Forum Replies Created
The point of comparison is class units:
Warbreed has 80HP + Regrowth
Phalanx has 65HP + 12 Def + Shield + received Martial arts training bonus + pikesquare, hence effectively having a maximum defense of 22 when attacking at recruit a cavalry/flying unit, or a meager 17 when attacking, that is, substantially higher than 65HP for all intents and purposes.
Yes, 75HP is significant, but dude it isn’t even close…
You forgot some key things here, like they are warlord units, with only physical damage, warbreed is stupidly weak to magic, and they don’t float, nor phase, nor sprint…
And there still is the question : why should the sorcerer get a summonable tank ?
What you answered is that sorcerer players would prefer that. But that’s absolutely not a reason to give it to them. Sorcerer players will always prefer a stronger sorcerer.
As already said the sorcerer is already a top class, buffing strategicaly like that would be dramaticaly bad for the balance of the game.
You obviously haven’t read what I wrote.
So node serpent keeps its role exactly as is with 75HP, but it survives a bit better, and watcher is what it is – an assault unit.
You are crazy here. Only a handful of T3 units have 75hp or more. Shock trouper is one, warbreed another, and I don’t see more actualy. Even the phalanx only has 65hp for god’s sake !
Of course other stats matter, and if you look at other stats, you can see that the node serpent is actualy one of toughest unit for this speed.
Watchers are great, but if the RP cost is high enough and the CP cost is substantial this will actually solve the fundamental problem of this class which is really focusing on spamming a single type of unit. You will actually have diversity. You want to invest mana? You have very smart options suddenly, and really turn differences no matter how you build your research.
You’ll probably take this badly but it’s not my intention, but here you are either lying to yourself or not realizing the real problem.
Sorcerer is a summoning class. That means that for each spell you get, you sort of lose the others, because you can only cast one at a time. That means that all spells of the sorcerer compete with eachother. That means that you will never have diversity unless each unit has a clear role, hence that each unit is very specialized.
And that was the case until fantastic creatures get the watcher : previously, you had the phantasm warrior to tank, the node serpent for assault, and fantastic creatures for anti-elemental/support and flying duty. Brawler actualy don’t have a place in sorcerer doctinre, because it would obsolete everything else. Hence the watcher is actualy the problem. Because of the watcher, fantastic creatures compete with the node serpent and phantasm warriors.
Yet I think the balance is fine. You can play roll the dice to get watchers, you can get phantasm warriors if tank is what you need, and you can summon node serpent for assault stuff (phase + sprint is the ultimate assault combo).
Yeah, sure gold medal is the same as innate… Not even slightly different… Even more so with a unit people complain she has difficulties reaching gold medal…
Anyhow, any sort of modification is easy to balance with changes to RP and CP costs.
And that leaves the question :
why the T3 of the sorcerer should be a tank ?
It opens up other damage channels and abilities for the sorceror.
Hence my question :
why the T3 of the sorcerer should be a brawler/tank ?
And with 72hp/12def/total awarenesss and petrifying stare, the watcher is definitely a tank. A tank that has the same kind of ability the apprentices have BTW, so prone to make people facing sorcerer completely mad because that would mean even more paralizing stuff.
Also, to be sure it’s noted : why the T3 of the sorcerer should be a tank ?
Except they are not fragile for T3. They are fragile when you overextend. 65hp/12def/11res is not fragile by any mean. This is average. This is about the same as a gryffon rider for example, and better than ogre or mature shock serpent or many other T3. The only T3 that have better stats are slower and have less fancy stuff than the node serpent. If anyone find a node serpent bad or too weak, he is using it wrong, like the AC does.
On top of that, buffing the node serpent would have a nasty side effect for some mana nodes where they are defenders.
Finaly, the question never had been answered : why the T3 of the sorcerer should be a brawler/tank ?
Swaping with the watcher would be a very ugly bandaid, because the watcher is the sorcerer unit that fits the sorcerer theme the least : it’s not shock based and doesn’t look taken from mana and it gives other damage channels.
Can I have access to your data BBB ? I started to collect them, but as you saw it was a chore to gather everything from all places, but at least I will be able to double check with your data and mines.
Balancing against AC flaws. Yeay !
Also, you know, professional sport practicers have doctors to fix and help them, and professional pilots have mechanics to fix their vehicles. Just because you practice a lot and are good in your practice doesn’t mean you understand what you are doing.
That’s actualy why player oriented balance is usualy a miserable failure.
