Ferrus_Animus

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 30 posts - 31 through 60 (of 457 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Tigran Race Governance: a couple of problems #210126

    So what are you disagreeing with and why? And how does/doesn’t that impact your perception of the issue?

    The AI chancels mind controlled summons now. Players can do that too.

    Consider the implications.

    It was that way at the beginning and was only changed because some people had the arbitrary feeling that they shouldn’t be affected even though it only took from the game and improved nothing.
    It was a sad day.

    After some playing I’d even say it made things worse. Keeper of the Peace Necros now have this one summon all their healing and support stuff doesn’t work on. It makes them a quite annoying special case to use on your side.

    As for the mind control issue: maybe a solution might be that mind controll immunity only protects again certain types of control. So lets say from everything but domination or something like that.

    When Shadow Magic introduced Willpower (MCI) it also introduced the skill “Drain Willpower” on a few units. AoW3 has no equivalent so far.

    in reply to: Tigran Race Governance: a couple of problems #209725

    Ferrus, while I really like Human RG2 for economy there is little doubt that it is generally more useful to gain +10 gold for a building I really aim to build in every city, regardless if it is more expensive than a shipyard. A shipyard you don’t really use as often on non-continent/-island maps.

    But you do on those maps. I’m not saying it is better, but I’m saying it is very different. Similarly the dwarven bonus will suck if you have no goldmines around (had it happen) and be rather awesome if you have a ton (had it happen too).

    And there simply is a difference betqween a bonus you need to do nothing to benefit from except get “lucky” enough and knowing it at the time you select it and building a T2 building that might not even be useful for now.

    In the same vein how do the goblins RG1 pop bonus for wetland hexes and the halfling RG2 bonus for pop from public baths measure up?

    Exactly. The observatory has a very significant usage besides just the 10 gold as well. Research and medal for supports. Competitively the harbor isn’t worth building just for its bonus unless you want to build ships.

    That’s not to say either one of them are useless. In fact you can’t really compare them directly as you have to take into account the entire race. But on their own the tigran’s bonus is far better.

    Are you trolling me? I can’t tell. You speak about taking into account additional factors but ignore all I say about additional factors.

    But let’s break it down once more:
    Goblins and Dwarves depend on the map and give you gold right NOW.

    Humans depend on the map and gives you gold SOON.

    Tigrans doesn’t depend on the map and gives you gold A WHILE LATER.

    Sure the additional bonus the observatory gives you is better than the harbor (no medal, that one is on the lab), but it is also a bonus that takes your money and production NOW and (ideally) pays off LATER.
    When you build observatories for the research you already made the decision to weaken your present position in the hopes to strengthen your future one. The RG does the same, it sweetens the deal and makes that particular strategy better. None of the others do that and you still have to pay the costs, and you also give up an immediately useful RG bonus. Those things are what balances the option.

    Or to put it into a more psychological experimental context:
    You pay someone 1000$.
    The goblins and the dwarves will repay you 2000$ immediately.
    The humans will repay you 5000$ in a month.
    The tigrans will repay you 100000$ in a year.
    What is the better deal?

    in reply to: Tigran Race Governance: a couple of problems #209636

    Your’e overestimating the accessibility of water hexes.

    I am not. It is heavily map dependent and that makes it hard to evaluate. You can get maps (at least you could, no idea how the beta patch changed the RMG) with a ton of water and you can get maps with little.
    The factors are the maps themselves, the amount of predetermined cities placed, if you can create new cities, the amount of land bridges and the size of the map.
    You can get maps with a majority of cities having harbors because why not and you want the ship repairs and you can get maps with basically none.

    Goblin is also 10/gold as much as Tigran but without investments and not too common. It’s better balanced.

    Few sites or many sites?

    Out of all those only the Tigran strikes me as overpowered, it’s the combination of the Gold amount, and accessibility over the course of the game that separates it from the rest.

    No the function is still the same, regenerates gold, but more appropriately for RG2 balance levels and on a balance level comparable to the others. I think it’s not atm, it has too much potential.

