Ram Buffs

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.

This topic contains 134 replies, has 24 voices, and was last updated by  ariga 7 years, 3 months ago.

Viewing 30 posts - 91 through 120 (of 135 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #193929

    ArcaneSeraph
    Member

    All you have to do is take a look at the massive list of balance changes made to the game since release to realize that balancing from feedback is a critical component in any sort of strategy game.

    If all the “criers” were silenced there would be no golden realms, no eternal lords, no diversity. there would be no players. Very few in any join a forum to whine about a game they don’t care about or enjoy at all. So while it is true that game developers should take with a critical eye all advice on game changes it is a much larger mistake for them to simply ignore feedback. The quickest way to make a flop of a game is to not get enough feedback during development. One of the most important tools for a gamedev to learn is to not mistake criticism for mere complaints.

    Pretty much every game out there with modding tools has been made better by the community than the devs managed by themselves. It’s why the monetization of modding is a popular idea to many. Right now the only beneficiary of the modding is the gamedev in terms of increased sales. As a moderately successful gamedev myself (and hope to be more in the future of course!) I know that as much as my community owes me for getting an enjoyable game to play, I owe them for feedback, making my game better and more popular.

    #194144

    Dagoth Ur
    Member

    I think Rams are already great. You can build them without having to invest in an outpost, they only cost 50 gold so if you settle your first or second town right you can already get them out in 1 turn each. They have Reinforced, 100% Blight and 100% Spirit protection. There is no wall in the early game that you can’t breach with 2 rams, I usually make 4 so I can make two breaches quickly. The faster you breach, the faster you can get over the wall, the less damage the rams take.

    Just don’t attack things that deal ranged fire damage with it and you’ll be fine.

    I think the biggest problem is the fact that it comes up without any investment, and the fact that the AI doesn’t use it, makes people think that Rams are also useless, which they aren’t.

    #194204

    Bouh
    Member

    Please don’t pretend you’re the only person with a correct and valid opinion.

    I don’t, I have my reputation on this forum because I am against changes. Because I am the most conservative man on this forum.

    This is because I think no one is good enough. Not even me. And because I think we need far more time than we ever let pass to see where balance sit.

    3 months for a turn based strategy game is nothing to see where balance settle. I said it right after the release : we would need a year to see where the balance actualy sit.

    We now are a year after, and so many things have changed that the balance is still a mess no one can evaluate.

    New Balance Forum Rule: Only Those Who Have Achieved <strong class=”d4pbbc-bold”>Total Balance Enlightenment Will Be Permitted Posting Privileges

    The <strong class=”d4pbbc-bold”>Great Balance Buddha Bouh Will Preside Over The Balance Forum, And Personally Determine Who Among The <strong class=”d4pbbc-bold”>Unenlightened Masses Is Truly Worthy Of Proper Balance Discussion

    Idiot.

    #194206

    Bouh
    Member

    If all the “criers” were silenced there would be no golden realms, no eternal lords, no diversity. there would be no players. Very few in any join a forum to whine about a game they don’t care about or enjoy at all. So while it is true that game developers should take with a critical eye all advice on game changes it is a much larger mistake for them to simply ignore feedback. The quickest way to make a flop of a game is to not get enough feedback during development. One of the most important tools for a gamedev to learn is to not mistake criticism for mere complaints.

    It’s a double edged sword. Many games have been killed in term of balance and quality because of devs following too easily the advices of their playing community.

    Feedback are importants indeed. And cryers are indeed feedbacks, and valuable for this. Yet it still require devs to consider that cryers are mostly idiots (don’t take it personaly, we are all idiots arguing about a video game) with no clue about balance.

    We should also consider that devs may not be all knowing about balance. That’s why they need feedbacks, and that’s why they can also fail at balancing the game properly.

    That’s why I advocate for a reasoned and scientific method for balance.

    But no one on this forum understand this. A shame considering how a high self estime many people have on this forum.

    #194255

    NINJEW
    Member

    That’s why I advocate for a reasoned and scientific method for balance.

