Connection ErrorBad RequestSession ExpiredSign in requiredForbiddenNot FoundToo Many RequestsServer ErrorBad GatewayService UnavailableGateway TimeoutHTTP Version Not Supported
Session Expired
Your session has expired. Please log in to continue.
Sign in required
You need an account to do that. Sign in or create one — it only takes a minute.
Request Failed
We encountered an issue while processing your request.
Please check your internet connection and try again.
A creature can perform a specific action, such as casting a spell, moving, or moving and attacking. However, a spell, in the turn it is cast, will not consume that action slot, and therefore, its effect will not take place until the next turn. This means that a creature can move away from its allies and then, obeying the spell's effect, proceed to attack everyone within reach.
A mage cast a fireball over an area, but the damage will not be dealt in the turn the spell was used. The creature will be able to move out of the area of effect, and only then will the spell deal damage, when all units are outside its area of effect.
Ple-Sen
15 years ago
Auto-translated
It's unlikely that your version is correct. Why? Here's the answer: 1) The spell, in theory, should work for several rounds, just like before, right? Let's assume that's the case. 2) With this system, the creature will attack the nearest unit, and then move and... it will reach the enemies, receiving a "bonus" in the form of a double attack from the opponent, directed at the opponent's troops.
So, in the variant you proposed, the spell will cause more harm (if the opponent isn't an idiot) than benefit.
Added after 43 seconds
The mage cast a fireball over an area, but the damage won't be dealt in the turn the spell was used. The creature will be able to exit the area of effect and only then will the spell deal damage, when all units are outside its area of effect.
It's unlikely that your version is correct. Why? Here's the answer: 1) Does the spell, as before, last for several rounds? Let's assume that it does.
Not at all. In this case, it would be logical to make the spell one-time, and the witchcraft would only affect the damage dealt.
Ple-Sen
15 years ago
Auto-translated
In this case, it would be logical to make the spell one-time use, and the witchcraft would only affect the damage dealt.
What would then be its essential difference from, say, the Fireball spell? Perhaps if the damage was a percentage of the damage dealt by the unit.
Ment
15 years ago
Auto-translated
Percentage damage – firstly. Random damage range – secondly. Various possible effects (poison, multi-target attack, etc.) – thirdly. Retaliation – fourthly. Movement of the attacking unit – fifthly. And, sixthly, visualization.
Центавр
15 years ago
Auto-translated
I thought that the effect of a spell, for example, "Berserk," starts to take effect in the next turn of the creature it is cast on.
Ment
15 years ago
Auto-translated
That’s how it used to be, but the developers once again decided to turn everything upside down.
Ple-Sen
15 years ago
Auto-translated
Anyway, Mент, I think my version is closer to the truth than yours. But we’ll see.
No, that seems a bit strange, don't you think? In my opinion, it would be simpler to just make it so that a creature instantly attacks someone without losing its turn. Like in King's Bounty: the goblins could order one unit to attack another. It seems similar here, I think.
Oh yeah, there was something like that, and it really annoyed me :(
Ment
15 years ago
Auto-translated
News has been updated. I should note that Armageddon has changed significantly; now it resembles Unholy Word more. Firestorm will probably be the third upgrade for Fire Bolt.
5p74
15 years ago
Auto-translated
Armageddon is a great bonus for demons, especially if it deals significant damage (more than Unholy Word or Holy Word in Heroes 5)!
Саня Изи
15 years ago
Auto-translated
Armageddon has changed significantly; now it looks more like Unholy Word.
How is that possible? They only resemble each other in that they are area-of-effect spells. Or did the developers just get lazy and use the same animation for two different spells?
How is that possible? They only resemble each other in that they are area-of-effect spells. Or did the developers get lazy again and use the same animation for two different spells?
More likely, Armageddon now hits everyone except demons. They ruined the spell, basically.
Ple-Sen
15 years ago
Auto-translated
Kill the spell – save the demon!
5p74
15 years ago
Auto-translated
Then, in theory, all fire spells of destruction (fire arrow, fireball, etc.) shouldn't cause any damage to demons! Why did they do it this way? They could have simply added fire resistance to demons in n-% and that would have been it!