Balance based on hard data from the PBEM tournament (continued)

We’ve moved over to the paradox forums. Please come visit us there to discuss:
You can still read the collective wisdom - and lolz - of the community here, but posting is no longer possible.

Home Forums Age of Wonders 3 Discussions Balance Suggestions Balance based on hard data from the PBEM tournament (continued)

This topic contains 246 replies, has 27 voices, and was last updated by  StephenDat 2 years, 5 months ago.

Viewing 30 posts - 31 through 60 (of 247 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #245118

    Zaskow
    Member

    I’m against removing too. But I have another radical idea.
    What about making convert abilities very powerful in strength and usable more than once per battle, but temporary (only on battlefields)? This change could fix abuse from converting units gathering armies non-stop, but leave converting abilities very effective in combats at least.

    #245120

    Hiliadan
    Member

    Yes, that’s change GC10 (without the “very high strength”) and it has very little support.

    GC10
    Converted, Charmed, Seduced, etc. units are converted only until the end of Battle and disappear afterwards

    4 people for, 7 people against. I don’t think the “very high strength” would change any of the “against” mind.

    #245125

    Zaskow
    Member

    4 people for, 7 people against. I don’t think the “very high strength” would change any of the “against” mind.

    Well, if people won’t do anything with their wish of unit gathering through convert we can’t fix it.

    #245141

    I somewhat agree with Zaskow. Ultimately the problem with conversion will not be fixed merely by changing the strength.

    IMO the best solution was increasing upkeep costs but that appears to not be doable unfortunately. I don’t think removing army gathering via convert completely is good solution; it’s a very large mechanic.

    For now I think it is best to just apply a band-aid solution (i.e. reduce strength, as it has already been done) and see if XP changes/starting setting changes will reduce the effect conversion has on the game.

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 9 months ago by  Dementophobic.
    #245159

    Hiliadan
    Member

    Something several people wanted to do for a long time but that I kept forgetting:
    GC13
    Ella the Runaway, Frostling Sorcerer, has Throw Ice Ball (was Charm) as a starting skill

    Another proposed idea was to give her Shadow Step instead of Throw Ice Ball. Who agrees for GC13? (needs 2 more “for” to approve the change, which would be in v1.15 since it’s linked to conversion)

    #245198

    Hiliadan
    Member

    I added a new proposal to replace the one AlX made for Slayer’s Doubt, which was too extreme:
    Th04a
    Slayer’s Doubt last 3 turns (was until the end of battle)

    Having a permanent movement malus is too strong in PBEM. 3 turns is sufficient.

    #245271

    cbower
    Member

    I think individually alot of the Rogue Leader changes are good. However I don’t fully understand why we are pushing buffing the Rogue leader so much. The Rogue hero is pretty useful at every stage of the game. Rogue has early mind control and sneaking. Late game rogue can be quite strong in melee. The Worst Hero for me is the Dreadnaught hero. Early on they have some nice abilities, but get passed level 7 and there really isn’t anything worth taking. Maybe add a stack ability to give weapons kit to infantry and pikeman, or something. Necro even with the debuff is still quite insane comparably.

    This is just my ranking of heroes, but this the way I see it.

    Tier 1
    Necro
    AD

    Tier 2
    Theo
    Rogue
    Warlord
    Sorcerer

    Tier 3
    Dreadnaught

    New priority change:
    AD09
    OK

    Ne06
    OK
    Ne09
    OK
    Ro09
    Against. This is pretty big ability, in most AI Battles I watch the AI will open itself up for flanks, and then take advantage of it the next round. Without adding to other leaders I would say I am against.
    Ro11 (Leader buff)
    OK.
    Ro13 (Leader buff minor)
    Sure
    Ro15 (Leader-mind Control debuff)
    OK
    Changes almost approved for v1.2:
    AD07
    ok

    Ro12 (Leader Buff)
    ok

    Ro05 (Leader buff)
    Against. Not sure why Rogue Leader needs healing aura. Plus everything else.

    Ha05
    OK. Yes very much in favor of bringing the Sheriff back

    New proposed changes:
    AD15
    Need to look at the mod editor a bit more before I can comment on this one.

