This spell is problematic because only the human can use it well. I often raise land my way to a sneak attack or to avoid monsters. The only reason I can see to make is so cheap is to help out players that get an island starting location. But really that kind of stamp placement is what needs fixing.  Having such a low cost will lead to some very bad balance. 

Here are some ways I now plan to abuse this spell:

Land bridges to get to sneak attack an enemy.

Seas to block off my territory and create only one choke point.

Putting hills everywhere to block guerrilla tactics and then adding caltrops so that every tile costs 4 moves if you can't use my roads. 

Trapping large monsters on islands.

Trapping enemy Sovs on islands.

Creating a ring around the entire map and using land bridges to connect to areas I want to invade.

Okay that last one would be pretty cool, but you get the point. This spell is just too easily abused at 5 mana. At 25 or 50, at least we have a cost to brutally gaming this mechanic. I would bet that this low cost is intended to show off the feature to new users, but since the AI can't use it, it needs to cost more for the human player to basically cheat.

5 mana is a bad joke. 50 was good, but I'd prefer at least 100. Terrain has to count alot, espaecially in early and mid game. 

It's also exploitive vs the AI. Last thing; it's not fun to use if it's so cheap, no real trade offs.

The AI just needs to be taught a few tactics and counter-tactics using these spells.

Edit: If the spells could also be used to create and destroy obstacles on the tactical map (raising and lowering land) battles would be more interesting too.

I think of games like populous and i simply don't believe that it would be hard to teach the ai how to control land. All you need to do is set an ideal for each sov how hilly they like their terrain, give them an ability to recognize the terrain height, and teach them to notice when it changes. To give them the ability to build a land bridge you give them the ability plan a move that uses a certain amount of mana within a certain number of turns while the rest of the settlements are protected. If they can't make to the target area within a resonable time they dont do it. They would most likely do this if they deem an are too dangerous to approach, so they go around it.

You also need better sight range range compared to movement so you can prevent people from moving into your land and casting Volcano.

50 is perfect. Otherwise, I would be too tempted to abuse it.

Totally disagree, guys.  Mana is a precious, precious resource that I find I need a lot of during wars.  If your sovereign and champions have useful spells to tip the balance in tough battles or you add enchantments to your heroes and units then mana is quickly drained.

Any sort of terraforming generally seems to take quite a number of casts to achieve the tactics described above.  I mean, how many casts does it take to make a land bridge or open a valley to an isolated area? 

My vote would be 10 mana cost would make it useful but not too cheap.

Cheers,

Sword

10 per cast is laughable.  With that cost, one could cut land bridges, close mountain passes, ford oceans, and basically run circles around the AI.  Yeah, it sure should take more mana to cast a Flame dart than to erect a mountain.

Yes, to safely close a three tiles wide land-bridge it takes 300 mana. Sounds about right to me.

Correct me if I'm wrong people, but raise and lower land can't make mountains, and can't create oceans.  There are two seperate spells for that.

Unless the spell descriptors are wrong.....

Raise land, turns water int plain, and plain into hill, but NOT hill into mountain.  Lower land turns mountain into hill, and hill into plain, but NOT plain into ocean.

So all this terraforming stuff you guys are takling about would actually require the much more expensive spells (create mountain is more than 50 per cast).

The spell descriptions are half way wrong.  You can make mountains, which is enough to close paths, and you can drain oceans, which is enough to make paths.

Spells that level and raise hills can cost 10 mana for all I care.  I may even use them to surround all of my border cities with hills, so that I can use the roads while the enemy pays double.

Post a bug report on the raise land spell if it can create mountains (as it doesn't fit the description, nor is there any reason to have create mountain as a seperate spell).  I'm not at home to test this, but I assume you have created maountains with raise land.

I wuold actually classify blocking paths, and creating paths as two very seperate beasts.  IMO creating paths should be easy and cheap.  Undoing paths and blocking off areas should be a large investment.

Therefore, assuming lower land and raise land can NOT create UNPASSABLE terrain, then they should be cheap.  However, if the desciption is wrong, and the intended effect is that the spells CAN create UNPASSABLE terrain, then they are under priced and I wholly agree with peoples' sentiments on the issue.

If the description is right and the ability to create impassable terrain is a bug, then I still think this whol issue goes away.

basically the crux of my opinion lies in whether the spell can/should be able to create terrain which is impassable.  If yes, cost increase +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

if no, then cost can be cheaper cheaper

Either the AI needs to learn how to use the spells, or it should be removed and replaced with something the AI can use.

Preferably the former- the AI needs to learn when it is sealed off at a minimum so Curgen's Volcano isn't an auto gamewinner.

I'd like to see this as a seldom used spell, both by the AI and the player. It should only be used when you really needs it. Otherwise terrain loses it's importance, and the gameplay arround it gets trivial and boring.