Balance wand magic

Here you can make and discuss suggestions to improve the game. / Hier kannst du Vorschläge einreichen und diskutieren um das Spiel zu verbessern.

Moderator: Developers

Post Reply
User avatar
Djironnyma
Posts: 3221
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2002 4:34 pm
Location: Berlin
Contact:

Balance wand magic

Post by Djironnyma »

We are all very happy that wand magic exists (thanks again for developing this nice feature).
Anyway after MASsive testing I think wand-magic is more underpowered as I thought before. I would like compare it mostly with bow shooting since both are in general the same, dealing distance damage. I comparing a full archer (so best skills and stats) with a full mage (again best skills and stats).

Bow shooting
  • +much higher DPS
    +much higher range
    +can stunt the enemy
    +is boost able with magic gems
    +If you have the stats for an archer you are usually still a good close combat fighter
    +you can make money with monster hunting
    -needs / consums ever arrows even to train
    -not usable in close combat (but most monster are able to outmanoeuvre)

Wand magic:
  • (+)use able in close combat (still cause of the stats of a mage that’s mostly suicide)
    +/- Theoretical you need no munition; BUT that would exclude you from most dungeons / dangerous areas /events / battles if you want kill more than a half dozen enemy’s you rely on mana potions. I also heard that some mages trained without any mana potions IMHO that’s a disgusting boring way to train the skill cause most of the time you would wait for your mana to be regenerated.
    -high repairing costs for wands
    -not boost able with magic gems
    -much lower DPS
    -much lower range
    -with the stats of a mage you are not even a passable close combat fighter
Proposals to balance
  • Magic should not be like bows with graphical effects, there should be clear difference. That’s why I wouldn’t change range, stunt effect, needed stats and the need of arrows/mana.
  • Making wands gem-able or give them special effects would be “nice to have” but I think it would need much time to develop.
  • I suppose the fastest way for a better balance would be increasing the DPS of wand magic. Increasing the damage dealt by mages but keep their low distance and high vulnerability would turn they more into the glass-canons they should be IMHO.
User avatar
Banduk
Posts: 1288
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Exilant aus Trolls Bane

Re: Balance wand magic

Post by Banduk »

According to my opinion good ideas would be:
  • Wand magic can stunt enemies
  • Wand magic can push enemies back
  • Magic gems improve DPS
  • Higher DPS as long as the mage wears no higher armory
User avatar
Dantagon Marescot
Posts: 1948
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2006 8:38 am
Location: Illarion Public Library

Re: Balance wand magic

Post by Dantagon Marescot »

Honestly I have been told on many occasions that my mage is rather deadly with a wand. I've even managed to solo some mid level dungeons with a combination of combat and wand magic. My mages wand magic does more damage than my mages combat abilities. And I do train without mana potions so I have yet to max out Wand Magic. I currently do not see any issue with wand magic as a whole, nor think it is in need of much adjusting.

I would however like to see wands gemable like any other weapon (technically you can gem them now, but I don't think it actually does anything). I think should should be enough to balance the DPS issue for the time being.
User avatar
Achae Eanstray
Posts: 4300
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 7:03 am
Location: A field of dandelions
Contact:

Re: Balance wand magic

Post by Achae Eanstray »

I haven't tried dungeons with my mage that isn't maxed (no potions) but in the 80-90 range however agree, the wands should be gemmable and for the effects I'd like to see keeping of close range as is but extend the distance and power. It is disheartening a monster mage can shoot and kill a mage at a much better distance.


I'd like to suggest the chars that play mages get together and come to an agreement on best improvement for a mage and agree with the rest... it isn't near as satisfying as bow and arrow at present.
User avatar
Q-wert
Posts: 1089
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 10:13 am
Contact:

Re: Balance wand magic

Post by Q-wert »

Gemming weapons (still) has basically no effect on the dps of weapons. If you know what you are doing, you put your gems anywhere else.
There is a mantis task for that, which seems to have been made into its own milestone.
Brightrim
Developer
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2017 2:21 pm
Location: Gallifrey

Re: Balance wand magic

Post by Brightrim »

The damage does seem fine at first but the higher level you reach, the more useless it is compared to archery, even with all the disadvantages it has that archery does not. I think this might have to do with how archers swap out for higher level bows with higher damage as they level, but wand users don't?

Either way, while I do not play my magic caster anymore, I do agree with Djironnyma on this one, and nothing did change in the meantime to wand magic since I last played her.

And yes, training wand magic without mana potions (as no alchemists were around actively back then) is awfully tedious, and even with alchemists around it can be far too expensive for a newly started mage to even get a wand, not to mention mana potions.
User avatar
Dantagon Marescot
Posts: 1948
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2006 8:38 am
Location: Illarion Public Library

Re: Balance wand magic

Post by Dantagon Marescot »

Brightrim wrote:The damage does seem fine at first but the higher level you reach, the more useless it is compared to archery, even with all the disadvantages it has that archery does not. I think this might have to do with how archers swap out for higher level bows with higher damage as they level, but wand users don't?
Correct. There is currently no change in damage associated with the different wands. The simple wand is all that is required, the only advantage to paying for a fancy elemental wand is the gfx effect. One change I could see being made is that the simple wand is good til lvl 50, and at 50 you are able to use the elemental wands that could do more damage.