    Other Changes;

    Ro08
    Very much against. Too much.
    Ro10
    OK
    Ro06
    Against
    Th05
    Against
    Th06
    Against
    Th04
    Against
    Th04a
    Ok
    So06
    Against
    So07
    Against
    AD03
    Against
    GC06
    OK

    #245275

    Hiliadan
    Member

    Thanks! 🙂
    I added this to v1.2:
    AD07
    Frostling Shaman and Draconian Shaman cost 130 gold and 30 mana (was 140 gold and 30 mana for the Frostlind and 130 gold and 40 mana for the Draconian)

    I dropped:
    Ro05
    Rogue heroes and leaders can now choose Healing aura at level X for Y points

    Ro08
    Rogue heroes and leaders can now choose Tireless – cost 5, available at level 13

    New priority changes:
    Th04a
    Slayer’s Doubt last 3 turns (was until the end of battle)

    GC06
    The Healing ability of heroes and leaders (Theocrat and Archdruid upgrade and item’s ability) can be used only Once per battle (was 2 turns cooldown)

    I discussed with gabthegab and he also thinks Rogue heroes are quite good. So I must be misusing them. I will probably change my position on some of the Rogue buff then.
    Even though gab was not convinced by the need to boost Warlord, Sorcerer and Dread heroes (not leaders), he agreed that he always take AD, Theo, Necro and Rogue as heroes. So that more or less means he agreed they need a boost. 😀

    Maybe add a stack ability to give weapons kit to infantry and pikeman, or something

    Yep but that makes the Weapon Kit spells a bit redundant. One proposal was to make Bomb Squad gives the units in the stack Sabotage. I asked if there was support for the idea but no-one answered.
    Dread actually just needs a lvl 13 killer ability. That could be a handgun cannon, but probably too strong! Or an improved sabotage that leaves in guard mode? Or an additional +20% Physical Protection? Or an AoE fire breath?

    #245514

    Gilafron
    Member

    GC06: I like GC06, but think it should apply to all units, not just heroes and leaders. If it is not changed for all units, then Healing ability should be augmented to regenerate the entire stack on the strategic map. It is stupid that I could “regenerate” my entire army in combat but not on the strategic map. So, any healing that is repeatable in combat should regenerate those types of units on the strategic map. I would even suggest that those abilities that heal a unit only once would heal 2x that amount of points on the strategic map (to account for use of the ability in multiple combats). This suggestion is primarily a common sense suggestion. I hate the manipulation of combat to game the system (e.g. extending combat so I can use more heal abilities).

    GC13: Makes sense since control abilities are nerfed. I like Shadowstep better, too, though. Also, I suggest incorporating all hero fixes from “Default Hero Bug Fixes” mod. These were identified bugs in heroes. They are:
    -v1.0 Amok the Beastfriend starts with Befriend Animal Awaken Spirit (or whatever the ability to make animals happy and tougher, can’t remember exact name)
    -v1.1 Changed Velvet the Assassin Hero Slayer ability to show in Unit Panel. By design, this starting skill only works against HERO units, not LEADER units. (Thanks to BBB for pointing out)
    -v1.2 Yarati the Spellstealer starts with Steal Enchantment

    Ro10: I like the idea, but cost seems high. Extra move is nice, but not Level 13 cost 10 nice. Throw out Level 9 cost 6 as a suggestion.

    Ne04a: Why 30% Spirit Weakness. The game has established protections and weaknesses in the increments of 20%. I suggest never deleting from this increment. I missed the halfking change on 15% protection, otherwise I would have voted against.

    Ne09: Does Energy Drain have a turn limit? If not, I suggest adding one to three turns.

    Ro15: Is Charm short range for other units? If so, I vote against in the name of consistency. Or make it touch for all ranges.

    AD06a, Ne08a, Ro16a, Th08a: Are you suggesting the strength is only lowered for heroes and leaders but not other units? If so, I’m against. That is, if it makes it different for hero/leader abilities vs unit abilities, then no. I vote any changes to be applied to all. Strength improvement based on skill is ok for leaders, much better than applying to heroes. However, I would actually vote for the skill having no impact on the leader ability.

    I’m generally against any hero ability that behaves differently than a standard unit’s ability (e.g. Healing 1xturn for heroes, Charm touch for heroes, etc.).

    I’m in favor of:

    AD09, Dr17, Ro9, Ro11, Ro13, Th04a, AD06a, Ne08a

    #245516

    Gilafron
    Member

    One new modification I suggest is ending combat after two (maybe three) rounds of no damage, instead of five. I think this would help the farming of experience and exploitation of abilities. Plus, it has the added benefit of getting combat going quicker (i.e. less time for a player to position his units just right). I don’t know if this is doable. If so, I would highly encourage two rounds.

