Age of Strategy Forums

Posted: **Tue Dec 12, 2023 11:45 am**

Miku:

3 Elf Geodryw (op) although it took a long time to set it up but it can have a insane range and damage via Enchant Nature's Fury.one of this in Tc.it's stone fall have base range is 9 and base damage is 144 with building bonus after all tech.it also have 2 actions after tech.Via Enchant Nature's each copse will increase 1 spell range and two spell power.maybe makes Enchant Nature's do not give spell range

Sunrise:

Mak has also mentioned that the final tech for geodryw (+4 power, +1 range, +1 action) needs stratego to implement mutually exclusive techs. Then there is to be a similar tech for arcane caster (sorceress I believe) but both such techs will only be available if you don't research any techs for the other caster type. (Aka if you upgrade arcane casters at all you can't max out geodryw, and if you max out geodryw you will not be able to upgrade arcane casters)

stratego:
remark: i disagree to annoy players by making a mistake and can not be undoed (inventing one - and later he want anohter)
so the change should come without the "mutual exclusive" feature

lucifer:

-Geodryw (Op)
Higly surclasses the ent thrower by versatility and his aoe 100% stun is a force to be reckoned with

Mak:

Geodryw — need to fix few of his abilities.

Posted: **Tue Dec 12, 2023 12:03 pm**

For geodryw, I suggest we go with the ability changes mak has planned. Stone fall should be for buildings and mechanical targets only, then adjust the wasp swarm spell to actually deal decent damage at full range. This will eliminate the extreme damage output against most units and replace with something more reasonable.

Posted: **Mon Dec 25, 2023 3:31 pm**

Planned changes for geodryw:

Stone fall: 4xSP dmg, ent demolisher bonuses against buildings (400/900/1900)
Wasp swarm: 5+2 range, 4xSP dmg (36), same DOT damage as poison, -1 speed debuff

This makes stone fall worse against foot units, while maintaining efficiency against buildings
wasp swarm deals better damage now to encourage its use.

Posted: **Mon Dec 25, 2023 4:49 pm**

Stone fall must not be able to target non-buildings and non-mechanical targets in the first place.

Posted: **Mon Dec 25, 2023 8:46 pm**

Stratego disagrees with that solution - an ability like stone fall should damage non-building units as well

Posted: **Tue Dec 26, 2023 4:41 am**

Than what about giving for stone fall negative -75% bonus to non-building and non-mechanical targets?

Burning has -50% bonus to skeletons which results in 5 damage per turn instead of 10.
Same can be done here, i believe.

As for wasp swarm — i think that 4×SP damage is too much.
Better to use 2 damaging effects in a row: 12 damage + 2×SP.

Posted: **Tue Dec 26, 2023 8:36 am**

makazuwr32 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 26, 2023 4:41 am Than what about giving for stone fall negative -75% bonus to non-building and non-mechanical targets?

Burning has -50% bonus to skeletons which results in 5 damage per turn instead of 10.
Same can be done here, i believe.

As for wasp swarm — i think that 4×SP damage is too much.
Better to use 2 damaging effects in a row: 12 damage + 2×SP.

negative bonus is not looking good.
that case we need to set the power to the smallest and increase bonus on all.

Posted: **Tue Dec 26, 2023 3:25 pm**

Only because you said no to limit possible targets for this spell down to mechanical units and buildings.

Posted: **Wed Dec 27, 2023 3:25 am**

Negative bonuses and limited targets are two different matters.
What stratego means is lowering the spell power so that the bonuses can stay positive. Same thing we did in my planned change.

As for wasp swarm, the damage is reduced by armor so the resultant damage is quite low. Especially for an elite caster.

Posted: **Wed Dec 27, 2023 1:00 pm**

The main damage from wasp swarm should come from poison, not from direct damage.

And once again — initially stone fall spell must not be able to target anything that is not building. It is a siege spell.

Age of Strategy Forums

PRI 1: Geodryw - OP [DISCUSSING]

PRI 1: Geodryw - OP [DISCUSSING]

Re: PRI 1: Geodryw - OP [DISCUSSING]

Re: PRI 1: Geodryw - OP [DISCUSSING]

Re: PRI 1: Geodryw - OP [DISCUSSING]

Re: PRI 1: Geodryw - OP [DISCUSSING]

Re: PRI 1: Geodryw - OP [DISCUSSING]

Re: PRI 1: Geodryw - OP [DISCUSSING]

Re: PRI 1: Geodryw - OP [DISCUSSING]

Re: PRI 1: Geodryw - OP [DISCUSSING]

Re: PRI 1: Geodryw - OP [DISCUSSING]