    That is part of the balance, and that is the part you deny.
    On the face of it they all create gold.
    But that is not all it is. And the other aspects need to be considered too.
    On the face of it cheetah as well as the dread reaper currently are melee units that have a recharging disabling ranged attack. Do we need to balance them against each other? NO, because they have completely different functions.

    The same is true for RG bonuses. They need to be put in context. The Tigrans RG2 is different than the other because it balances higher potential and availability with a higher investment cost. That is a balancing aspect too. And one you downplay with little reasoning given as to why.
    Do you think Tigran RG 5 is similarly problematic? Or Halfling RG3?

    Tigran RG 2 is a mid-to-late-game economy bonus that has a significantly higher early opportunity cost than the other RG2 economy option that prodiuce gold and are an early-game gold bonus.
    You claim that a +6 gold bonus to labs would basically be the same, does show a lack of understanding regarding these additional aspects.
    The one argument you could make is that all early RG options should mainly affect the early game. You didn’t.

    The thing is:

    I don’t think so. I think, Heal Undead and Lesser Reanimation should not be that good (and make no mistake, they ARE that good). And that is a BALANCE problem, and not the only one.

    That is not a balance problem, that is simply your opinion. Which leads to:

    True.
    That’s why I strain to explain the why. After all, that point is true for every problem: to change something, there should be more reason than individual dislike, and I think there IS, which is why I give a reasoning.

    And well, your explanations are more an establishing of your individual opinion than an explanation of objective issues. Which is why you get this amount of disagreement, as there is simply no other option to reply.
    Either people think it is an issue by themselves and agree with you, or they don’t. And there is little else to discuss so far.

    As for your suggestion of changes:
    All alternatives you suggest would massively change the entire class. It is not simply a matter of adding 6 points of Victory Rush healing and removing 6 points of Heal Undead healing to get the same end healing. One is a tactical ability the other isn’t and as a tactical ability part of the balance issue is making it worth to regularly use the action, and nerfing Heal Undead would make that a worse option, and as a result make the tactical battles less interesting.
    All your suggestions in this thread fall into the same category of changes whose wider impact would change a lot to fix only a little issue.

    And that issue is one many don’t have.

    So there is disagreement. The entire premise is subjective, so there can be nothing else. You think there is an objective aspect, but so far have failed at convincing. The probable cause are your methods of convincing, not the blindness of others. If this topic is this important to you, I would recommend taking a step back and reformulate your arguments.

    in reply to: Why are machines Spirit/Blight-immune?: A proposal #209340

    Do you think that this game is nearing final completion then?

    In a way it always is. But Tombles wrote in the patch thread about soon making new announcements and no matter what those will be, the result will probably be less resources to patch development.

    in reply to: Why are machines Spirit/Blight-immune?: A proposal #209272

    This is not too different from my own view, and probably not too different from Chrys’ either.

    Where I disagreed with his argument of lack of knowledge. The historical issue was more one of production capabilities.
    The dreadnought is a class that explicitly has these production capabilities, and as such the argument doesn’t hold.

    Fact is we can’t create a golem like machine today.

    Fact is we can, but we have still trouble making it walk.
    Legs are a surprisingly complicated and ineffective method of mobility for combat vehicles and their advantage is the ability to cross uneven terrain.
    Outside of that, treads are actually far better to move a vehicle.

    The point of these strengths is that they are strengths.

    I think this is a good point.
    Machines have clear strengths and weaknesses, and the entire balance of them revolves around them.
    Furthermore AoW3 is a game that does handle out a significant amount of immunities to units. And as a consequence of that, there is a lot of the game balance built around the fact that except for physical damage, there will be units immune to that. And as another consequence there are a significant amount of ways to deal with units that have immunities. Immunities are a difficulty nothing more.