    Although, those damn pioneers and builders would be a problem. Hate those things in combat. Don’t know if there is a mod to address them or not.

    #245536

    Hiliadan
    Member

    Just not to forget it: cbower made a video of test playing AD to see how many T4 he could get by turn 20. He got 3 T4 by turn 22, one of them Elite.

    (I haven’t seen it yet)

    it should apply to all units, not just heroes and leaders. If it is not changed for all units, then Healing ability should be augmented to regenerate the entire stack on the strategic map

    The idea behind GC6 is to nerf AD and Theo heroes (and not leaders) compared to other heroes, to make others more interesting to choose. I do not think Theo supports (including Evangelist) deserve to be nerfed, that would be a big drawback for Theo and would need to be compensated.

    -v1.0 Amok the Beastfriend starts with Befriend Animal Awaken Spirit (or whatever the ability to make animals happy and tougher, can’t remember exact name)
    -v1.1 Changed Velvet the Assassin Hero Slayer ability to show in Unit Panel. By design, this starting skill only works against HERO units, not LEADER units. (Thanks to BBB for pointing out)
    -v1.2 Yarati the Spellstealer starts with Steal Enchantment

    Thanks, very good suggestion! I add these as GC14.

    Ro10: I like the idea, but cost seems high. Extra move is nice, but not Level 13 cost 10 nice. Throw out Level 9 cost 6 as a suggestion.

    Extra mobility is very strong, lvl 9 and cost 6 is clearly not enough.

    Ne04a: Why 30% Spirit Weakness. The game has established protections and weaknesses in the increments of 20%.

    Because now you can stack as many 20% as you want. Making it just 20% would be a very big nerf. I don’t see why we would need to stay with multiples of 20%? Are you not a bit too traditional? 😛

    Ne09: Does Energy Drain have a turn limit?

    age-of-wonders-3.wikia.com/wiki/Template:Energy_Drain
    It works only for one turn. Increasing its duration would only make it more OP, very bad idea.

    Ro15: Is Charm short range for other units? If so, I vote against in the name of consistency.

    Charm is Short range for Bards, yes. Here the idea is to nerf mind control abilities for heroes and leaders. No one said mind control abilities for units were an issue. You need to research, build and pay upkeep for Bards, not for heroes or leaders, so it makes sense to distinguish between them.

    AD06a, Ne08a, Ro16a, Th08a: Are you suggesting the strength is only lowered for heroes and leaders but not other units? If so, I’m against. That is, if it makes it different for hero/leader abilities vs unit abilities, then no. I vote any changes to be applied to all. Strength improvement based on skill is ok for leaders, much better than applying to heroes. However, I would actually vote for the skill having no impact on the leader ability.

    I’m a bit taken aback by this: you were the one to suggest to apply the strength increase only to LEADERS and NOT to HEROES. I followed your advice to propose these changes.
    And yes, the strength is lowered only for leaders and heroes, and leaders can get back to their normal strength when the tech is researched. (see Ro15 above)

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 8 months ago by  Hiliadan.
    #245538

    Hiliadan
    Member

    Confirmed for v1.2:

    Dr17
    Juggernauts produced in Halfling and Elf cities do not have Tree Crusher

    Th04a [also confirmed for v1.15 for the tournament]
    Slayer’s Doubt last 3 turns (was until the end of battle)

    I’m in favor of:

    […] AD06a, Ne08a

    You said above you were against them, so did you misspell?

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 8 months ago by  Hiliadan.
    #245540

    Gilafron
    Member

    Because now you can stack as many 20% as you want. Making it just 20% would be a very big nerf. I don’t see why we would need to stay with multiples of 20%? Are you not a bit too traditional?

    Traditional is not quite the correct word. I’d say consistent is more accurate. 🙂

    For this topic, I believe Triumph made a conscious decision to go with 20% increments and it seems to work pretty well. I think 25% would have worked, too, but they choose 20%. By allowing increments of 10% (Ne04a) or 5% (halfling change), the designers get more choice but at the cost of appearing arbitrary. This opens to the door the thirds (33%, 67%) and so on. Overall, it is a subjective decision, but by applying a guideline or rule like 20% then some consistency is enforced.

    Another way to look at is ratings. Most ratings of movies and surveys are five stars. They could be ten stars. But, the difference between six and seven on a ten point scale is more subjective than three or four on a five point scale.

