should be considered Devil's work as well.

[Shauku]

Here is information on Inferno creatures, and also on every other town too. Succubi are shooters, with very nice abilities

And you simply gotta love those "abilities" of theirs

Yes, I am glad they brought the classical mythological succubus. Meaning her features are classical

[DaemianLucifer]

You proved nothing. You said - correctly - if I remember right, that you simply do more damage just for splitting without doing anything.
What you don't see is that splitting meat shields is cover more ground - without doing anything more than splitting - which transfers to doing more damage in one way or another.

Split the meat shield:You last longer,but have loses.Split the casters:No loses.Yes,those are completelly identical With meat shield you gain that extra damage for the loss of some of the creatures,with casters you gain that extra damage for free.

[MistWeaver]

Counter example: Both heroes have a stack of Gremlins and a stack of Gargoyles. The first hero simply keeps two stacks. The second splits his Gargoyles into 3 and covers the Gremlins. The first hero has losses, will maybe even lose the fight, the second loses some Gargoyles but wins.
And don't tell me now, the second splitting is TACTIC. The second splitting is splitting stacks to COVER MORE GROUND which is basically the same thing than splitting stacks to do more damage. Both things is splitting for advantage.

No. That is different things. Im taking your example:
We have several gremlins in 2 stacks and several golems (Gargoyles whatever). This army was attacked by peasants. If keep golems in one stack and gremlins in 2 stacks - one of the gremlins stack will suffer losses. And dont tell me now that it is NOT a tactic to split golems in to two stacks - so they would kick all peasants that nearing gremlins. That is the most basic tactic decision. Its not just about covering ground - its about possibility of interception of all attacking stacks.

But what it has to do with damage ? If two druids are casting lighting bolt while standing in two meters from each other, WHY the damage must differ if they are standing 100 meters from each other ?

[Shauku]

Split the meat shield:You last longer,but have loses.Split the casters:No loses.

Nice, so you are seriously saying that with dividing the casters you can keep on playing without losses? Can't you see, you are taking that your example to the extremes into explaining the whole game. Bad DL.

Dividing helps, yes! No one is arguing that. But you are loosing the reality here with those theoretical examples of yours.

[The Mad Dragon]

DL does bring up a point, if I've read everything correctly.

[Gaidal Cain]

Whenever you can,split them.Youll do more damage that way.Buff/curse casters(matriarchs and inquisitors)should be split up to,but not in same size stacks.Split them in one big stack,and few stacks of 1 creature because buffs/curses dont depend on the size.

Correction: Caster spell duration increase logaritmically as well. It's spell-like abilities triggered on attacks that don't depend on stack sizes.

That's a bit like in the thread about the Dungeon level 6s, when someone said (or would say), well, the level 6 is too weak, then someone says, no, it isn't because the other Dungeon troops make up for it, and then that someone would say well, yes, but I'd change the whole line-up of the Dungeon anyway.

If BD:s had a weekly base growth of 2 instead of 1 (all other things unchanged), but Matriarcs where weakened enough to compensate, I'd still say it would be valid to argue for the matriarchs to be strengthened- they'd not come up in the quality that other level 6's does, which would create imbalances for mapmakers placing random stacks, or a map without level 7:s etc. The spell system interacts with other parts of the game as well, and I think it does so badly. The buffs aren't good either, but they're slightly more passable as the effects becomes less pronounciated- they usually has damage spells to cast which are more effective, or there isn't that much room for splitting when you finally get them.

On the other hand I wouldn't like a magic system that regulates everything with spell duration - I'd rather see a system as I described it.

I think that duration would be the sole parameter that would make sense to modify in most cases, and often be the easiest to understand (a 53% bless isn't easy to understand how effective it will be). No matter, I think you're system is basically fine, I was just baffled how you brought up some things as "problems" with my system while having the exact same ones in yours.

You proved nothing. You said - correctly - if I remember right, that you simply do more damage just for splitting without doing anything.
What you don't see is that splitting meat shields is cover more ground - without doing anything more than splitting - which transfers to doing more damage in one way or another.

The difference is that with meat shields, when you split, you get two new ones that are each half as effective as when put into one- but that they give you a tactical advantage when you make them work together. In the case of druids, you get a boost in pure strength. There is no tactics involved in dealing with your two half-sized caster stacks, which it is with the meatshields (albeit a very basic one).

[Jolly Joker]

No.
Split the meat shields and you cover ground with stalwart units for free with the effect that an opponent cannot reach (vulnerable) units that do damage on distance and less damage hand to hand.
Split the casters and you do more damage while you cover more ground with VULNERABLE units (as opposed to cover ground with meat shields).
Note that you don't have this option with shooters (they could have the same option of doing more damage when covering more ground), however, you can have unlimited shots with mundane shooting units while the spell power of damage doing casters is very limited: if the damage gain for splitting isn't good enough after using up the casters' mana it's usually curtains.
There are maps that will allow you to fight with 8 Druids in week 2 and there are maps that you will be allowed 4 Druids only.
The manual lists the following damage for Druids (they have the Mana for 2 Lightning Bolts):
1: 28 5: 98
2: 42 6: 112
3: 56 7: 126
4: 84 8: 140

So let's have a look at the case you have 4 Druids in 4 single stacks. With 2 castings each they will do a total of 224 damage as opposed to the 168 the 4 Druids will do in one stack. That's a gain of 56 damage points per combat which equals, umm, 4 Demons, something like that. With HORDES of Demons normally guarding each pile of dog turd, not to mention mines or something this is really a big deal for giving the neutrals easy targets.

What if you have eight. If you really leave the rest of your troops at home - which would be folly - you'd be able to do 420 points of spell damage - still only a bit more than 30 Demons.

Splitting 4 - 4 which might be more sensible then one stack of 8, will gain 336 damage, 84 damage less . Going in with one stack of 8 will do 280 damage, two thirds or 140 points less. This may sound a lot, but is worth only 10 Demons, again not that much for putting 8 Druids on the line and not being able to deal with a plethora of neutrals.

Draw your own conclusions here.