[FOLLOWED] WARLORD Balance Discussion

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 [FOLLOWED] WARLORD Balance Discussion

This topic contains 375 replies, has 42 voices, and was last updated by  Mourioche 6 years, 10 months ago.

Viewing 30 posts - 91 through 120 (of 376 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #122876

    I don’t know Bouh, I think Ex has a point here.

    As Warlord, you have rubbish scouting throughout the game, not just at the beginning (it’s just more obvious and important at the beginning) and I do think that regardless of what new scout unit may or may not be coming, earlier Monster Hunters would be useful, even if purely to have an option against Druids and Sorcerers.

    I would simply swap them and Berserkers in the chain, and leave everything else untouched, as an experiment to see how it works, i.e. no tweaking of stats or costs, as MH and Berserkers cost more or less the same anyway.

    As it is, if you dedicate yourself to Monster Hunters you can have them out by turn 10 or thereabouts, whereas swapping the research would get you them by turn 6 or thereabouts, allowing you to produce Berserkers to act as a form of Cavalry, but allowing you a very useful anti-scout unit.

    Right now, Warlords are massively open to any and all scouting incursions, so, apart from not getting the free stuff as quickly as the rest, the Warlord makes more wrong turns to get stuff, and has no way to counter the better information of other guys, whereas pushing MH earlier would mean the Warlord gets a better scout unit, but marginally later than the rest, and has a way to shut down scout swarms etc.

    #122887

    Ayenara
    Member

    I think having Berserkers/MH as it is right now gives interesting options for WL and changing them around would remove a part of the Warlords character.

    Bersekers are fast, tough troops that can attack cities well. In some games I’ve played as WL I’ve built up a stack of berserkers fast and just gone to town on the other player. If you change it around in the tech tree it will slow down this approach enough so it might not even be viable. If berserkers come later they become more like cavalry in timing, losing more of their uniqueness.

    #122888

    Ricminator
    Member

    @exnihil,

    I have discovered a problem with the free medal on global assault. What if global assault is dispelled? If you cast it again what will happen with the free medal? If you get it again you can exploit that, getting the same situation we have now.

    Unless you keep track of it, whether or not a unit already had his free medal or not. But that is possible too much work, because you must add such a mechanism to every unit in game to cover rare circumstances where a wl can have acces to other class units.

    Most common one is clearing a spring of live which always gives an ad hunter( nice way of getting one, if you are in need of one btw) or like my last game where I acquired a dwarf crusader in my dreadnaught army( he deserted from my theocrat ally).

    So I think we should drop the medal idea.

    #122896

    ExNihil
    Member

    @bouh,

    Actually the WL’s units are not exceptionally strong before the Warlord’s formidable array of unit enhancement techs is unlocked. When it does they become hugely powerful indeed, but due to the very high research costs involved this doesn’t occur until the late mid-game at the very least and often much later indeed.

    @ayenara,

    Berserkers become stronger as the game progresses- they have great level scaling and benefit from Martial Arts Training, which makes them up to par with quite a bit of t3 units in melee. Switching them with Monster Hunters will not greatly slow down their accumulation. Yet I understand your worry from a 1v1 perspective as the Berserker is pretty much the best WL unit until Manticore-Riders per its respective tier, whereby the Monster Hunter is substantially less powerful in all-round PvP situations. That is why the Monster Hunter needs to both appear earlier and be buffed – in the Early phases of the game its mobility advantage is potentially decisive for the WL but ATM it really has a rather small window of effectiveness and this is a great shame for a unit that is meant to be one of the best creepers in the game, thus accumulating a lot of the valuable resource XP.

    @Riciminator,

    Yes, an extra medal could be abused. Yet, I’d think that at 660m per casting players would be loathe to cast and cancel and vice versa, also with XP being accumulated every turn it is actually much more beneficial to keep it running.