    For most of the other items, again it is consistency that stands out to me. I view the proposals as modifying abilities, not modifying units. If you are proposing to only have the ability on heroes/leaders change for Healing, then create a new ability called Lesser Healing or Limited Healing. Give that new ability to heroes and remove Healing from the list for heroes. With the said, however, I am favor of nerfing the Healing ability to once per combat. AS a result, it affects any unit that has that ability.

    age-of-wonders-3.wikia.com/wiki/Template:Energy_Drain
    It works only for one turn. Increasing its duration would only make it more OP, very bad idea.

    Concur. I should have looked up Energy Drain before commenting. I’m ok with this proposal.

    I’m a bit taken aback by this: you were the one to suggest to apply the strength increase only to LEADERS and NOT to HEROES. I followed your advice to propose these changes.
    And yes, the strength is lowered only for leaders and heroes, and leaders can get back to their normal strength when the tech is researched. (see Ro15 above)

    I am not proposing to apply to HEROES and LEADERS. I am in favor of the Leader only aspect, which is why I probably put them in the “favor of” list I had. I shouldn’t have had them in both places. But I don’t like nerfing the mind control abilities for only heroes and leaders (see next paragraph).

    Similar to my Healing ability argument, I am proposing that the ability be nerfed, not the unit/ability combination. If the ability for heroes & leaders only is to be nerfed, then create a new ability called Lesser Convert, Lesser Charm (or actually Touch Charm when combined with Ro15), and so on. I would rather the original ability for the mind control abilities be nerfed, though.

    Extra mobility is very strong, lvl 9 and cost 6 is clearly not enough.

    My point is that I don’t know if I agree that the +4 stack movement is the most powerful hero ability available. At Level 13 Cost 10, it is treated as the most powerful hero ability. I’ll leave it to those wiser than I on the appropriate cost. I do like the ability.

    In conclusion, when I review these proposed changes I come at it more from a consistency across the game approach. That is, I’m don’t think I’m very good at determining what things cost or small tweaks to balance class or race, but I think I got a good feel for enforcing standards and spotting things that jump out as not quite feeling right. In the end, I’m good with what you decide to do. You definitely consider my input and I appreciate that. I also appreciate the work each of you puts in to analyze the game.

    #245541

    Gilafron
    Member

    Ro10: Just a thought that came to me on Ro10 (+4 stack move), what if it only applied to irregular and hero/leaders units? That seems more “scouting”. It also feels like it fits the Rogue’s role a bit better.

    #245561

    Hiliadan
    Member

    If you are proposing to only have the ability on heroes/leaders change for Healing, then create a new ability called Lesser Healing or Limited Healing.

    Ok, Limited Healing seems like a good name. Or maybe Emergency Healing a bit like Emergency Repair.

    Any ideas for Convert and Charm (Touch Charm then?)? Lesser does not seem fitting to me.
    Control Undead and Befriend Animal actually exist only for heroes/leaders, right? Now I understand why you were for them.
    So if we change the name of Convert and Charm, you’re for the changes then?

    Ro10: Just a thought that came to me on Ro10 (+4 stack move), what if it only applied to irregular and hero/leaders units? That seems more “scouting”. It also feels like it fits the Rogue’s role a bit better.

    Or maybe to its class units? Or Irregulars + Bards? Or Irregulars + Supports (but make less sense)?
    Its interest for Rogue HEROES would be much more limited if it applied only to Irregulars. My initial aim was to give it a very strong ability (so level 13) which compete with Regrowth, Call Lightning, Divine Justicars, etc. I don’t consider Total Awareness to compete, though it’s surely very good.
    I add your idea in the comments.

    I confirmed this for v1.15:
    GC13
    Ella the Runaway, Frostling Sorcerer, has Throw Ice Ball (was Charm) as a starting skill

    #245714

    Gilafron
    Member

    I’m against removing too. But I have another radical idea.
    What about making convert abilities very powerful in strength and usable more than once per battle, but temporary (only on battlefields)? This change could fix abuse from converting units gathering armies non-stop, but leave converting abilities very effective in combats at least.

    I have to say, this idea from Zaskow is growing on me. Logically, it makes sense that mind control is limited in duration. In fact, why is Arcane Binding not permanent but others are? If terms of logic to me, Arcane Binding would more likely be permanent than Charm. I do understand this change is radical and probably needs a lot of thought to make it work. But it also opens some interesting possibilities, like Dragon Control Items and stuff. Immunity to Mind Control nearly goes away and these mind control abilities just have forbidden requisites expanded.