    So IMO reducing an immunity to a a high protection does change a significant amount of game balance. For example, there is the susceptibility to debuffs.
    And removing an immunity from a class of units, be they undead (as in the other thread) or machines in the system as it stands is a heavy paradigm shift. That would have a big impact and as a balance point require a a significant added bonus to compensate. Basically it would set back all machine unit balance to sometime during the beta stage.
    I don’t think that is a good idea, especially as the future seems to hold less patches.
    As a mod I think ti would require a lot of destructive playtesting and be a right headache to get right.

    in reply to: Why are machines Spirit/Blight-immune?: A proposal #209230

    What makes the lore justification so difficult and able to support both views is that the AoW3 blight damage encompasses what in AoW2 would have been poison and death damage and in a system like D&D would be Death, Acid and Poison plus a number of untyped effects for corrosion, which each would affect a machine differently.
    Similar for spirit.

    And that makes “should machines be immune to it” a resounding “sometimes yes, sometimes no, maybe…the system isn’t granular enough for that”.

    From a game perspective, the game has been designed and balanced with these immunities in mind for a long time now and changing that would be a IMO as waste of development time, effort and change the games base direction in that regard too much to be done at this stage.

    As for the particular Archimedes tale (which you yourself seem to doubt by calling it a “legend”), I simply do not know much about Archimedes or optics or the tale itself to express any good faith judgment.

    I call it a legend due to the lack of concise sources and proof for it. Given the prominence of Rome, Alexandria and Archimedes, there should be more than there is, and given what has lasted, having omissions that take that specific shape would be a weird coincidence.
    I consider it quite probable that, similar to steam engines, maybe even models existed as proof of concept, but due to technological and economical limitations the idea never went beyond that stage and wasn’t weaponized.
    And the legend can be rather easily explained with the cultural and other aspects of the time. That is my opinion, and I have no more than other to base it on, as there is a distinct lack of evidence either way.

    Except that this is simply untrue. And they way it’s used you could call it a lie. There is no race that is 100% immune against something, and there is no Class except the Necromancer that would change that. In fact the opposite is true: AoW 3 put great care into avoiding that; even incorporeal units are not 100% physical damage resistant, but only 60, for example.
    I have no idea why you have to resort to this kind of malevolent fact warping – couldn’t you simply say that the rebalancing effort necessary to change this would probably be too much, for practical purposes, instead of this kind of excuse for making a point that isn’t there?

    Dude, chill and stop your persecution complex.
    I misunderstood what you said. Nothing more.
    I thought you were referring to individual units, not entire race and class lineups. Because immunity to non-physical damage is all over the place but not everywhere.
    And the latter paragraph is literally what I said.

    Question: Is total immunity of race and class units for one damage channel a good thing? MY answer is, no, it isn’t.

    That is a valid opinion, and one many games subscribe to.
    There is also the other answer: “Yes, it is.” and many games subscribe tot hat too.
    AoW in all its incarnations has been the latter, and that is that.

    You might dislike that, but to change it, you are about 2 years of game design too late, and changing it now would require AoW3 to be rebalanced all over the place, an effort that is simply unfeasible at the current stage.

    So bottom line is, I simply don’t like part of the way the Necro Class works. I consider it not as elegant as the rest of the game.

    Bottom line: This sentence is all it is about.

    in reply to: Tigran Race Governance: a couple of problems #209148

    That’s the point, harbors are seldom necessary. That’s closer to a useless 100 gold investment that needs x amount of turns to recuperate the investment(1 harbor building ships will do, if needed at all). Laboratory, who doesn’t build that? You’ll win the game by researching, don’t have a decent research income is losing the game not to mention the +1 medal for supports. Observatories are highly beneficial, it can be the difference between having that quarry/dungeon in the domain or not and the extra research isn’t bad. Granted that in the early game building observatories in all conquered towns is out of the question, however looking at the course of the game the bonus is too good for RG2.

    Depending on the map harbors can be plentiful and useful. Harbors are situational, but they give more than the the Tigran RG2 and cost less.
    And while research might win you the game, it might not win you the early wars, blindly building labs is a bad strategy, the medal for supports has a highly variable use, especially as the Tigran racial support, is basically a non-supporting combat unit, and for domain expansion, walls are cheaper and faster. Yes, the observatory can give your city 3 lost cities and 2 dungeons. Or it can give you nothing at all.
    Short term, the Tigran RG2 is better than nothing, but it is not an economical advantage. Only over the course of the game does it actually become beneficial as an economic aspect.

