View Full Version : Crystal Shield
Warhammer
July 11th, 2007, 06:55 PM
Is there any downside to equipping a mage with a crystal shield? It seems like it would be a no brainer to do so since it is an automatic power of the spheres.
lch
July 11th, 2007, 06:59 PM
Little expensive, heavy encumberance, there are other nice shields aswell. Otherwise it's fine.
MaxWilson
July 11th, 2007, 07:12 PM
It's kind of nice to boost H2 priests to H3 for Divine Blessing. But yeah, high encumbrance is the biggest drawback.
-Max
P.S. It only works for priests that have some regular magic paths in addition to Holy, though, like Jotun Godes, Vanjarls, Servants of the Oracles, etc. In theory you could get up to a effective H6 this way, though I don't know why you'd bother.
Jazzepi
July 11th, 2007, 07:12 PM
Almost every piece of armor has encumbrance associated with it. This raises your spellcasting encumbrance which can be seen by clicking on the fatigue stat. Every time you cast a spell, this is added in addition to the spell's original fatigue cost.
You may find, however, that having an extra level in a spell category of your choice more than makes up for the extra fatigue caused by the shield's encumbrance by reducing the fatigue caused by the spell.
Jazzepi
Ironhawk
July 11th, 2007, 07:45 PM
Yeah. But likely you are using the shield to push your paths up so that you gain access to whatever spell you are looking for.
MaxWilson
July 11th, 2007, 08:21 PM
Or to boost the effects of whatever spell you're casting. I love to see D9 Cloud of Death, for instance. 14 AN damage (MR at +2 penetration), AoE 19.
-Max
sum1lost
July 12th, 2007, 02:50 AM
MaxWilson said:
It's kind of nice to boost H2 priests to H3 for Divine Blessing. But yeah, high encumbrance is the biggest drawback.
-Max
P.S. It only works for priests that have some regular magic paths in addition to Holy, though, like Jotun Godes, Vanjarls, Servants of the Oracles, etc. In theory you could get up to a effective H6 this way, though I don't know why you'd bother.
To use banishment against shadowvestals effectively!
vfb
July 12th, 2007, 04:17 AM
I couldn't get this guy to follow his script and cast Hell Power. Might have boosted him to H10.
Edit: Fighting more monsters made him cast it. The image has been updated.
http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w148/vfb_dominions/Ek-1.jpg
QXel
July 12th, 2007, 12:58 PM
Yes, the main drawback is encumbrance. Beware ! I had loose some mages in massives battles (i.e. long-during battles).
But it is really worth it, especially for boosting Holy. And if your Priests don't have any kind of magic, well, empowered them in the path where you have the most gems ;o)
I use this tactic often in my SP games.
QXel
Frostmourne27
July 13th, 2007, 12:37 AM
vfb said:
I couldn't get this guy to follow his script and cast Hell Power. Might have boosted him to H10.
<image omitted>
Not sure about this, but it could have been a lack opponents. Mages often don't cast scripted gem requiring spells against small/weak armies, even if they include some very tough units. E.g. it's hard to shadowblast an SC sometimes. Try against a horde of longdead or something maybe?
vfb
July 13th, 2007, 01:40 AM
Thanks! You're right, it just took a few more enemies. I've updated the image.
So, his Banishment (if he isn't too busy fighting off the horrors that Hell Power spawns) is:
Area 22
Range 65
Damage 23
Penetration 4
All total silliness, of course.
Taqwus
July 13th, 2007, 02:34 AM
vfb said:
Thanks! You're right, it just took a few more enemies. I've updated the image.
So, his Banishment (if he isn't too busy fighting off the horrors that Hell Power spawns) is:
Area 22
Range 65
Damage 23
Penetration 4
All total silliness, of course.
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/redface.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/redface.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/redface.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/redface.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/redface.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/redface.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/redface.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/redface.gif
/hydra mode
Lingchih
July 13th, 2007, 02:39 AM
I just lost a pretender, because he was carrying a crystal shield and became over-encumbered. I'm not a fan of it, accordingly. It should be used wisely.
Kristoffer O
July 13th, 2007, 05:26 AM
I challenge you Lingchih: what item should not be used wisely?
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif
Sombre
July 13th, 2007, 05:53 AM
Implementor axe?
Amhazair
July 13th, 2007, 12:22 PM
Warpfire throwers!
MaxWilson
July 13th, 2007, 01:09 PM
I think you're suggesting that the Implementor Axe should not be used at all, right? Now I have to experiment with pillaging.
-Max
vfb
July 13th, 2007, 01:14 PM
It's useful to bring a wasteland province with a gold mine down to zero population, for free 200% taxation.
Kristoffer O
July 13th, 2007, 05:01 PM
lol
sum1lost
July 13th, 2007, 05:24 PM
Kristoffer O said:
I challenge you Lingchih: what item should not be used wisely?
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif
Amulet of vengeance and slave collars!
Frostmourne27
July 13th, 2007, 05:30 PM
Hey! I actually kinda like the amulet of vengeance. Works well on a1 or s1 mages who cast air shield or twist fate/luck, then attack closest. Just make sure that they aren't deployed beside your other commanders in case someone gets lucky... BOOM!
Kristoffer O
July 13th, 2007, 05:36 PM
> Amulet of vengeance
I'm inclined to agree http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif
MaxWilson
July 13th, 2007, 05:56 PM
Slave collars should be made en masse and then wisely gifted to opposing AI nations.
-Max
Beorne
July 14th, 2007, 08:11 AM
Warhammer said:
Is there any downside to equipping a mage with a crystal shield? It seems like it would be a no brainer to do so since it is an automatic power of the spheres.