    Another idea is a nerf requisite called Enslaved that gets applied to a mind-controlled unit. It seems loss of will would make a unit not fight near as well. So, the requisite could be -4 attack, -4 defense, -4 resistance, and -25% movement, or something like that. The unit could also get -75% upkeep, too, to account for lack of desire. I’m not sure this is possible, though, especially considering Break Mind Control.

    Ok, Limited Healing seems like a good name. Or maybe Emergency Healing a bit like Emergency Repair.

    Any ideas for Convert and Charm (Touch Charm then?)? Lesser does not seem fitting to me.
    Control Undead and Befriend Animal actually exist only for heroes/leaders, right? Now I understand why you were for them.

    For Healing, I suggest Limited Healing or Combat Healing instead of Emergency Healing. Ultimately, it really doesn’t matter to me. But naming something is so hard!

    Likewise, I’m ok with Lesser Convert. Minor Convert is another possibility. Charm Touch helps describe the ability in the title.

    Don’t Shamans and Nymphs have Befriend Animal? They did at one point, at least. I can’t think of any units that has Control Undead. Although, Reanimator did have it at one point.

    So if we change the name of Convert and Charm, you’re for the changes then?

    I’m ok with the changes. My preference is still nerfing ability, which nerfs all units that use that ability.

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 8 months ago by  Gilafron.
    #245842

    Hiliadan
    Member

    2 ideas from the PBEM tournament player pool (http://www.the-battlefield.com/aow3/index.php?page=bfmgames&listid=55)

    – Inflict Stun for (Sorcerer) heroes and leaders need to be nerfed similarly as Energy Drain would be for Necro
    – Energy Drain could become a physical attack instead of a spirit attack to avoid combo with Inflict Despair

    #245936

    Hiliadan
    Member

    3 changes proposed:
    Ne09a
    Energy Drain has a physical strength 10 (was spirit strength 10)
    Ne09b
    Energy Drain is melee only (was melee and ranged)
    So08
    Sorcerer heroes and leaders can choose Inflict Stun for 6 (was 5)

    Also:
    Ro06a
    Rogue heroes and leaders can choose Antiserum for 4 points at level 5. Antiserum can be used once per battle on a Poisonned unit (touch ability): it heals 10 HP and gets 100% Blight Protection for one round.

    And this one is moved to: “To be dropped”.
    Ro06
    Rogue heroes and leaders can now choose Guardian Flame (or Rogue equivalent) at level X for Y points

    Feedback needed on all 4 to confirm their status.

    #245958

    Hiliadan
    Member

    New ideas to limit Necro’s explosive start:
    Ne10
    Necromancer heroes and leaders can choose Raise Corpse at level 1 for 4 points (was free and from level 0, i.e. inherent ability)
    Ne11
    Necromancer heroes and leaders can choose Heal Undead at level 1 for 3 points
    Ne12
    Necromancer starts with a random hero (was starts with a Necromancer hero)

    A compensation in the form of added bonus for Necro’s building (Embalmer Guild, etc) or Necro’s tech (including reduced costs of tech, etc.) may be necessary.

    Reminder: all proposed changes are listed here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1flsHncpzAmJa_2xMHZ6Tlp-mf69ej2mYrSGNc4V3_QA/edit?usp=sharing

    #245976

    Hiliadan
    Member

    2 other changes proposed:
    Ne06d
    Ghouling Strike cannot be used on Mind Control Immune, Undead, Machine, Dragons (and other units immune to mind control) units
    Ne06e
    Immune to Ghoul Strike cannot be dispelled

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 8 months ago by  Hiliadan.
    #245978

    Hiliadan
    Member

    I have to say, this idea from Zaskow is growing on me. Logically, it makes sense that mind control is limited in duration. In fact, why is Arcane Binding not permanent but others are?

    In short, you’re in favour of GC10
    Converted, Charmed, Seduced, etc. units are converted only until the end of Battle and disappear afterwards
    ?

    Another idea is a nerf requisite called Enslaved that gets applied to a mind-controlled unit. It seems loss of will would make a unit not fight near as well. So, the requisite could be -4 attack, -4 defense, -4 resistance, and -25% movement, or something like that. The unit could also get -75% upkeep, too, to account for lack of desire. I’m not sure this is possible, though, especially considering Break Mind Control.