    #122904

    Ayenara
    Member

    @exnihil

    My worry isn’t that this would weaken Warlord, I think overall having Monster Hunters available earlier would make them more powerful. My worry is that it’s a step away from what the Warlord is about.

    They way I use MH is as scout killers. By the time you tech MH you need them to take back some control of the map, and they’re not that good at attacking cities. But compare them to Assassins or Hunters and you might understand my problem better. Sending out agile units, concealed or not, hunting for something, isn’t really the Warlord way of doing things and buffing that playstyle is a step in the wrong direction.

    If the Warlord need to be buffed I’d rather see it done in a different way, as I feel we need to avoid homogenizing the different classes. Right now I’d like to wait a bit and see how GR and the new patch affects things before we decide what’s imbalanced or not.

    On the other hand, it might be interesting to make the MH into a weaker t1 unit as it couldn’t as easily be used as a main spam strategy.

    #122908

    I too wouldn’t want any homogenizing, and whatever new unit is made as the scout will render most of this discussion moot, but on the assumption that nothing is done, the the unit swap makes sense.

    I see what you are saying about Warlords aren’t supposed to be sending out units to go hunting, but I would say that mobility/manoeuvrability are key aspects of a real life Warlord, which are currently lacking (as is scouting.)

    If the 2 were switched around, it would help the Warlord slightly in the earlier game, and to me surely this is what a WL should be all about- locating the enemy, then delivering a hammer blow the likes of which no-one else can match.

    #122910

    ExNihil
    Member

    I think there is way too much in terms of what the Warlord is supposed to be and way too little in terms of what it actually is. Being able to send out units to hunt other units, or in other words to send a scout/scout-eliminator after a scout is not an “unwarlord-like” thing at all but rather a strategic necessity that is at the moment greatly and unnecessarily circumscribed. Also, switching the MH with Berserker would be a rather small change indeed, but it seems to me you actually have a problem with the MH to begin with as par the Warlord’s concept. I actually like this unit and think it should be much more useful for a much greater variety of situations. This entails in my mind either buffing it or changing it into a t1 unit. In either way this will not entail homogenization as this unit’s unique abilities would simply be able to shine better.

    I am surprised no-one had anything to say about my actual suggestions on how to buff this unit, I would be very happy to hear some input.

    #122921

    Bouh
    Member

    @BBB : I’m not talking about MH versus berzerker position in the tree, but about giving true sight to a warlord unit or hero.

    What I don’t want is a class with no weakness. The warlord is already king of physical units and regular combat. If you give him weapons against everything he doesn’t do the best, what will be left ?

    I already thought about swaping MH and berzerker in the tree, and I think like Ayenara.

    I wouldn’t make MH a T1 unit though. He’s the anti magic unit of the warlord, and I don’t think he will be useful for this as a T1 unit.

    #122926

    ExNihil
    Member

    ’m not talking about MH versus berzerker position in the tree, but about giving true sight to a warlord unit or hero.
    What I don’t want is a class with no weakness. The warlord is already king of physical units and regular combat. If you give him weapons against everything he doesn’t do the best, what will be left ?

    I wouldn’t make MH a T1 unit though. He’s the anti magic unit of the warlord,

    Hmm… duh?

    #122937

    Bob5
    Member

    I am surprised no-one had anything to say about my actual suggestions on how to buff this unit, I would be very happy to hear some input.

    I think it’s difficult to predict with numbers how balanced something is, when I don’t know how things will work out in Golden Realms. The game is too complicated (at least for me) to predict game balance just purely on the basis of numbers and skills to such detail. Perhaps just swapping Monster Hunters and Berserkers in the research tree, combined with giving them Elemental Slayer, would already be enough to make them very useful as early conquerors of Seals and simultaneously kill off enemy scouts. I don’t think they need blight damage or blight resistance, I think the blight channel is already way too much used and too much resisted. If you want to go down that road just take Goblin Monster Hunters who do that.

