Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jgbrowning" data-source="post: 651969" data-attributes="member: 5724">Hrm. Well where are the banners that override those banners? The spells that overide those spells.  Using your arguement that eventually everything is countered and balanced would not magic eventually counter the countermagic allowing magic free reign over the battlefield, even if only for a short enough time to utterly destroy the majority of the army before this new magic is countered?Also.. where are the magic banners the prohibit any physical damage from occuring in their range?  ie. only magic damage (elemental/force) is not banned in their miles wide radius? Wouldn't those banners be in just as high demand because they almost totally negate the effectiveness of hand-to-hand soldiersJust seems to me that you're using a base assumption to support what you want to happen as opposed to using a base assumption to disprove what you want to happen. Which is fine, but is not consistant because your base assumption does both.If, as you postulate, magic will eventually counter magic, would not magic eventually counter counter-magic? Would not those situations arise often enough (given the uber-flexability of magic) so that massive armies of 800k people would die often enough to make making the armies of 800k not cost-effective?So far the only thing i've seen is that you have changed the parameters of the defensive spells to allow you to do what you want to do, which is negate the effectiveness of magic so you can have big armies fighting.  Where are the stealth spells that allow wizards to compeletely and utterly ignore this Eye of Dominion?  Using your logic, magic would counter magic eventually, no?How much does it cost to make and use these items you speak of? How much would it cost to make a magical way of overcoming them?  Which one is more effective?The only reason defenses keep getting better is that offenses keep getting better. Defenses will never prevent offense, it can only deter offense to move to another form of attack. Eventually your magic defenses will fail and huge armies are gonna bite it to magic.  Magic offense is more flexible, more like water, and it will find ways past every defense faster than the defense can apply itself effectivly. This is why they say you never win a war by fighting defensivly. (Not always true, i know, but mostly so) Why's is this the case?  Why do they pierce all magical protections? Wouldn't someone develop protections they they couldn't pierce? Wouldn't there be a "mass charm the interdemensional demonic vampire ravens" to attack the army their supposed to be defending? And once that spell was developed, how quickly do you think it would spread?  Thereby rendering any army that uses such defenses more vulnerable?Wouldn't there be illusion spells that act a foci for wizards. Illusions of the wizards that can cast spells at a distance so that when the ravens are attacking the "wizard" all they're doing is attacking an illusion that cannot be hurt?I guess the main point im trying to make is this: You have only taken magic to the point where wizards are limited to acting as support units and then you stopped. And you did this because you think magic eventually developes counter-magic. But its a cycle. Magic will eventually counter your counter-magic and when it does entire massive 800k armies will fall quickly before more magic can be developed to counter this new magic. This fact, well i think its a fact <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />, will counter your assumption of large armies because they will die often enough to not be very cost-effective.joe b.</blockquote>

Verification