    I, too, want to turn this forum into a bastion of Science and Reason

    Are you serious dude? This is some stupid fucking shit right here. Yes, lets never talk about balance in fear that the incompetent developer overlords make changes to the game ever. Are you kidding me? This isn’t Starcraft 2 here buddy, it’s TBS, not even Civilization has a pro player league, I don’t think we need to wait a year to achieve Perfect Balance.

    The game is way more fun now than it was at release, and if you’re unhappy about that I can’t say I understand why you’re still hanging around this forum, I guess. You think that there have been poor changes made to the game, but can’t name what they are, and are advocating that no one talk about balance ever. In fact, you don’t want to see any changes made to this game at all, because I guess you want to see it die the slow death of a year of community stagnation.

    What the fuck does Scientific Method have to do with Balance? What the fuck are you even proposing? Are you insanely stupid or something? What do you expect anyone to do?

    Hypothesis: You’re fucking dumb

    Observation: You said so yourself lol

    Now I’m not saying I’m smart and humble. I’m definitely stupid and arrogant, but at least I know it, and that’s why I so often advocate for conservatism.

    Evidence: You complain about how people don’t see the “big picture” in terms of balance, when several people in this very thread talked about the larger implications of a Ram Buff. This was detailed by me here, including quotes to those posts:

    http://ageofwonders.com/forums/topic/ram-buffs/page/2/#post-190955

    Analysis: Despite advocating for “Scientific Theory,” you have yet to provide any evidence at all to back up any of your claims. You can’t even show that no one is looking at the big picture, because that is quite plainly false. Where are the poor balance decisions? What are you even unhappy about? The only thing I can maybe get out of this is that you seem opposed to all changes, on principal, even if you have no fucking idea why a change could be even slightly detrimental. In which case, lol why are you even reading the balance forum if is everything is just fine as is, holy shit man what a waste of your time

    Conclusion: Hypothesis confirmed: You’re Fucking Dumb. Someone else please run another experiment so my results can be verified, thanks.

    #194261

    NINJEW
    Member

    My perfect video game must never be sullied by the filth of Balance Changes. Game was perfect as is, should’ve never been changed from release state. Change is scary

    #194274

    Bouh
    Member

    The game is way more fun now than it was at release, and if you’re unhappy about that I can’t say I understand why you’re still hanging around this forum, I guess

    The fun part comes about from stuff, not balance. “Balance” only entertain people so they believe devs are awesome regardless of the actual effect.

    Also, this thread is a perfect example of how people don’t see the big picture because the first post stated :

    Siege Rams are useless and I don’t think most people are even aware they exist, they are so bad.

    And a few pages later, after I ranted a little :

    Rams are fine.

    Dude as a result of this thread I disagree with my suggestion

    What could have happened if I hadn’t said anything ?

    I could change ram to do base 16 damage against obstacles, and then give the ram demolisher x6. The only issue is that the ram would then become a crazy powerful machine killer. I think it might be quite fun that way, but I think a lot of people would get upset about it.

    Now I’m sorry to have enlightened you but it was only a side effect of me trying to keep this game not too screwed. So I may be fucking dumb but at least I don’t pretend the opposite when it’s obviously wrong.

    But please continue with insults and insanities. The worst this forum will become and the more the devs will realize the value of it.

    #194277

    NINJEW
    Member

    Dude there’s nothing wrong with you coming into the ram threead and saying why you think rams are fine and balanced. I never once rided you for talking about Rams. That’s what this fucking thread was for. Also, none of your posts are what convinced me, it was these posts:

    I think Rams are good in very early game siege warfare, when you want to take throne cities by turn 10 or so, before you get much ways to bypass walls otherwise. Climbing walls is generally hazardous, breaking gates even more, and archers down the wall are going to lose to archers on the wall. Beyond turn 20-30 or so they become really outclassed by Trebs and other methods to bypass walls, like phasing unicorns, phasing supports, floating/flying units, and so on. That said there are plenty of T1 units that lose viability in mid-game

    I have used battering rams many many times. They’re quite excellent in bashing down doors and walls. Just don’t bring them to magic heavy city because they will get destroyed quick otherwise, use trebuchets in those situations instead.