    I’m quite indifferent still on swapping it with Mounted Archers, it depends a lot on how that the other Warlord Scout would look like, and whether it could travel over water easy or not. I also have to test the new mounted archers some more, as especially the elf ones are very scary now (12 ranged damage triggering 3 times with no distance penalty is a lot, it’s at base the amount of damage silver medal longbowmen do), I’m a bit hesitant to move them up too early.

    Btw, don’t be so surprised, I haven’t been online at all since yesterday afternoon. I’ve got a life beyond the Age of Wonders forums 😉

    #123026

    Btw, don’t be so surprised, I haven’t been online at all since yesterday afternoon. I’ve got a life beyond the Age of Wonders forums

    Lies and slander.

    I’m quite indifferent still on swapping it with Mounted Archers,

    I thought the proposal was to do a Berserker/MH swap, i.e. bring out MH earlier, not later.

    There are pros and cons to bringing it out earlier. I think though that, as it arguably scales worse than the Berserker, it should get Elemental slayer, but not true sight. I think making it a bit cheaper might also be useful, so it can be massed a bit easier, but the nature of it makes it not quite a scout and not quite regular forces, but more a sort of pathfinder/reconnaisance platoon type thing, i.e. they can scout out ahead of the main armies, but in an even fight they just aren’t that great (use Berserkers instead) but they excel in killing the unnatural.

    #123032

    Garresh
    Member

    So with all the discussion, how are the warlords doing this balance pass, BBB? You play them more than anyone. It sounds like they’re still sub par, but are they at least better?

    #123043

    madmac
    Member

    I’ll just put in that I’d rather Monster Hunters get Elemental Slayer then Truesight. It suits them better, and giving Warlords that good of a detector would be massive overcompensation, I think.

    Also for the love of all that is holy don’t even think about making them Tier 1. I love Monster Slayers just the way they are and nerfing their stats would just be wrecking their primary purpose to give the Warlord a half-assed scout, nobody wants that.

    As for changing the order around…Eh. Monster Hunters and Berserkers are roughly equivalent units with completely different purposes, no matter what you do some people aren’t going to be happy.

    I don’t think there’s any call for changes to Warlord overall just yet. They got some non-trivial buffs, and supposedly there’s a scout unit incoming, just wait and see how they shake out.

    #123048

    ExNihil
    Member

    A scout unit is not arriving ATM obviously, if it were it would be in this patch here. I understand that the next patch has not been begun yet at all. So there is every reason to discuss this right now I’d say.

    #123057

    jb
    Member

    This came up in another thread, but I wanted to mention it here too.

    The new naval mechanics in the 1.4 patch eliminates the extra movement from boat to land. I think this is a hidden nerf to the Warlord scouting situation. Scouting via boat was a very viable option in the absence of a true scout…now that is gone too.

    #123061

    madmac
    Member

    A scout unit is not arriving ATM obviously, if it were it would be in this patch here. I understand that the next patch has not been begun yet at all. So there is every reason to discuss this right now I’d say.

    Anything we discuss won’t be implemented until the next patch either. If Warlord is going to get a scout next time the game updates, then suggestions based on that unit not existing are pointless. Until we have confirmation that the idea has been dropped then it’s something to keep in mind.

    #123067

    alf978
    Member

    Just as a point of clarification, for @exnihil and @bob5; as I tried to point out in my original post, GOBLIN MH already receive +4 blight damage, that is already in the game. As of patch 1.2 I believe, and it’s great, now as a WL player I’m actually happy to come across a goblin town, they’re pretty easy to churn out at 1 turn, and with wetland foraging they are self-sustainable.

    Now I’m not advocating to give all MH blight damage, but perhaps give dracs MH +2 fire damage on range attack.
    And dwarven bezerkers get projectile resistance already (patch 1.2), perhaps human bezerkers could get trow net. Perhaps human and elven mounted archers, rather then the 2 phys dmg, maybe they could get 2 spirit and shock damage respectively instead. (I know, elven archers are already powerful…)
    I’ll hodgepodge a force together with elemental damage that way.

