Global spell tactics ?

[Yvelina]

Nagot Gick Fel said:
Burden of Time is merely a mild nuisance for living nations.

I disagree. When you have very expensive, well equipped, and very fragile mages, like for example Pythium, Burden of Time can cost you thousands of gold in one turn. In a MP game I am still in, Arcocephales cast Burden of Time after he lost a major battle, I guess as a way to get back at his enemy.

The Burden of time got dispelled the next turn, but no less than two artifacts appeared for forging in that turn. Some of my expensive Drotts were diseased as well, although they survived long enough for my Fairy queens to heal them. I had a pact with the player who had Gift of Health up, so I could not take it for myself.

Burden of Time is so devastating for some nations, and such a pain for every living nation, that anyone casting it in a game I am in can not only expect to have it dispelled in one turn but also to be destroyed as a matter of principle in the next few turns.

I do not expect to see it cast by anyone who is still in the running... unless he is firmly on top of the heap.

As for how many gems I put into globals, I usually invest only the minimum if I have no enemies, and the global is not too powerful (i.e. not Forge of the Ancients, Arcane Vortex, etc...)

If it is a gem generator (Gale Gate, Well of Misery, etc...) I throw it with as much gems as I can afford when I research it.

If it is one of the game winners, then I wait until I have at least 500 extra gems before I throw it. After all would you throw a Arcane Vortex with 150 gems, so that someone else has an even chance of dispelling it with 30 pearls?

[Nagot Gick Fel]

Yvelina said:
I disagree. When you have very expensive, well equipped, and very fragile mages, like for example Pythium, Burden of Time can cost you thousands of gold in one turn. In a MP game I am still in, Arcocephales cast Burden of Time after he lost a major battle, I guess as a way to get back at his enemy.

The Burden of time got dispelled the next turn, but no less than two artifacts appeared for forging in that turn. [...]

That's a very extreme case, and as such it doesn't invalidate my point. I've been at the receiving of dozens of BOTs myself (mainly because the AI used to have a great liking for it), and I've never been close to losing *thousands* of gold in a single turn because of it, not even a single thousand. A small hundred would be a more accurate figure.

[Daynarr]

You would be losing thousands only from unrest and population deaths it produces (well, unless you have a small empire). Getting your mages and troops killed is just an insult to the wound. The worst thing about this spell is that your dominion provides no protection from it (unlike WotG).

[deccan]

Speaking of globals, "Wild Hunt" doesn't seem very useful for such a cool sounding spell. It targets enemy priests, but it isn't an assassination type battle, and the Lord of the Hunt isn't that tough. Can it kill priests inside castles?

[Nagot Gick Fel]

Daynarr said:
You would be losing thousands only from unrest and population deaths it produces (well, unless you have a small empire).

If I had an empire and armies big enough to lose 1000s of gold EACH turn to BOT, I wouldn't care - because it would mean I have won the game already.

On the other hand, losing 1000s each turn to Utterdark is easy.

[Daynarr]

Nagot Gick Fel said:

If I had an empire and armies big enough to lose 1000s of gold EACH turn to BOT, I wouldn't care - because it would mean I have won the game already.

On the other hand, losing 1000s each turn to Utterdark is easy.

Not if you play on large maps.
Even smaller maps then Faerun (like Cradle) will produce significant loss. The trouble on larger maps is that it's harder to actually get in and kill offensive mage so you usually have to take the losses or try some long-range attack. Long-range attacks usually don�t do much good against BoT casters since they are usually either pretenders or powerful mages that you can't kill with seeking arrows or flames from afar.

Then there are losses you get if you collect fetishes, clams, etc and your carriers keep getting killed from old age.

Not arguing Utterdark, though.

[Nagot Gick Fel]

Daynarr said:
Even smaller maps then Faerun (like Cradle)

Cradle looks like a rather large map to me.

will produce significant loss.

Significant loss, yes, but over time. In a single turn the loss amounts to a small fraction of your income - and that's not even including gem income, bar the odd clam. Ditto with old age and afflictions: they will affect only a small percentage of your troops each turn, and most of these afflictions won't have a significant impact on leaders. A limp, one-eyed, battle-fraught sage can still research just as well as an healthy one.

Keep in mind I was replying to something who wrote:

Of course your opponents will pool their resources and get rid of [Burden of Time] within a few turns.

So BOT is a nuisance, sure, but since it brings no direct benefit to its caster, since it affects other nations as well (I'll always have more enemies than allies), and since its effect on my econ and manpower is only marginal, it comes in the Last tier of my own 'to dispel' list. There are several other GEs I'd want to dispel first.

Then there are losses you get if you collect fetishes, clams, etc and your carriers keep getting killed from old age.

Clams maybe, although I'd bet a clamhoarder will still churn them out faster than he loses them. Fetishes carriers on the other hand, are usually undead leaders who don't really care about BOT.

[Daynarr]

Nagot Gick Fel said:

Cradle looks like a rather large map to me.

I didn't say its small, just smaller then Faerun.
LOL, I placed it as an example of a large map, so there is no need to tell me its large.