    If you have to bring battering rams to a magic heavy city, well, bring plenty and good news is that now that walls don’t magically restores themselves after a single battle…. you can actually have a bunch of battering ram suicide themselves on a section of wall you want breached. And it will get breached unless enemy in question have alot of CP to stop it or you’re fighting a dreadnought.

    After all the battering rams die off, you can now start second battle and attack that breach. And if enemy team cluster around to protect that breach.. attack the farthest gate with your cavalry/knights and they’ll get through easily.

    And then there was many times where I got a batter ram specifically just to act as plug that breach unit to delay that nasty unit from breaking through to attack my tier 1s in melee. It will buy you a turn, two turns if you’re lucky. It helps a lot because battering ram cannot be feared. And it cannot be retaliated, any damage ram does to the breaching enemy unit before it goes down is good damage.

    That is one of the tricks I used to survive taming the khan scenario. Especially when all i had was civic guard lol

    So actually, this thread minus Bouh would’ve been just fine. It’s the perfect example of multiple people seeing the big picture, and being able to put forward convincing arguments of that. You’re full of shit, Bouh, and I’m sorry to break it to you but you’re not single handedly holding up the sanctity of balance. Plenty of other people do it just fine without you, it turns out!

    In short:

    I think he’s right about Rams, sure? I said as much.

    Is he right about being the only person who has anything worthwhile to say about any balance discussion? lol

    #194278

    NINJEW
    Member

    “What could have happened if I hadn’t said anything ?” get the fuck over yourself holy shit man

    #194279

    NINJEW
    Member

    Seriously though how is anyone supposed to apply the Scientific Method to balance I genuinely don’t understand what you want at all

    #194280

    NINJEW
    Member

    I hope Bouh continues to be incapable of answering basic questions like “what do you think is imbalanced?” and “what does the Scientific Method have to do with anything?”

    I mean the most Scientific and Reasonable thing to do is never back up any of the things you say. It’s not like Science isn’t literally built up on people challenging each other’s ideas.

    Somehow Bouh can’t even explain what his ideas are, though. How unfortunate for a man of Science and Reason

    #194297

    Dagoth Ur
    Member

    Bouh probably could have rephrased his disagreements with your remarks better, NINJEW, but you consistently have been trying to misinterpret his comments, in an aggressive way, going on and on. I’m surprised Bouh is still replying, even replying in a somewhat civilized manner.

    So please, pretty please, calm down, you’ve made your point and it’s not amounting to anything.

    If you want to discuss balancing in general you can enter this discussion here:

    http://ageofwonders.com/forums/topic/balance-3/

    #194303

    Bouh
    Member

    Man you should relax a bit you know. You’re not doing yourself any good crying like that.

    Seriously though how is anyone supposed to apply the Scientific Method to balance I genuinely don’t understand what you want at all

    Yeah, that’s what I see. Who would know that such arrogant people couldn’t know how to make a proper demonstration.

    Scientific method for beginers :
    – observation :
    these rams look bad eventhough I never used them
    – hypothesis :
    are rams underpowered ?
    – experiments :
    ???
    – conclusion :
    please nerf !

    Here, the hypothesis discard too many elements to be of any use, and the first of them, the first any player who pretend himself good will forget : context.

    Now there are many important things for game balance that people almost never consider (like what role is this unit supposed to have and its place in the game ecosystem).

    The first question someone should ask himself before posting anything about game balance is : does the problem comes from me or from the game itself ?

    Descartes is three centuries old, and he explains well what I’m talking about.

    Now, are rams underpowered ?
    Well, people showed examples of how to use them (I did too eventhough no one cares about what I can do because I’m an arrogant and stupid jerk).
    Hence, the answer is “no, rams are not underpowered”.