    As far as True Sight, it should show up somewhere in the WL repertoire. The DN at least gets it as a Hero upgrade, perhaps that’s an agreeable compromise.
    It just seems awkward, that the primary military class has no way to deal with concealed scoundrels, hunters, assassins, halflings and monsters, other than bringing along a slow lumbering priest..

    #123073

    alf978
    Member

    @BBB,

    what Garresh said. Lol (don’t know how to quote.)
    How are they since the Beta and with Golden Realms???

    I enjoyed your LP very much, by the way!
    Thanks for setting that up!!

    #123101

    Draxynnic
    Member

    Also, we shouldn’t forget the Naga Slayer label for Monster Hunter! :) .

    Not needed. Naga also have the ‘monster’ tag.

    Regarding my kill rates – usually my MHs would have some left over after killing a naga, although it varies based on critical hits and so on. Even if we assume it took all six, though – this means that a naga has been eliminated without dealing any damage in return. Then the real fighting started – at the time, I was usually taking on large numbers of Naga with very few or no casualties.

    Mind you, Naga had different capabilities then – I’m not sure how the matchup would go now. Easier to take down in the first turn, I think, but a high likelihood of excess shots going to waste.

    #123209

    @ alf978, ty :).

    @ Garresh, you got the latest patch so you can judge for yourself.

    Imho, 3 big improvements:

    Horse Archers are tough, and can sprint, so in numbers, someone somewhere is getting flanked.

    Warbreeds are truly tanky and terrifying because they just keep healing (regrowth) but they are really expensive and don’t benefit form any medalling or cost upgrades.

    Field medic on Warlord heroes/leaders makes them useful and okay at clearing. Imho, Druid is better because of summons and healing, Sorc because of Summons, Theo because of Healing and to a lesser degree summons (a horde of Cherubs can make a difference), Rogue because it can get a tonne of crows out, but overall more or less the same as Warlord for clearing.

    Warlords key weaknesses remain (imho):

    Research and unit acquisition rates were designed, originally, to let the Warlord compete with Summoners by fast teching to Cavalry/Berserkers etc. Research slowdown (1.2) extended the opening phase of the game so units and abilities good there (wisps) are better than before, and weaknesses there (Warlord, no scouting) are amplified, and lengthened the period of time Warlords require to get competitive.

    Too many required techs to get good, but once they are there, they are pretty sweet.

    In other words, not enough viable opening strats, and too much dependency on random spells, no scouting (Monster Hunters are the only real scout unit, and are the 3rd thing on the research tree, and atm I think Hunters beat them as Scouts, and they come in 2nd on their tree, and everyone else’s first research is a Scout…)

    Basically, not enough flexibility imho.

    Druids can manage with little mana by pumping out Hunters and saving mana for spells.

    Dreads can go with their own units or racial units and be competitive either way.

    Sorcerers have a tonne of tricks, and can be competitive with little to no Summoning (hardly anyone tries it but a Spell using Sorcerer is dangerous indeed.)

    Theocrats are crazy good now :).

    Rogues got a tonne of buffs, from top to bottom, just check out how useful and annoying to kill Scoundrels are now.

    It frustrates me because Warlords are so close to being really really good, but aren’t *quite* there.

    I honestly think once viable, realistic early scouting comes in* the entire picture changes. Try Air adept and hope to get lucky with the research and unlock early Zephyrs. I get them by turn 10 in 80% of my Air Warlord games, and they make such a huge difference.

    *btw, many ways to skin a cat, as I am all too wary of making it too similar to other classes – one idea was to have the Warlord as a falconer, who release his falcons into an area and they give him intel in that area. Think of the Terran scanning ability from starcraft. Give it a range limitation, say 10 hexes from Warlord hero, and it reveals a 5 hex radius area. Now there’s no actual scout to kill, or to scoop up resources, so it isn’t as useful as a real scout unit, but the upside is it allows you to reconnoitre an area quickly. Tying it to the Warlord hero thus gives a unique Warlord scout ability, and ofcourse limits the use of it, whereas you can spam as many Cherubs as you have casting points.