Significant loss, yes, but over time. In a single turn the loss amounts to a small fraction of your income - and that's not even including gem income, bar the odd clam. Ditto with old age and afflictions: they will affect only a small percentage of your troops each turn, and most of these afflictions won't have a significant impact on leaders. A limp, one-eyed, battle-fraught sage can still research just as well as an healthy one.

Well, no global spell has much effect in one turn. Over time effect is what they are all about. And this one produces unrest which either forces you to drop taxes or live with high unrest which also produces less gold income. Now, maybe to you at least 10% less income in each province looks like marginal thing if you have no upkeep, but if you want to pay for what you have and buy a mage or two that you lost due to the old age - you will feel it. Best way to see how BoT affects income is to cast it an watch the income graph - all nations will get noticable less amount of gold. A few turns is acceptable, but it mounts up in time. Of course, the real effect on someone depends on what nation he plays and his style of play. Some nations are far more vulnerable to BoT then others (not counting undead nations). E.g. Panganea can live with it far better then Ulm.

BoT doesn't only give afflictions; it kills your weaker troops and commanders instantly. Mages usually suffer from it mostly (low HP) so losing even a 1 or 2 of them per turn is a lot. If you don't consider that to be nothing more then nuisance then you have such large empire and income that you have already won the game (or playing faerun).

Note that I'm talking about BoT's effects in general, not strictly from MP or SP aspect, so that's probably why our opinions differ.

There is a reason why people don't cast it often in MP, and there is an even better reason why it tends to be dispelled in a few turn once it's up. Simply put, people don't like seeing their mages get afflictions and get killed, risk their pretender get a nasty affliction (getting rid of them is never easy if you are not Arco) and see their income drop by at least 10% per turn. And when someone does cast it, people usually pay him a visit with a couple of their armies to see WTH was he thinking.

So BOT is a nuisance, sure, but since it brings no direct benefit to its caster, since it affects other nations as well (I'll always have more enemies than allies), and since its effect on my econ and manpower is only marginal, it comes in the Last tier of my own 'to dispel' list. There are several other GEs I'd want to dispel first.

Well, it's usually on my no. 1 to dispel list (unless something nastier is up, like Utterdark). I try to take out offensive global that can kill my troops on the other side of the world before I try to reduce someone's gem income.
Of course, it does depend on what nation � theme I play.

The caster is usually undead nation (Carrion Woods, Desert Tombs, Ermor), which can even benefit from it by getting more corpses in provinces.

Clams maybe, although I'd bet a clamhoarder will still churn them out faster than he loses them. Fetishes carriers on the other hand, are usually undead leaders who don't really care about BOT.

Depends on whom you use as carrier. You can use undead to carry clams and scouts for fetishes. Depends what you have access to. Undead are always better as carriers of course (no upkeep could be one of the reasons ) but you use what you can. Chances are that most of the guys in MP won't have enough death gem income to use undead as carriers so they will resort to scouts and other cheap means. BTW my favourite carriers are spectres.

[Tuidjy]

I cannot see the point of discussing whether Burden of Time is a minor
nuisance, or a devastating cataclism. It is blatant aggression, and anyone
casting it will have my main army on top of his capital the next turn...
even if I do not get the chance to make sure that I will be the only
teleporting there.

I dispell or override Arcane Vortex, Forge of the Ancients and Well of Misery
as a matter of principle. I will tolerate most other globals until I attack
the owner. But in the case of Wrath of God, Burden of Time, Underdark, etc...
'until I attack the owner' means 'this turn'.

As for the losses Burden of Time inflicts... Even with Gift of Health, I was
losing three-four mages per turn to outright death from old age in an Inland
game I was nowhere near winning. I was a newbie at the time, but I still
invaded the offender (Pangaea) and got away with it, because everyone else did
as well.

[Nagot Gick Fel]

Daynarr said:
Well, no global spell has much effect in one turn.

The Eyes of God? Thetis Blessing? Sea of Ice? Utterdark? Perpetual Storm? In one word, all the 'strategical' GEs?

And then there are globals you can choose to cast "just for a turn", when you haven't the gems to buff them, if you can get a bargain from that single turn - Forge of the Ancients being the most obvious example.

Now, maybe to you at least 10% less income in each province looks like marginal thing if you have no upkeep

Maybe 'marginal' isn't the most appropriate word here - I say 'marginal' because it's a small fraction, be it 10% of 1000 or 10% of 100000 - it's always 10%.

If you don't consider that to be nothing more then nuisance then you have such large empire and income that you have already won the game (or playing faerun).

Size has nothing to do with it. And I've never played Faerun - way too big for me.

The caster is usually undead nation (Carrion Woods, Desert Tombs, Ermor), which can even benefit from it by getting more corpses in provinces.

I forgot about that - but there are cheaper ways to get fresh (and better) corpses.

Anyway, since it's so little used in MP (except occasionally by near-extinct nations who just cast it to annoy their more succesful enemies! ), I think we're giving BOT an undeserved honor with this lengthy discussion.