    Now you can discuss the role of rams, and if they are suitable for it (they destroy walls, and they do it well). You can discuss their place in the ecosystem then, so you need to compare them to T1 infantry (comparable production cost and place in the building tree) and to trebuchet (same role but more expensive and higher in the building tree).

    How often do you see this in any thread proposing balance changes ? Never. Because people base their assumptions on what they see, but they don’t gather data and they make biased comparisons because they discard many important things.

    Instead, people consider them expert on the game because they played XXXX hours or because they play MP with two friends “competetively”, so they *know*, and a debate revolve around how many hours you played.

    And this is when it’s not complete diarea of insults like NINJEW. Seriously man, a few months sooner you would have been baned for all these personal attack and out of subject posts.

    #194304

    NINJEW
    Member

    He literally never answered the very first question I asked him, despite me repeating it in just about every post I have made.

    What units do you two feel got buffed too strongly, because people came in and cried?

    That is to say, what units in the game do you think are currently overpowered? Personally I think it’s mostly a pretty well balanced game, so I guess people coming in and crying about units is working! (the Elf Swordsman buff I will concede was dumb though)

    I think this was a fair and civil question to ask.

    He’s got problems beyond phrasing. He’s constantly doubled down on how no one understand balance, but can’t even properly respond to someone asking him what the problems with balance are.

    Also the thread you linked to hasn’t had a reply in 2 months, I’m sorry we didn’t take the discussion to a dead thread

    #194310

    NINJEW
    Member

    Now there are many important things for game balance that people almost never consider (like what role is this unit supposed to have and its place in the game ecosystem).

    People brought this up in this thread. Again, in case you have forgotten, here are the posts where they did:

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Zaskow wrote:</div>
    Doubtfully. Ram has only 16 damage and stone wall has 100 HP.

    I’m ok with this. Such is the strategic cost of attacking walls before you have access to trebutchets. And unlike Trebs, Rams are totally useless in field battles, so it’s not like they should stay mixed into your main army stacks anyway

    I think Rams are good in very early game siege warfare, when you want to take throne cities by turn 10 or so, before you get much ways to bypass walls otherwise. Climbing walls is generally hazardous, breaking gates even more, and archers down the wall are going to lose to archers on the wall. Beyond turn 20-30 or so they become really outclassed by Trebs and other methods to bypass walls, like phasing unicorns, phasing supports, floating/flying units, and so on. That said there are plenty of T1 units that lose viability in mid-game

    A universal tank boost would be detrimental as they are already used to tank in non-siege combat. If anything, I would boost missile resistances and nerf close combat resistance, This means in open combat they will lose their merit and become specialized siege engines as they are supposed to be. Very resistant to arrows but a cavalry sortie can quickly end the threat while (most likely) sacrificing the unit going out to kill the Battering Ram in melee.

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Zaskow wrote:</div>
    Can you remove this hidden bonus and just give a few Demolishers? Rams would have one more purpose besides Wall crushing.

    I could change ram to do base 16 damage against obstacles, and then give the ram demolisher x6. The only issue is that the ram would then become a crazy powerful machine killer. I think it might be quite fun that way, but I think a lot of people would get upset about it.

    So, again, it’s really dumb to say that people don’t consider this. They obviously do, and obviously did, and that doesn’t stop you from whining about how they don’t, because you’re an idiot.

    Now, are rams underpowered ?
    Well, people showed examples of how to use them (I did too eventhough no one cares about what I can do because I’m an arrogant and stupid jerk).
    Hence, the answer is “no, rams are not underpowered”.

    Now you can discuss the role of rams, and if they are suitable for it (they destroy walls, and they do it well). You can discuss their place in the ecosystem then, so you need to compare them to T1 infantry (comparable production cost and place in the building tree) and to trebuchet (same role but more expensive and higher in the building tree).

    Yeah, it was a pretty cool discussion, I’m glad I made this thread and got to see it happen.

    How often do you see this in any thread proposing balance changes ? Never.

    It literally happened, right here, in the thread you are fucking posting in. You’re thick as shit dude.