A switch would not be fine. Thematicaly the node serpent is a perfect sorcerer unit. Focused on magic, offense, shock and speed.
As for the resilience, there is already the phantasm warrior for that.
And whatever the number of follower ExNihil can gather to complain on the forum, that doesn’t change the fact that the node serpent is a fine unit for its role but some people want it to have another role for unknown reasons.
Why should the T3 class unit of the sorcerer a brawler ?
It’s funny how I simply need to say something for all the haters to instantly disagree with at all cost.
Like how exactly is any of ExNihil or Ninjew proposals supposed to not kill the settler spam strategy ?
What is all this thread about if not killing the settler spam strategy ?
Either this strategy is fine and no action is required, or it’s OP and not a desirable strategy and actions need to be taken to kill it. There is no middle ground here, only solutions with more or less side effects.
Believe it or not, I would advise against any change because obviously this strategy is very risky and probably due to a fashion.
Not bad idea, but needs careful implementing, because it could destroy settler meta completely.
Destroying the settlers meta is the whole point of this discussion actualy.
So, ExNihil want the sorcerer class to suit his needs better, he want a brawler, and not this node serpent that is everything but a brawler. This is definitely a case of adapting the class to someone’s taste. This has nothing to do with balance.
Node serpent is not a tank or brawler, and the sorcerer doesn’t need one of these, because he has a whole arsenal of stun and other control weapons.
One suggestion I threw around was making Martial Arts Training no longer affect cavalry (or mounted units in general)
I love this idea.
So bards and “night wish” are the only things in the rogue line-up everyone kind of agrees on that it wouldn’t hurt to buff them?
Actualy for bards I’m not sure, or rather it would be difficult to buff them without making them too powerful. They already are high utility units, with the moral buff and charm, and they get taunt with dark pact. Perhaps they can get taunt at bronze medal and something like siren’s wail or cause fear with dark pact ?
For night wish, the spell is probably a bit overpriced, but nothing more. I think a price of 60cp/mana and an upkeep of 10 or 15 would go a long way to make it extremely interesting. The problem is not a problem of power IMO but of competition. Rogue has so many enchantments to cast, one would easily stop bothering with the subtlety of night wish to focus on all the other available spells.
What if settler cost was linked to the number of cities you own ? Like (1000pop + X gold)*number of cities.
I have the game on GoG AND on steam. I fail to see how hard this is to understand. Obviously playing the game a lot doesn’t make you better at game balancing or just reasoning.
But I wonder, did you miss me so much that you need to unleash all this anger at me now that I come back ?
You know GoG playtime doesn’t register on steam right ? Right ? I guess this yet another thing you didn’t thought about… And yes, you would indeed deserve your warning, but unlike you I’m not a child calling for moderation anytime someone express his disagreement with me. Fun part is that you actualy only need someone who disagree with you with the same comfidence you have to start being a jerk. It looks like you actualy can’t bear your ideas challenged.
BOUH if you will have 10% of my integrity it will be 100% improvement
You see, that’s why I abandoned these forums for a while. I’m so tired of you and the people like you, immune to logic, keen on ad hominem, if not plain insults, and with strong but skewed beliefs about game balance.
a smallish hp buff to node serpent i don’t see particularly hurting anything. might make their use less “questionable” than “good.” i’d be pretty ok with that change
And this explain that…
haha what the fuck is this shit
Obviously balancing discussions are still in a “someone is complaining, he must be right, the game needs a fix asap !” mode.
I agree with NINJEW there, that accusation was uncalled for Bouh, and he already attacked different sites as well, the dungeon one with the Manticores was even from the previous page.
I hadn’t read the full thread, which is a mistake indeed. Yet ExNihil jumped on someone for flawed demonstration several times in this thread, because he always does this, and yet his demonstrations are not better.
Like, for example, using node serpents as clearing main battle force. Because this unit is obviously designed for mystical sites clearing… Or perhaps absolutely all T3 units should be able to clear a mystical site in AC without any loss ?
The reasoning here is completely absurd. And that’s only one thread I dare to read after a while to see if things get better when I’m not here. Well, they don’t. The same people are still talking a lot with skewed reasonings and insults and offenses and ad hominem. The try on proof is a very good evolution though, I must admit.
Here I see a case of someone who trys to adapt a unit to his playstyle instead of adapting himself to the game (not the first time for this unit BTW). Node serpent never was meant to be tank/brawler with the ability to clear mystical sites. There are phantasm warriors to clear sites, and racial T3 units.