The power of the spheres effect is automatically active in battle or you have the option to cast it even if you don't know it?
thejeff
July 14th, 2007, 08:20 AM
Automatic boost to all paths.
Is it actually a power of the spheres, though? Does it stack?
atul
July 14th, 2007, 08:30 AM
It's Power of the Spheres cast in the beginning of the battle, so no PotS will be cast afterwards even if it's scripted. So, no stacking.
thejeff
July 14th, 2007, 09:34 AM
Hmmm, does that work with Communion Matrices? Slaves get the PotS boost?
Kristoffer O
July 14th, 2007, 09:38 AM
I believe so, which might be a good way to exploit the bug of resourceful slaves http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif
lch
July 14th, 2007, 09:56 AM
I just tried it with a Robe of Invulnerability and the Crystal Shield, and no, neither work with Master/slave matrices.
Kristoffer O
July 14th, 2007, 10:00 AM
You have to cast spells for the communion to take effect. Item effect don't carry over unless the item casts the effect. Most items just grant effects. Enchantment spells like storm are actually cast. Fire res, strength of gaia, etc are just granted effects. If one of the slaves cast PotS with a pearl it sould apply to all.
lch
July 14th, 2007, 10:07 AM
The question was whether the Crystal Shield works with Master/slave matrices and the answer is no, it doesn't. All other spells that have AoE: Caster work with communions, how ever the communion might have come together at all.
thejeff
July 14th, 2007, 10:21 AM
But I thought Crystal Shield actually cast the effect.
That's why I suggested the communion.
The Robe, grants the effect outside of battle so I wouldn't expect it.
It was observed first with the charge body effect of copper plate.
If the shield actually casts power of the spheres it should affect the slaves. If we actually understand what's happening.
Maybe there's some ordering coming into play here? The spells are cast at the beginning of the battle. If the Matrices cast communion spells, maybe those get cast before the charge body, but after PotS?
It could be dependent on commander order, too.
Edi
July 14th, 2007, 10:55 AM
You need a Crystal Matrix and you need the Crystal Shield. They cannot be worn by the same person, because the shield is equipped before the matrix and thus casts its spell first, unaffected by communion. So you need to have the shield on someone who comes AFTER the matrix bearer in the battle order. And that someone MUST be a theurg communicant. That MIGHT make it work, but there are no guarantees.
I haven't tested it, but those are the predictions generated based on the observed behavior of spells and commanders.
thejeff
July 14th, 2007, 11:11 AM
Spells cast by slaves affect the whole communion?
And shield is equipped before matrix therefore it comes first can't be how it's determined. Copper plate is equipped before matrix and the charge body from that does work.
Edi
July 14th, 2007, 11:27 AM
Well, in that case you need to experiment more and shows my prediction to be somewhat wrong. It hingeson the order of effects, does communion come first, or Power of the Spheres?
thejeff
July 15th, 2007, 04:56 PM
I ran some tests with this (and a few other communion things)
Spells cast by slaves do not affect the whole communion, so having a communicant carry the Shield does not work.
Assuming the use of Crystal Matrix and Slave Matrices.
The Crystal Shield does boost the path of Slaves, at least those who act before the master.
I'm not sure what Ich saw, but I definitely saw the boost. Maybe his master acted before the slaves?
And in reference to a suggestion in another communion thread, slaves paths may be boosted for fatigue purposes, but not for spells they cast themselves.
So does any of this qualify as a bug? I like slaves being able to act if no Masters are casting, but being able to cast if they act first seems abusive. It certainly isn't the intended behavior.
lch
July 15th, 2007, 05:52 PM
thejeff said:
Assuming the use of Crystal Matrix and Slave Matrices.
The Crystal Shield does boost the path of Slaves, at least those who act before the master.
I'm not sure what Ich saw, but I definitely saw the boost. Maybe his master acted before the slaves?
Then that does not depends on battlefield placement like in actual combat, I tried out every relevant combination. Maybe it depends on the unit ID's, the one with the lowest unit ID (i.e. the sooner the unit was created) acts first?
Edi
July 15th, 2007, 05:56 PM
It's probably tied to the unit ID. A lot of things are.
thejeff
July 15th, 2007, 06:29 PM
Wait a second. Are you saying actual battlefield placement? Where on the map you put the mage?
It's certainly not dependent on that. As far as I know nothing is.
Order of action on the battlefield seems to correlate to the order they're listed elsewhere (F1 screen, Army setup, province display). This is also the order ritual spells are cast.
It may be unit number, but it's not strictly the oldest units first. Are unit numbers reused? That might be it.
Edi
July 16th, 2007, 07:20 AM
Unit ID determines the order they are listed in off the battlefield in commander or troop screens, and they act in combat in that same order.
Unit ID numbers are reused after they run out, not before. The limit is somewhere around 150k or 200k.
thejeff
July 16th, 2007, 09:01 AM
Interesting because even in the early game, new commanders do not always appear at the end of the list.
Obvious example: in the game I was testing this in, my awake pretender appeared down in the lower half of the list.
I'm not sure what order I recruited the others, but the researchers with a star of experience are not all at the top.
Edi
July 16th, 2007, 09:14 AM
Hmm, so that's the second time I'm wrong then. Apparently unit IDs are freed for reuse immediately upon the death of the previous owner, which, now that I think of it, is what happens since I've seen the same behavior myself.
MaxWilson
July 16th, 2007, 03:53 PM
Only the second time? That's pretty good. Even excluding my life outside Dominions, I'm probably up in the mid 50's or so in errorful beliefs.
-Max
Edi
July 16th, 2007, 03:59 PM
Second time in this thread, you imp. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif
vBulletin® v3.8.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.