Should mages be rebalanced?

Brainstorm ideas of possible additions to the game. Read this before posting!

Moderator: Forum Moderators

Forum rules
Before posting a new idea, you must read the following:
Elvish Leader
Posts: 49
Joined: April 17th, 2005, 8:18 am

Should mages be rebalanced?

Post by Elvish Leader »

They are so easy to kill and they need much exp to advance. You can protect them, but defense can be destroyed and mage killed. Also ,in some campaigns there aren't enogh healers, which are nececary for mages.
elscouta
Posts: 46
Joined: November 21st, 2004, 1:47 pm

Post by elscouta »

No. That's the design of mages. Learning to protect them is key (move them for killing blow, and move another unit in the freed spot to protect it), as is learning when to use them is (don't use them in scenarios with skirmishers!)

If your defense get destroyed, it means you have lost the skirmist (in Wesnoth, Pyrrus' victories are defeats).

Healing is rare, and so is precious. Protect your white mage!
User avatar
Dragonking
Inactive Developer
Posts: 591
Joined: November 6th, 2004, 10:45 am
Location: Poland

Post by Dragonking »

I believe mage is a good balanced unit. Nothing more to add here.
This is a block of text that can be added to posts you make. There is a 255 character limit
User avatar
Elvish_Pillager
Posts: 8137
Joined: May 28th, 2004, 10:21 am
Location: Everywhere you think, nowhere you can possibly imagine.
Contact:

Post by Elvish_Pillager »

Dragonking wrote:I believe mage is a good balanced unit. Nothing more to add here.
Agreed. If anything, it's slightly overpowered, but that's only really on maps with excessive high-defense terrain.
It's all fun and games until someone loses a lawsuit. Oh, and by the way, sending me private messages won't work. :/ If you must contact me, there's an e-mail address listed on the website in my profile.
markus_2
Posts: 30
Joined: April 4th, 2005, 7:39 am
Location: Germany

Post by markus_2 »

I think, in as much as there is a problem at all, it is the versatility of the mage.
Often, you only want a healer, and 60 xp is a lot for a unit which hardly ever can be placed at the front line. In fact, AFAIK it's the lvl1 unit which takes longest to level. If you just want a magical ranged fighter, the dark adept is IMO the better deal in most cases. The difference between no melee and 5-1 is not exactly impressive and you get 4 hp on the DA in return. The magical attack is slightly weaker (10-2 vs. 7-3), but it takes 12 xp less to advance it.
So while its nice to have an unit with so many options, and I understand the higher xp requirement that should be attached to compensate for the versatility, I think it unnecessarily hurts the player in situations where e.g. the player would be percetly happy if he/she was simply able to recruit a unit that "heals".
Chris Byler
Posts: 99
Joined: April 14th, 2005, 2:32 pm
Location: Blacksburg, VA, USA

Post by Chris Byler »

I don't see why versatility should translate to increased exp cost to advance - particularly when the versatility isn't in the unit itself, but in the forking of its advancement tree. (A versatile *unit* would be something like an elvish ranger - good maneuverability, good survivability, can out-melee a ranged unit and out-ranged a melee unit, has a decent counterattack no matter what is hitting it. Mage isn't remotely like that.)

Mage is a fragile unit that often can't afford to take killshots because they would leave it exposed and slaughtered, they are (in my experience) harder to gain exp for than a lot of other units, and cost a lot. What really balances the high exp cost is the really good unit you get afterward - whichever path you take.
Assasin
Posts: 956
Joined: March 15th, 2005, 3:51 am
Location: Where ever my mind takes me
Contact:

Post by Assasin »

Mages are fine the way they are. They don't need to be balanced, cause they already are.
I speak what's on my mind.

Which is why nothing I say makes sense.
markus_2
Posts: 30
Joined: April 4th, 2005, 7:39 am
Location: Germany

Post by markus_2 »

Chris Byler wrote:What really balances the high exp cost is the really good unit you get afterward - whichever path you take.
Am I the only one finding it a little odd, that xp to level are based on the unit you will get and not on the unit you have?
Or is this simply a peculiarity of the mage, because its advancement options are broader than the usual "better variant of base type"?

((FWIW, I'd be in favour of switching the white mage to "heals" and adding holy damage, and if necessary tone down the red mage in exchange for lessening the xp requirement on the mage itself.))
User avatar
turin
Lord of the East
Posts: 11662
Joined: January 11th, 2004, 7:17 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

Post by turin »

Huh? The White Mage already has holy.
For I am Turin Turambar - Master of Doom, by doom mastered. On permanent Wesbreak. Will not respond to private messages. Sorry!
And I hate stupid people.
The World of Orbivm
Doros
Posts: 78
Joined: October 13th, 2004, 4:02 am
Location: USA

Post by Doros »

turin wrote:Huh? The White Mage already has holy.
I think he means increase the damage that the holy attack currently does.