    That is similar to
    GC11
    Converted units cost more in upkeep:+25% gold / turn
    But so far, it is considered technically not feasible.

    Don’t Shamans and Nymphs have Befriend Animal?

    True.

    Then let’s go for:
    – Limited Healing for GC06
    – Lesser Convert
    – Lesser Charm (since the “touch” part has not been approved)
    – Lesser Befriend Animal
    I need to check with cbower and Zaskow if it’s possible to change the name when the tech is researched.

    #245979

    jab_st
    Member

    1. I agree on Ne09a ‘Energy Drain has a physical strength 10 (was spirit strength 10)’.
    2. I don’t agree on Ne09b ‘Energy Drain is melee only (was melee and ranged)’ because then it is not same as inflict stun which is better than energy drain. Also if we do #1 we don’t need this. Because most of tier 3 and tier 4 units have better physical resistance/defense.
    3. I agree on So08 ‘Sorcerer heroes and leaders can choose Inflict Stun for 6 (was 5) ‘
    4. I agree on Ro06 ‘Rogue heroes and leaders can now choose Guardian Flame (or Rogue equivalent) at level X for Y points’
    5. I agree on Ne10
    6. I don’t agree on Ne11 because before level 2 you wouldn’t be able to heal your units outside the combat. Remember undead doesn’t regenerate.
    7. I agree on ‘Ne12’. This would be fair as every other class
    8. I partially agree on Ne06d, ghouling strike should have same effect as inflict ghouling curse i.e no machine, undead, elementals and dragon. This is not mind control effect and nothing to do with mind control immunity.
    9. I don’t agree on GC10 and GC11, then the only playable classes are warlord and dreadnought. The permanent conversion is needed but need to nerf the chances if exploited. I am also up for if a conversion failed then the source unit (leader/hero etc.) gets damage or disoriented something like negative feedback. So that people will not try to exploit lower chances.

    #245980

    jab_st
    Member

    I have to say, this idea from Zaskow is growing on me. Logically, it makes sense that mind control is limited in duration. In fact, why is Arcane Binding not permanent but others are?

    The reason for this is very simple.

    Arcane binding is a spell not a skill which can be casted multiple times unlike other conversion skills.
    Arcane binding doesn’t have a chance, it is always 100%

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 8 months ago by  jab_st.
    #245986

    cbower
    Member

    Ne09a For – seems fine

    Ne09b against – I don’t think we need to
    So08 against – It’s not a big change but Sorcerer is one of the weaker leaders to begin with imo
    Ro06a against – I don’t think rogues heroes need healing
    Ne06d – Very much for – mind control units should not be able to be ghouls
    Ne06e For – makes sense to me, it seems like an oversight for it to begin with
    Ne10 For – very powerful start abilities
    Ne11 For – very powerful start abilities
    Ne12 Against – it just goes too far in my opinion. They really need necro heroes

    #245998

    Crivvens
    Member

    9. I don’t agree on GC10 and GC11, then the only playable classes are warlord and dreadnought. The permanent conversion is needed but need to nerf the chances if exploited. I am also up for if a conversion failed then the source unit (leader/hero etc.) gets damage or disoriented something like negative feedback. So that people will not try to exploit lower chances.

    Nerfing the odds or adding penalties to failure are never going to address major PBEM issues, because in PBEM you can just keep reloading until you get the T3/T4 unit you were aiming for. Tacking on failure penalties won’t matter because you’ll never see them when it matters, and reducing the odds just increases the tedium of the tactic rather than nerfing its utility. Can we just get away from this approach it’s completely failing to address the actual issues.

    (not specifically directed at you jab)

    I also dislike GC10 btw.

    #246003

    Hiliadan
    Member

    because in PBEM you can just keep reloading until you get the T3/T4 unit you were aiming for

    Wrong, you would get Ironman notification and people would ask you why, so nobody will reload multiple times.

    But I agree with the main conclusion: we need a strategic disavantage for converted units vs normal units. And GC11 offers that.