------

However, I would like to note that wand magic was not meant to be the end all be all. It is what we have while the runic magic system is still down. It was not intended to be permanent (and if it is, it probably shouldn't be as powerful as arcane rune magic).

I will agree with Achae in that I find monster mages overpowered in comparison to PC mages. Perhaps something there needs to be scaled. A stun and push back feature could make things a tad more interesting.
User avatar
Karrock
Posts: 515
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 6:11 pm

Re: Balance wand magic

Post by Karrock »

Brightrim wrote: And yes, training wand magic without mana potions (as no alchemists were around actively back then) is awfully tedious, and even with alchemists around it can be far too expensive for a newly started mage to even get a wand, not to mention mana potions.
I find this made good. Mage character should stands out intelligence and wisdom. This class should be elite, and not first choice of newbie. Even now some old players who play mages don't even learnt most basic fundaments of magic theory. How one can rp mage (who is someone like a representative of a science from our world) if he don't know basic facts from lore, magic theory or such? This really look terrible.

With points suggested by Djironnyma I agree.
User avatar
Lia
Posts: 909
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 10:12 pm

Re: Balance wand magic

Post by Lia »

I play a mage too, and i agree with all points from Djironnyma.

And i also test with a full Warrior. High Skills and the right attributes. I need 4 mana potion and over 7 minutes to bring him to "Near the dead"

In this time a Warrior could kill my mage really often.

And in the same time a Archer would bringthe same warrior 2 or 3 times to "near the dead"

What say it to me? Mage attack seems as well as useless.
User avatar
Rincewind
Posts: 1960
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2008 10:40 am
Location: schroedingersbox.org
Contact:

Re: Balance wand magic

Post by Rincewind »

I desire 1 tile more range at skill 50 and another one at skill 100. Since bows increase their range with skill too, I think this would help to balance wandmagic.



@ Lia did you run a test at a person with no armor as well? Somehow the armor makes all the balancing super complicate I guess.

There seems to be a major difference between damage on npc and PCs. First it is strange that, no matter my skill I always need 3 attacks to kill a sheep. So would that mean I can comparably easily slay a warrior-character if they wouldn't were any armor? I know I can do that with my bow... but somehow failed to do that with my wand (or my test was crap).

While missing an attack seems to depend on the defenders ability and stats with ordinary weapons, I think the magic wand only considers the users stats alone. I seem to miss sheep as often as lichs, even when the message tells me my aim "blocked your attack with it's will". So either give out a correct message or make the aims willpower a factor considered.

Those are my two(or 3) points.
Since we know that wandmagic will not be a stand-alone feature forever and will be complemented by rune magic one day, it's balancing should be handled with great care. Runes will give mages extraordinary abilities as well as strong damage attacks. All in All I agree, an increase of effect (and adding the special-attacks! 8) finally!) would be awesome.

Glad we talk about it!
All the Best
Rincewind
User avatar
Q-wert
Posts: 1089
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 10:13 am
Contact:

Re: Balance wand magic

Post by Q-wert »

I did not run the numbers, but during the initial testing we found armour to be the determining factor on damage with magic wands.
A maxed 100 mage can 3 hit (a character has 10000 health, damage of a single attack - no matter the weapon - is capped to 4999) a sheep or unclothed person, as can a maxed warrior with a bow.
As soon the target wears any kind of armour, damage from wands goes down significantly, generally offering better protection against wand magic than regular weapons in all levels.
Last edited by Q-wert on Mon Oct 16, 2017 12:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Drugar Stonesmasher
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2001 8:55 am

Re: Balance wand magic

Post by Drugar Stonesmasher »

Rincewind wrote:

There seems to be a major difference between damage on npc and PCs. First it is strange that, no matter my skill I always need 3 attacks to kill a sheep. So would that mean I can comparably easily slay a warrior-character if they wouldn't were any armor? I know I can do that with my bow... but somehow failed to do that with my wand (or my test was crap).

Rincewind

As far as my experience goes you always need at least 3 hits to kill something. i Suppose damage is limited to 50% of the life bar, where as you are not yet dead with 0% (just an assumption).
User avatar
Estralis Seborian
Posts: 12308
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 9:14 pm
Location: Sir Postalot
Contact:

Re: Balance wand magic

Post by Estralis Seborian »

That's correct. There is a damage cap of 4999 in place. Every being has 10000 hitpoints. So you need three hits at least.
User avatar
Charlotte-ate-wilbur
Posts: 228
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 6:42 pm

Re: Balance wand magic

Post by Charlotte-ate-wilbur »

Why not implement a resistance or absorbtion skill instead of making armor the determining factor, as well as adding gems to the damage.

It might be alot of work and not the best solution for this particular game, Im no dev.
Brightrim
Developer
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2017 2:21 pm
Location: Gallifrey

Re: Balance wand magic

Post by Brightrim »

Charlotte-ate-wilbur wrote:Why not implement a resistance or absorbtion skill instead of making armor the determining factor, as well as adding gems to the damage.

It might be alot of work and not the best solution for this particular game, Im no dev.
The main point would be that the wand system is a temporary solution while we wait for the real magic system to be done, so the less work needed on a temporary system the better.
Post Reply