Also, because I didn’t saw it before, but is priceless :
Please make Node Serpent a 75-80HP t3, if you can also buff its resistance by 1 point, and it will be a mighty fine unit and everyone is happy.
Man are you serious ? You know that 80hp is warbreed hp right ? This is ridiculous.
The point was to demonstrate AC loses with node serpents on a wizard towers and that was the only wizard tower I had in an available save, i guess there will be others on the same map but really i couldn’t be arsed to find them in order to make this little demonstration. If I wanted to crack this dungeon up I wouldn’t use node serpents to begin with, I’d wait a few turns for Horrors and do it right – as you see they are just around the corner.
I love how you always manage to “accidentaly” flaw all your demonstrations. Like here, your demonstration about node serpent underpowerness involve an innocent attack on a “representative” mystical site, a wizard toward, which “coincidentaly” involve fighting units with high shock resistance and high resistance, the two things a sorcerer don’t like fighting.August 18, 2015 at 09:08 #223128August 17, 2015 at 14:24 #223080August 17, 2015 at 10:32 #223067July 29, 2015 at 09:02 #219593July 28, 2015 at 08:51 #219386July 27, 2015 at 12:35 #219237July 27, 2015 at 09:28 #219173July 24, 2015 at 14:27 #218712
and fast engineers means that dreadnought armies are faster than healer bound undead.
This was a stupid change BTW, supported by the community.
Anyway, an important point about the “rushing debate” is that dreads clear much better in pbem as well (since a human can abuse muskets well), so the necros superiority there is somewhat dubious. Without the ability to power gain a quick Titan or wraith king pair, the necromancer is probably the worst rushing class.
If the dreadnought is better at clearing than the necromancer, he is better at clearing than most classes, and hence he is overpowered.
And if it’s the early recruiting power of the necromancer that is not enough to compete, then the solution is to revert the controle undead nerf.
That’s another thing I hate in this dreadnought vs necromancer discussion : necromancer already have one of the most powerful tools a class can get to fight machines. The solution is not in more tools if the matchup is imbalanced. The problem is not this matchup, if there is a problem, it’s in the necromancer strategic parameters.
The thing is that here the problem is not a MP problem. The problem is autocombat AI.
The “dreadnought problem” is fantasised because the situation described as giving an advantage to the dreadnought basicaly make the hypothesis that the necromancer already lost, exactly like it was with the theocrat.
MP experience has nothing to do with these debates. As long as we talked about reasonable MP experience everyone mostly agreed.
But then some theorycrafter came to say that dreadnought was an impossible matchup using the same kind of insanities than with the theocrat, which are “machine only armies are impossible to kill and haywire is useless”. Both assertions are insane.
Naturally, by the nature of how complex a game this isnot every matchup is going to be entirely even, but I think that generally the devs would want to eliminate class imbalances, because it just simply isn’t fun for the game to be decided before the game begins, based on class choice.
It never is. It never was and it will never be. And actualy you are not talking about class imbalances but about class asymetries.
An imbalance would be “the necromancer is too weak in early game which cripple his chances of victory”. An asymetry is “necromancer use blight and spirit damage” and “machines are immune to blight and spirit”.
Asymetry is not imbalancing because there is enough of it for things to compensate. And because the “problem” already have been adressed with haywire and bone collector.
The problem is that like always people only see this game as a wargame and completely disregard the strategy when evaluating balance.
And simplifications like “machines are imune to blight and spirit ; necromancer class units use blight and spirit ; hence necromancer is doomed” are insult to intelligence itself. Because several necromancer units are designed to counter machines, and because a dreadnought will never field machines only, or if he does this will have many constraints and exploitable weaknesses.
As for the racial units thing that supposedely betrayed my ignorance of MP, you understood nothing guys and I’m pissed to explain things to people who don’t want to understand anyway because they are so comfident in their supposed knowledge of the game only because steam display a four digit number of hours played.
Bottom line is that the devs have their task of making the game as fun and as smooth to their user base
That is the principle behind the worst games ever created. Great games are not the games that try to please the most players or listen to all of their requests. AoW3 would not even exists if it was the case and we would have yet another of these boring games.
Oh, I almost forgot : the poll made it clear anyway that diversity and asymetry are more important for most users than balance. So the advocates of balance at all cost are actualy representing a minority here and should consider this.July 22, 2015 at 08:44 #218172