    #123340

    Garresh
    Member

    Yeah havent dived into WL too heavily but they seem good at all phases except their awful earlygame.

    #123343

    Bouh
    Member

    I honestly think once viable, realistic early scouting comes in* the entire picture changes. Try Air adept and hope to get lucky with the research and unlock early Zephyrs. I get them by turn 10 in 80% of my Air Warlord games, and they make such a huge difference.

    That’s why I think racial irregulars could get 4 more MP. It would help the warlord the most because he almost summon them and he would be able to rely on them for scouting. And it would differentiate racial irregulars more from regular troups. Of course I’m not talking about scoundrels and martyrs.

    Your idea of revealing an area is interesting too. Another way of scouting without summoning, and you can balance its price so the warlord still keep a scouting disadvantage in early game.

    #123369

    Ricminator
    Member

    If we get a new scout, we will need 7 of them, since it will be a living creature. And thus for each race one. It will be even 8 when/if the frostlings come out. So perhaps it is because of this reason, that we haven’t heared of it more.

    #123376

    @ Bouh, making it once per turn limits it and therein the balance would be.

    Other classes would be better off sending 2 cherubs etc in 2 straight lines, being able to uncover more and pick things up, but running the risk of death and also requiring upkeep and actually clicking.

    “Send falcons” would be more flexible in that you could scan any area within x hexes of teh warlord, no upkeep, and no detection, so you could spot an incoming army without them knowing about it, but no fighting capacity, no pick up capacity, limited to once per turn, and doesn’t help with creeping (as in an innate warlord ability, linked to the heroes) and thus no changes to the current Warlord unit and research matrix

    The more I think about it, the more I like this idea.

    #123377

    Ricminator
    Member

    @BBB

    indeed a good idea

    #123473

    Draxynnic
    Member

    I feel I should point out here the thematic issue with the falcons idea:

    Warlords may be good at domesticating creatures, but they have no special ability to communicate with them (as archdruids might). How are the falcons going to be able to report to the warlord what they’ve seen?

    #123479

    Garresh
    Member

    @BBB I think I suggested the same thing like 3 months ago. Either way I like it. Starcraft scanner sweeps?

    #123497

    @ Drax, Warlords aren’t completely magically inert. They see through the eyes of the Falcon.

    @ Garresh, it is entirely possible that I read your idea and it gestated along with about 50* other ideas for new units and abilities.

    *I’m not kidding. I had a day where my blood was replaced by coffee and spammed the beta forums with idea after idea for new stuff, not even changes to existing stuff, and I counted 21 relating to Aow3, a new idea for AoW4 and in another thread brainstormed specific new race ideas, and I also brainstormed a Zerglike ShadowDemon race and Tigran race with White Knighted.

    Most of these ideas never see the light of day as, let’s be honest, some of them just are silly and/or useless, btu some do, and get refined and refined and some even make it into the game ;).

    #123539

    Fenraellis
    Member

    As far as True Sight, it should show up somewhere in the WL repertoire. The DN at least gets it as a Hero upgrade, perhaps that’s an agreeable compromise.

    I just randomly feel like pointing out that if people are saying that a Dreadnought has stealth detection because their guaranteed Dreadnought Leader can get True Sight, compared to the Warlord leader not… that’s kind of silly. A Dreadnought Leader can’t cover vision for their entire empire, so they are going to need either Supports or Sorc/Dread/Druid heroes just like anybody else.

    Not picking on the quoted individual specifically, since I saw at least one other person mention Dreadnoughts having stealth detection.

    #123654

    Draxynnic
    Member

    *I’m not kidding. I had a day where my blood was replaced by coffee and spammed the beta forums with idea after idea for new stuff

    So THAT’S what happened there. I was wondering where that came from!

Viewing 30 posts - 91 through 120 (of 376 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.