    #246047

    Hiliadan
    Member

    Proposed changes that are currently “Priority changes” (i.e. received some support but not enough to get confirmed) and need more feedback:
    For v1.15 (7 July) or v1.16 (just after) (round 1 of the tournament)
    GC14
    Amok the Beastfriend starts with Awaken Spirit (was Befriend Animal)
    Velvet the Assassin’s Hero Slayer ability is correctly shown in Unit Panel (his skill only works against HERO units, not LEADER units)
    Yarati the Spellstealer starts with Steal Enchantment

    AD06a [it’s actually implemented in v1.1 but had not officially received sufficient support, AD06 had, so please confirm you’re for it]
    Leaders and heroes’ Befriend Animal has strength 10 (was 12). When Summon Eldritch Animal is researched by the player, its strength is improved to 12 for its leaders (not heroes).

    Ne06e
    Immune to Ghoul Curse cannot be dispelled

    Ne08a [same as AD06a]
    Leaders and heroes’ Control Undead has strength 6 (was 8). When Summon Banshee is researched by the player, its strength is improved to 8 for its leader (not heroes).

    Ro16a [same as AD06a]
    Leaders and heroes’ Charm has strength 7 (was 9). When Produce Bard is researched by the player, its strength is improved to 9 for its leader (not heroes).

    Th08a [same as AD06a]
    Leaders and heroes’ Convert has strength 9 (was 11). When Produce Evangelist is researched by the player, its strength is improved to 11 for its leader (not heroes).

    For v1.17 (round 2 of the tournament)
    AD10
    Baby Spiders and Serpents evolve on Champion grade (was on Elite)

    Ne10
    Necromancer heroes and leaders can choose Raise Corpse at level 1 for 4 points (was free and from level 0, i.e. inherent ability)

    So08
    Sorcerer heroes and leaders can choose Inflict Stun for 6 (was 5)

    For v1.2 (after the tournament)
    GC06
    The Healing ability of heroes and leaders (Theocrat and Archdruid upgrade and item’s ability) can be used only Once per battle (was 2 turns cooldown)

    AD09
    Goblin Hunters get Blight Concealment

    Other key ideas for v1.17

    AD12
    Baby Spiders have an intermediary T2 step in their evolution:
    Dread Spider Baby evolves into Mature Dread Spider Baby:
    HP: 48; Def: 10; Res: 10; MP: 32
    Melee Strike: 8 physical, 5 blight
    Abilities: same as Dread Spider Baby, 60% (40%) Blight Protection, Evolve (Dread Spider Queen)
    Hunter Spider Baby evolves into Mature Hunter Spider:
    HP: 43; Def: 10; Res: 10; MP: 36
    Melee Strike: 8 physical, 5 blight
    Abilities: same as Hunter Spider Baby, 60% (40%) Blight Protection; Evolve (Hunter Spider Queen)
    Vampire Spider Baby evolves into Mature Vampire Spider:
    HP: 44; Def: 10; Res: 10; MP: 32
    Melee Strike: 8 physical, 5 blight
    Abilities: same as Vampire Spider Baby, 60% (40%) Blight Protection; Evolve (Vampire Spider Queen)

    AD13
    Baby Serpents have an intermediary T2 step in their evolution: Adult Serpents

    AD14
    Baby and Mature Spider and Serpents get 50% less XP

    Ne11
    Necromancer heroes and leaders can choose Heal Undead at level 1 for 3 points

    Ne12
    Necromancer starts with a random hero (was starts with a Necromancer hero)

    New proposed changes:
    AD10a
    Baby Spiders and Baby Serpets get the abilities of their evolved state (Spider Queens and Mature Serpent) on Elite, namely:
    Dread Spider Baby: Inflict Severely Poisoned
    Hunter Spider Baby: Inflict Enfeebling Fever
    Vampire Spider Baby: Inflict Exhausting Fatigue
    Baby Reed Serpent and Baby Shock Serpent get +4 MP

    AD16
    Mature Serpents are T2 and their stats are lowered and King Serpents are T3 and their stats are lowered. In details:
    Mature Reed Serpents have Inflict Noxious Vulnerability inherent (like Babies) and gain Inflict Severely Poisoned on Silver.
    Mature Shock Serpents have Inflict Shock inherent and gain Inflict Stun on Silver
    King Reed Serpents gain Fearsome on Elite (was Charge)
    King Shock Serpents should have Static Shield on Elite (was Charge)
    King Serpents do not have Mind Control Immunity any more.
    Naga building’s March of the Serpents gives +1 rank to (was none) to produced Serpents

    EDIT:
    AD17
    Independent Spiders and Serpents lose the Evolve ability (only summoned and produced units keep it)
    /EDIT

    ==
    Also, I confirmed this for v1.15 (or 1.16):
    Ne06d
    Ghouling Strike cannot be used on Mind Control Immune, Undead, Machine, Dragons (and other units immune to mind control) units

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 8 months ago by  Hiliadan.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 8 months ago by  Hiliadan.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 8 months ago by  Hiliadan.
    #246070

    GC14 – for

    AD06a – for

    Ne06e – for

    Ne08a [same as AD06a] – for

    Ro16a [same as AD06a] – for

    Th08a [same as AD06a] – for

    For v1.17 (round 2 of the tournament)
    AD10 – for; slowing down evolutions seems good, but I wouldn’t want all of your suggestions to go through since that seems far too drastic. This is my favourite of your suggestions, so I support this one.