    Because infrastructure is used to justify it, i rather see it lowered in requirements and halving the bonus, laboratory/5-6 gold. It’s less potential than the dwarven bonus but more reliable, and everyone builds laboratory anyways for the the bonuses of the building per se.

    As for the calculation, you’ll want to consider happiness bonuses as well, and in conjunction with merchandise.

    I did consider some happiness, but to even assume a stable basis requires to assume to be past the early midgame, at which point the RG2 has been long running.
    An no matter how much we weight calculations, gold-economically speaking, the Tigran RG2 is a net loss o9f gold for a significant amount of turns before becoming a net profit in any scenario that doesn’t involve building observatories all over the place no matter what. And these opportunity costs are a factor in balance.
    And besides not being as strong as you consider it, your changes IMO would make the choice far more boring.
    Besides being a worse economic boost than the others, it would remove the interesting choice of going for the observatory and take economic downsides now for a later payoff or not. A +6 for labs is much less worthwhile compared to nets for prowlers and doesn’t give the pay-now-profit-later choice.

    I understand that you may think i’m hating this race.[…] They’re in a more balanced state now but some things are still just better than what other races get, this is one of them IMO.

    I don’t think that.
    I think you are not good at comparing similarly looking elements that in the big picture function differently.
    Like this current discussion:
    Dwarves: pure bonus, small scale
    Goblins: better bonus but the sites it applies to are rarer, so the same but more conditional
    Humans: better bonus that is more conditional and requires some short-term investment
    Tigran: average bonus, that is reliable and broadly applicable, but the investment requires makes it a long-term investment.

    Your change would change Tigrans to:
    bonus that requires some short-term investment

    That completely changes the entire function of the RG option and that you consider that “balancing” it and not completely overhauling it, affirms my evaluation of you.
    And the fact that you think they are as easily comparable as your balance suggestion implies, does that too.

    This is a similar issue that leads to practically all MMO forums always having threads about how broken DPS classes are and such. And it leads to “identifying” a lot of balance issues between things that are about equal on very different scales, and proposing balance changes that would push them all onto the same scale and in the end remove variety. And I’d rather keep the variety of options and balncing scales instead of making AoW3 choices much more samey.

    in reply to: Why are machines Spirit/Blight-immune?: A proposal #209021

    That is probably mythical. A proper understanding of optics did not occur until the late middle ages of the Arab world, so it is unlikely that light was used as a focused weapon of any kind without that basic knowledge.

    Over the course of history a lot of knowledge has been lost and rediscovered.
    Often principles and ideas where known but the technology or other conditions was insufficient to exploit them.
    The romans and greek had steam engines, yet lacked the metallurgic capabilities to build them big enough to utilize for more than entertainment.
    Greek Fire is a chemical formula that is currently unknown, yet it existed.
    For a time archeologists thought the Maya never discovered the wheel. Until they discovered toys with wheels.
    Until the methods to align the pyramids were rediscovered, it took over 200 years to find other ways to mirror their precision.
    Etc…

    The legend of Archimedes’ mirror is older than the arab exploration of optics.
    The basic knowledge might as well have been known by the ancient greek and other cultures. It might not have had the same refinement, or it might have. The contemporary descriptions of the Alexandrian lighthouse speak of a mirror to reflect the sunlight during the day which implies a basic understanding of the optical basics required.

    Or to put it simply: there is no evidence nor any indication Archimedes mirror existed, but dismissing the claims on the basis of “they couldn’t have had the knowledge” is ignorant and wrong.

    in reply to: Tigran Race Governance: a couple of problems #209013

    How come?

    Gold Mines are simply there and often easy to claim.
    Harbors cost 100 resources to build and provide 15 gold and some population with the appropriate RG, with the downside of maptype based availability.