    Instead, people consider them expert on the game because they played XXXX hours or because they play MP with two friends “competetively”, so they *know*, and a debate revolve around how many hours you played.

    Pretty sure there was exactly one person in the entire thread who said this

    #194312

    NINJEW
    Member

    I still want to know what these supposed balance problems are that are coming from this pandemic of people posting about balance in the balance forum.

    #194317

    NINJEW
    Member

    How many times can a man be asked to provide evidence for his core complaint

    Ignoring evidence isn’t the Scientific Process at all!

    #194319

    NINJEW
    Member

    I am beginning to suspect that there does not, in fact, exist any balance changes that Bouh can point to as being bad, and he just wanted to complain about people not posting in the way he likes.

    That is to say, at all. The unwashed masses must be silenced, for their inferior cries of imbalance have probably resulted in something bad, I think, I’m really not too sure, but it makes sense to me.

    #194322

    Bob5
    Member

    Damn dude, you’re being really butthurt over this. Just let it go, you can’t force anyone to reply on a forum.

    #194324

    NINJEW
    Member

    Nah I’m gonna keep saying the guy who wants literally everyone in this whole forum to shut up for totally insubstantiated reasons is dumb, thanks

    #194331

    Jolly Joker
    Member

    YOUR TONE SUCKS!

    To answer your question: Scoundrels have been OPd; “because they die in autocombat”, was the reason, but the actual reason was, that the AI couldn’t use them correctly. NOW, however, the AI uses for example Sprint, and Scoundrels are pretty darn OP.

    All Goblins are more or less OP now for the same reason. (“OMG, they die in auto-combat and can’t clear stuff aseffectively as others, Blight being such a disadvantage with Tombs and stuff…”).

    #194332

    NINJEW
    Member

    YOUR TONE SUCKS!

    To answer your question: Scoundrels have been OPd; “because they die in autocombat”, was the reason, but the actual reason was, that the AI couldn’t use them correctly. NOW, however, the AI uses for example Sprint, and Scoundrels are pretty darn OP.

    All Goblins are more or less OP now for the same reason. (“OMG, they die in auto-combat and can’t clear stuff aseffectively as others, Blight being such a disadvantage with Tombs and stuff…”).

    Holy shit thank you

    Would you be willing to discuss either of these topics in their own dedicated thread? I can’t say I’m a terribly experienced Rogue or Goblin player, but I’d love to hear what other people would have to say on the matter. In my own experience, I’ve never had Scoundrels or Goblins preform well in autobattle, but manualing bandit spawns has taught me of how powerful scoundrels can be, and playing against other Goblin players can be pretty nasty if they know what they’re doing. An in depth discussion could honestly push me either way on both those subjects, and be very interesting for me to see.

    #194338

    Jolly Joker
    Member

    Garresh may be the guy to ask about Rogue – Goblin balance has had its own thread.

    #194339

    ArcaneSeraph
    Member

    The problem I see with a lot of the balancing discussions is most of the evidence is anecdotal so it’s hard to come to a consensus. No matter what is suggested there will always be someone who provides an example where said option is overpowered / underpowered / fine as is.

    The motivations of the posters can’t be taken into account. Are they trying to help the game or are they trying to maintain an imbalance or create one in their favour? Do they understand the game or not?

    Thus the scientific method is almost pointless in this environment. Objective analysis becomes nearly impossible. The best you can do is present your arguments in as logical a fashion as possible and then leave it up to the arbiters to decide. Similar to a jury trial in that sense.

    I’ve argued many times, for example, that balancing the game for auto combat is a terrible idea as it almost always results in the units being overpowered in manual combat. So there is also the problem of the balancing target to consider. It’s a non-trivial problem.

    So all this is to say my approach to balancing is: if there are sufficient people with reasoned arguments to suggest something isn’t as it should be as a dev I would try to pick something I felt addressed the arguments but didn’t make the change imbalanced in my view of the game. That to me is how it should be. It is their game. Their vision.

