Fireball vs firebolt

[Question]

Decided to run some stats on this :

Lets assume a 6 figure unit with 4 shields against ranged (e.g. regular swordsmen) :

Firebolt :

25 mana for a str 25 attack. On average 7.5 will hit and 1.2 be deflected by shields. 6.3 wounds, 1 figure dies. 5.3 wounds carries over, 1.2 gets deflected, 4.1 left. 2nd figure dies, 3.1 carries over, 1.2 deflected, 3rd figure dies, 0.9 carries over.

So on average 3 figures die for a 25 mana spell...not that good, especially on a dirt cheap unit like swords men.

Fireball :

25 mana, str 9 fireball hits each figure. On average 2.7 hits, 1.2 deflected b shields, 1.5 hits for all figures. Whole unit wiped out.

[neleai]

Too expensive. Phantom warriors do same damage for 10 mana.

[b0rsuk]

Too expensive. Phantom warriors do same damage for 10 mana.

I think Phantom Warriors shouldn't be balanced based on price. The problem lies in the fact that you can summon and attack on the same turn. This means that in many cases it's unstoppable, even though they are very fragile you can't prevent the attack. If you just change the price, you may end up pricing them like a summon spell, or like a direct damage spell. Either way isn't ideal.

Last time I mentioned "summoning sickness" (like in Magic: the Gathering - unit can't attack on the turn it has been summoned) kyrub expressed his approval. He seemed to like this idea, so maybe it will (or already is) implemented in the Catnip mod.

[Asfex]

Don't forget that the fireball can be targeted everywhere, but phantom warrior can be summoned on the own territory (its analog summoning sikness) -i.e. upper left corner of the battlefield for the defender, and down right corner for the attacker.

[Question]

If phantom warriors had summoning sickness, they would be instant killed before they could attack.

Most combat summons arent that effective anyway. A fire elemental cant beat most normal units. Earth/air elementals are expensive and rarely obtainable too.

[b0rsuk]

If phantom warriors had summoning sickness, they would be instant killed before they could attack.

Because literally everyone has ranged units or combat spells ? No. And sometimes a decoy is valuable in itself.

Most combat summons arent that effective anyway. A fire elemental cant beat most normal units.

Give it Immolation (possible with the editor) and it works very nicely. It's more expensive than Phantom Wariors so it can have a nasty power like that.

Phantom warriors are ridiculously cost-effective, they even make most direct damage spells not worth it. And you can still use them like a summon, block people with it, synergy with mass battle buffs (especially node aura) unlike damaging spells. Because they're so ahead of everyone else AND they're a common spell, special treatment is warranted. Summoning Sickness could be limited to Phantom Warriors only.

[Question]

Literally everyone either has first strike or ranged combat units. Aside from "bad" races like gnolls who are limited to shamans and bowmen, the only ones i can think of that are predominantly melee are dwarves, and hammerhands can actually take on multiple phantom beasts and win.

[neleai]

Most combat summons arent that effective anyway. A fire elemental cant beat most normal units. Earth/air elementals are expensive and rarely obtainable too.

For capturing neutral cities fire elementals are more effective than firebolt.

Phantom warriors are ridiculously cost-effective, they even make most direct damage spells not worth it. And you can still use them like a summon, block people with it, synergy with mass battle buffs (especially node aura) unlike damaging spells. Because they're so ahead of everyone else AND they're a common spell, special treatment is warranted. Summoning Sickness could be limited to Phantom Warriors only.

And it would helped how? By having players stupid enough to place them only next to cavalry?

[neleai]

Decided to run some stats on this :

Lets assume a 6 figure unit with 4 shields against ranged (e.g. regular swordsmen) :

Firebolt :

25 mana for a str 25 attack. On average 7.5 will hit and 1.2 be deflected by shields. 6.3 wounds, 1 figure dies. 5.3 wounds carries over, 1.2 gets deflected, 4.1 left. 2nd figure dies, 3.1 carries over, 1.2 deflected, 3rd figure dies, 0.9 carries over.

So on average 3 figures die for a 25 mana spell...not that good, especially on a dirt cheap unit like swords men.

Fireball :

25 mana, str 9 fireball hits each figure. On average 2.7 hits, 1.2 deflected b shields, 1.5 hits for all figures. Whole unit wiped out.

It is str 8 attack. Even for str 9 attack probability that figure dies is roughtly 2/3 (see http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%28...%2Fx%29**4)
so 4 figure die on average.

[Asfex]

Of couse,phantom warrior is owerpowered. But i have question: i think all direct damage spells very overpriced. For example: to kill cheap bowmen it cost
30 skill to kill it by fireball.(add 15 if elite).if you cast posession,you get same result+1 unit. With confusion you effectively disable unit too.but it cost 15. Its the better choice for direct damage comparsion.
If we take melee unit,like cavalry,it cost even more. For minotaurs it cost ~95 by firebolt or 80 by doombolt. If we take confusion,it cost 15*(2.5=probability), its far less.
For rare spells the banish,cr. binding and others are much effective too. Even to destroy phantom warriors it will cost ~20 by fireball.
I think direct-damage spells must cost 2/3 of its current cost,or even half.
Thoughts?