Mages take a lot of experience to level, and that makes it particularly frustrating when a mage gets killed. When you consider just how much damage mages are capable of, though, you can see that it's really necessary. You have to position mages very carefully, because you can't afford to lose them. If mages were hard to kill or easier to level, you would be able to get a bunch of mages, and the idea of several units doing 8x4 magical damage (and fire damage, too, which few units are resistant to) is scary.

On a side note, one of my favorite things is unleashing your units in the last scenario of a campagin - you know longer need to worry about keeping them for the next scenario, so you can sent suicide squads of leveled leaders. It's very liberating. :)
markus_2
Posts: 30
Joined: April 4th, 2005, 7:39 am
Location: Germany

Post by markus_2 »

Doros wrote:
turin wrote:Huh? The White Mage already has holy.
I think he means increase the damage that the holy attack currently does.
Absolutely not. Apologies for the poor phrasing, I can now see it is terribly misleading.
What I meant to say was: If the high xp cost of the mage is due to its powerful advancement options, why not tone those down? The white mages currently gets 8-4 ranged, holy and cures. IMHO 9-3 would suffice, together with holy and heals. The red mage could also do with a lower attack in exchange for a lower xp requirement on the base unit.

But nevermind, I realise this would be way to much hassle to rebalance and given that, I think the unit should stay as it is. I merely wanted to throw in what I would want things to be in an ideal (from my POV) BoW. Wishful thinking, not a serious proposal, hence the double brackets.
Chris Byler
Posts: 99
Joined: April 14th, 2005, 2:32 pm
Location: Blacksburg, VA, USA

Post by Chris Byler »

I don't see anything odd about exp costs being based on the power of the leveled unit. Exp is how you *get* the leveled unit. You buy the base unit with gold, and then "pay" exp to get the leveled one.

Possibly exp costs should be adjusted for how hard it is to give exp to that base unit without getting it killed (trivial for ghosts, easy for most frontline units, moderately hard for mages, really hard for elvish shamans; campaign leaders vary depending on the scenario.)
CBaoth
Posts: 45
Joined: May 22nd, 2005, 3:38 pm

Post by CBaoth »

markus_2 wrote: What I meant to say was: If the high xp cost of the mage is due to its powerful advancement options, why not tone those down? The white mages currently gets 8-4 ranged, holy and cures. IMHO 9-3 would suffice, together with holy and heals. The red mage could also do with a lower attack in exchange for a lower xp requirement on the base unit.
if they change the white mage from cures to heals i will hunt you down... the cures is esantal (sp) to many loyalist ideas when playing low xp (which 30 xp is most fun way to pla:))
RAR!!!
User avatar
Casual User
Posts: 475
Joined: March 11th, 2005, 5:05 pm

Post by Casual User »

Good afternoon!

I think the reason so many people say the mage needs to be balanced is that some players simply don't play in a way which is compatible with mages. Anyone pretending I'm a good player would be lying, but I've gotten a little experience. Enough of it to realize any mage I'd hire is just 20 wasted gp. I'm pretty sure there are ways and strategies for mages to be great, and they do shine occasionally, but a fairly expensive unit which, as far as I'm concerned, shines in a select few 10% of situations and in the rest either must be left out of the action (i.e. useless) or be included in the action and get killed (i.e. useless)... I'd rather get a fighter. I don't think the problem is with the mage, I think the problem is just that my usual gameplay requires some sturdiness (go dwarves!).

I understand very well why some dislike mages, but here's a proposal: ignore them. They can be replaced very well with fighters. The heavy infantry is the only unit which requires a mage to counter it, and it's rare and can be defeated with archers and cavalry (a very deadly combo).

Thanks for reading and sorry about the pointless post.
finny_01
Posts: 15
Joined: June 28th, 2005, 12:04 am
Location: texas

Post by finny_01 »

I like mages the way they are. They are a pain to keep alive at first, but they turn into extremely useful units if you are patient. Also, using them in any skirmish is a waste. I tend to save the mage for killing or weakening enemy commanders. Which is, incidentally, how mages tend to get used in paper and dice RPGs, they save their powerful spells for the confrontation with the main villain, instead of zapping the first orc that comes into range.

And when they do level up, they get to advance to very useful units. I would say that none of the units are bad. The Red Mage can turn into the ArchMage, which is awesome at killing just about everything. The white mage usually forms the core of my fighting formations, and the mage of light is great for compensating for night time. Finally, the silver mage is a great unit for blocking stray enemy units, or for recapturing towns.

Getting those supremely useful units shouln't be cheap, so nursing your mages to a level up is a fair price in my opinion.
Post Reply