    At least until the modding tools are released anyway! 🙂

    #194342

    NINJEW
    Member

    Garresh may be the guy to ask about Rogue – Goblin balance has had its own thread.

    I’m not seeing one on the first or second page of the forum, whatever thread might’ve existed is long dead now, and apparently whatever the consensus of that thread was you are unhappy about, so I’d like to hear what you have to say in detail. I’m also not asking Garresh about Rogues, since he hasn’t made a balance thread, and assumedly therefore finds no glaring problems with Rogue Balance. If someone else made a thread, however, that brought up their complaints about Rogue, and Garresh responded to that thread, I would be very interested in seeing what he has to say.

    #194349

    CSav10
    Member

    Who would have thought a topic on rams would get this many replies. I have a vision of the next coming Aow 3 expansion, AoW 3 Lord of the Rams ;P.

    #194353

    Brothritis
    Member

    New Goat-person race confirmed.

    I just hope it isn’t too RAM intensive.

    #194354

    Jolly Joker
    Member

    It’s not that easy.

    I also think it’s silly to balance for auto-combat – on the other hand balance is important in MP only anyway.
    Add to that the fact that a game which combines so many aspects is more or less impossible to balance – just think of all the combos of Class, Race and Spec possible, then add different RMG settings or the possibility to hire all kinds of different hero -, so it’s like, something must be really GLARINGLY obvious before you can judge things.

    For example: Highelven Swordman has been buffed. currently. However. Highelves have extremely powerful archers, so having not so good T1 Inf makes sense (whereas Humans have average Archers, so the Longswordman buff is probably ok.
    It gets interesting, when things are compared with Dwarves: basically ALL T1 INfs have been buffed (including Axeman), but with Crossbowman being such a different kind of beast than the other archers I’m pretty certain now that the Elven Barracks combo is now better than the Dwarven.

    That’s the snowball effect in action.

    Bouh is more or less on principle chiming in, saying things are fine, if things are not glaringly obvious.

    #194390

    Brothritis
    Member

    He said that things shouldn’t have changed since release. I strongly disagree with that- the T4 spam was intense on release one year ago, in addition to all of the races feeling incredibly homogenized (and us having only a single class structure to have to build.)

    Auto Combat balance is still something major to account for, especially for PBEM games where the only way to fight other players (or defend yourself against the AI) is to fight in auto combat.

    Probably the most important thing Triumph is doing is listening to and responding to user feedback. Most oftentimes we aren’t able to elaborate specifically on what we don’t like about a game (oftentimes reducing it to “I don’t think these units are strong enough”), and them taking that into account by asking things like “What do they really mean by that?” and modifying their game accordingly can keep the community alive and the game fresh until they find a happy medium with whatever comes their way on the next patch.

    Another thing to keep in mind is that The Game Developers are not gods. They are human beings just like you and I, and just as capable of making mistakes. It’s probably more integral to us to vocalize our thoughts on the game as is, and exalting them to a status of “Everything they do is right and the people who complain and make them change are ruining this game” is doing them (or this game) absolutely no favors.

    #194480

    NINJEW
    Member

    Yeah if all Bouh said was “Rams are fine, don’t need a buff” there would have been no problems

    The problem was this bullshit:

    I’m tired of this. These days it looks like someone only need to come on the forum when he sees a unit he never used, cry a little, and the unit get buffed.

    This is some dumb shit right here

    He then followed it up with this exceedingly stupid bullshit

    Balance is a high level thing. You can’t do it properly by focusing on one unit and expect it to do stuff without considering everything else. And the big problem here is that NOBODY on this forum of arrogant and stupid people ever try to fit his balance propositions into a higher level model. The best we have is “this unit is bad, it should be better, that is obvious, or everyone would use it”. This is children balance. This is stupidity. And I don’t even talk about the authority arguments of people who think that playing a thousand hours to a game makes you any good at balancing it. These people are the worst.

    That’s way different than “everything’s fine, Rams don’t need a buff”

Viewing 30 posts - 91 through 120 (of 135 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.