    Laboratory costs 125 and the observatory another 150 for a +10 gold bonus.
    That is a higher investment required in resources and production time. They do have a more general intrinsic benefit though.

    As far as comparisons go (assuming you only take the bonus when you have actually use for it, and with gold=mana) Dwarven RG2 is an income bonus from the turn you get it, Human RG2 takes less than 7 turns to recoup the investment, and Tigran RG 2 takes 28 turns.
    Observatories simply aren’t as easy and cheap as gold mines and harbors for the early game.

    Observatories aren’t hard, only require labs. Compared to docks they don’t depend on terrain and you would build them anyway

    In a longer game you would, but before reaching midgame, heavy investment in observatories has economic downsides which are bigger than the other races RG2 requirements. And RG2 is a rather early RG bonus.
    As I see it Dwarven RG2 is a early game income boost, Human RG2 is a conditional early game income boost and Tigran RG2 is an early game option to get a midgame economy boost.

    Observatories are the knowledge producers and prereq for the item forge.
    The latter justifies one observatory early game (as one forge is enough for the empire quest and item production until your empire has grown some) and the former is part of the strategic decision to pay now for a later advantage, same as the gold bonus.

    +30 gold per turn for a warlord sounds impressive, but without a laboratory and observatory that is still +20. As far as economic bonuses goes, let’s calculate:

    The grey guard tigran warlord with war effort has an income bonus of +20 already and now given the decision to boost Prowlers or gold he goes for the latter.
    Let’s assume the city is a town and has a healthy 50-74 production (75+ isn’t easy to get early IME). For effective cost let’s also ignore the mana price of the buildings.
    This warlord now takes the observatory bonus and builds an observatory:
    – Laboratory: 75 gold, 2 production turns ( 3 with less than 63 production which is possible)
    – Observatory: 100 gold, 3 production turns

    Payoff: +20 research and +10 gold income (also support medal)
    Time until the gold income has recouped the price: another 18 turns
    So for let’s do an 25 turn later (from the point of starting to build) picture:
    Minus 6 town production turns, minus 175 gold, 23 turns of +10 knowledge from the laboratory, 20 turns of +10 knowledge and +10 gold from observatory.
    Sum: +25 gold and + 430 knowledge

    Now let’s take his still neutral but goatee-wearing twin who doesn’t do that.
    He spends those 6 production turns on producing merchandise. If we assume a town with the +20 income from Tigran, GG and War Effort, that is another +20 (50% of 40 income) for +120 gold.
    25 turns later that is still 120 gold.
    And for these 25 turns he has had 295 gold to build, recruit, buy or whatever, the first warlord didn’t have.

    The first warlord has more gold than the second 35! turns after starting to build stuff.
    Even if we give the first one the full happiness bonus of +50% (for +15 per turn) and the second the necromancers +15% (for a total of 138 gold), it will still take 15 turns after finishing the observatory, so about 20 turns for the first one to pull ahead.

    Now having an observatory has other advantages, like knowledge income, the added domain size and more. And those do make the option better than nothing. But from a pure gold economical perspective, the +10 gold per observatory is a long-term investment, whereas the other two option pay off rather quickly.

    So frankly I do think your perspective is muddled by seeing the big +30 per turn number while neglecting the price. Of course it is better if you build observatories everywhere, but doing that isn’t free, and especially on smaller maps might have a heavy opportunity cost. And if you build them for the knowledge, then you have already made the decision to forgo early economic and military bonuses (from public baths or warhalls) for a later advantage, in which case, the added “pay now for a later gain” option fits well. But that doesn’t make it automatically a better choice.
    Or as Ilfoso put it:

    I don’t think the +10 is all that though.

    ———————————————————–

    I think maybe coup de grace does too much damage

    So given former discussions: Is there any conditional trait you consider to not do too much damage?