    Ne10 – I don’t care either way; I’m concerned that Necromancers might be having too many things taken away from them, but I don’t mind having to buy this skill if that makes for better balance.

    So08 – for

    For v1.2 (after the tournament)
    GC06 – for

    AD09 – for

    Other key ideas for v1.17

    AD12 – for; spiders are so much better than serpents, so slowing them down further might be justified.

    AD13 – against; serpents already have 3 stages to go through; a 4th seems excessive.

    AD14 – against; evolving on champion already doubles the experience required for evolution. This would effectively increase it to 4x.

    Ne11 – for; starting with a healing ability for free is too strong.

    Ne12 – against; I feel like this makes necromancer starts way too random, since getting a necromancer option at the beginning would make too much of a difference.

    New proposed changes:
    AD10a – I don’t care either way.

    AD16 – against; I would prefer to test druids using slower evolutions first. I feel like these are two different approaches to the same problem, and that only one of them should really be implemented.

    EDIT:
    AD17 – for; leaving animal evolution to druids and naga dwellings seems fine; it’s a bit silly seeing every class running around with stacks of T3 spiders.
    /EDIT

    ==
    Also, I confirmed this for v1.15 (or 1.16):
    Ne06d – for; this fixes the most serious issues with this skill.

    #246075

    Hiliadan
    Member

    Thanks mauve!

    Confirmed for v1.16:
    Ne06e
    Immune to Ghoul Curse cannot be dispelled

    Confirmed for v1.2:
    AD09
    Goblin Hunters get Blight Concealment

    New priority change:
    AD17
    Independent Spiders and Serpents lose the Evolve ability (only summoned and produced units keep it)

    #246099

    Hiliadan
    Member

    Ok, with the tournament in mind, I think we need to fix 2 additional issues urgently (both reported by gab). Then for the rest, I think we will lack time before the tournament and should keep it for v1.2 (which will not be used for the tournament).

    1/ Death March is too cheap (20 CP) and allows to move many stacks twice in a turn. For instance, at 40 CP, you can move 3 stacks twice in one turn and basically do a 3 stack “surprise” attack on your opponent by preloading your 1st Death March the previous turn.
    The -50% HP malus is not that big, especially when using Warbreed (class unit) or other Regrowth units.
    gab suggests to increase its cost to 50 CP. Maybe that’s too much. I would go for 40 CP first and see if it still need to be nerfed or not.
    Also, cbower stressed that Death March also have other uses, such as on scouts, to make them move fast. So the tech could lead to 2 spells: Death March as now but for 40 CP and Individual Death March for 20 CP and works only on stack of 1 unit and T1 Irregular.

    Wa04
    Death March costs 40 CP to cast (was 20)
    Wa05
    Researching Death March allows to cast Death March for 40 CP (was 20) and Individual Death March for 20 CP, which has a similar effect. Individual Death March can only target 1 stack of 1 T1 Irregular (and units can only be targetted once by Death March or Individual Death March).

    2/ as mentioned in the Arcane Item Forge topic http://aow.triumph.net/forums/topic/balancing-strong-abilities-in-the-arcane-item-forge you can access non-nerfed mind control through the Forge. I think it will be hard to get a consensus on how to fix that quickly enough so I’d like to just remove Domination from the Forge for now.

    GC15
    Dominate cannot be added to items built with the Arcane Item Forge
    ==
    Also, I added this to v1.15:
    GC14
    Amok the Beastfriend starts with Awaken Spirit and 2 points available (was Befriend Animal)
    Velvet the Assassin’s Hero Slayer ability is correctly shown in Unit Panel (his skill only works against HERO units, not LEADER units)
    Yarati the Spellstealer starts with Steal Enchantment

Viewing 30 posts - 31 through 60 (of 247 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.