    So how do we solve the issue of Tigran units/heroes and strong will?

    in reply to: Why are machines Spirit/Blight-immune?: A proposal #208478

    No doubt you raise a pertinent difficulty when it comes to balance discussions. But I think you also understand that giving a precise, universally-applicable metric that describes when something is over-powered (or under-powered) is rather difficult. It is almost as subjective as Justice Potter Stewart’s famous (non-) test on what constitutes porn: “I know it when I see it.”

    Yet you haven’t raised any more than that.
    Nor elaborated too much on what you see and why what you see fits those definitions. “I know it when I see it and there is is” is a non-sequitor and meaningless without being expanded upon.
    It makes these discussion vague and rather pointless, as they are filled with meaningless or vague statements of declaring things “OP” with little to discuss.
    So we devolve to the “it is OP” “Is not” “Is too” stage of discussion.

    Add to that undisclosed preferences like more visible balance vs. more subtle balance and other aspects and this thread is predestined to become the nowadays usual mess without given a solid base.

    You have started this thread so you are the one best suited to provide it, yet you have trouble even putting out a vague definition of the buzzword you used to frame the problem.

    But let’s frame your question, or interpret it, a little differently: I think if you knew your opponent will be a Theocrat, people would in fact disproportionately choose Dreadnought. Similarly, if you knew your opponent will be Goblin, the same may go for Dreadnought/Necromancer classes

    And people would disproportionally less choose Necromancer. Certain classes have advantages easier leveraged against other classes. Same for races. This has not only been in AoW3 since day 1, but also been by design.
    So is the problem this one design and balance principle that over a year now has been spent on forming the game around and that so far has functioned well?
    Or is the problem there is a issue that goes beyond that principle? In which case you haven’t made a comprehensive argument to that case.

    in reply to: Why are machines Spirit/Blight-immune?: A proposal #208399

    Still, my definition is fairly broad and not too divergent from a dictionary or common sense one: Possessing unduly excessive power or something like that? Of course, there is a lot of subjective element to it.

    Yeah, when is the power undue and what is the benchmark for excessive? The average? The mean? Some other value? And after what degree over this benchmark is it an excess?
    This is the difficulty with these discussion and why the have become rather fruitless in recent times:
    “X element is subjective a, subjective b and subjective c and obviously needs to be changed.”

    One more qualification – a qualification I made throughout this thread consistently – I think machines were overpowered in certain match-ups.

    Asymmetrical balance and counterabilities mean everything is overpowered in certain matchups. Scissors is overpowered in Paper matchups.
    The question is if this actually means anything in the greater picture and what it means. The second question is if we have a case of overpoweredness or a case of being more powerful within the framework of asymmetry and hard and soft counters. The third question is the result of these have a further reaching effect or if the sum of parts they are apart of works for a consistent and undisruptive result. The fourth question is under what factors we have diverging results and if those are significant. Etc…

    Or to put it another way: If this aspect is overpowered to such a degree, why aren’t Dreadnoughts more heavily used or otherwise noticeable to a degree overpoweredness warrants? As the determination of overpoweredness you make one based on some objective metric or on personal preferences and specific experiences that may or may not paint a complete picture? And does that issue warrant such a significant balance overhaul as a changing unit type inherent aspects of a unit type one of the classes is based around causes?

    in reply to: Why are machines Spirit/Blight-immune?: A proposal #208309

    If a class possessing 100 percent immunities to two of six damage channels (and primary damage channels for one class and one race) is not “over-powered” per se, I am not sure what is?

    I asked for a definition, not an example. As a lawyer I am certain you are familiar with the difference.
    Frankly “overpowered” is a meaningless buzzword into which everyone can invest his or her own interpretation, and as you opened this thread by repeated utilization of that word, I am asking for a definition to establish a common ground.

    Or in other words, I want to know what you think you are saying and not what could be read out of your words. So indulge me please.

    in reply to: Why are machines Spirit/Blight-immune?: A proposal #208252

    Please define the term “overpowered”. Cause the meaning I am familiar with does not coincide with your use in the OP.

    Two counter-points. First, I am not sure if we should assume AoW 3 technology can achieve what contemporary technology can achieve. Hermetic interiors in tanks, etc. is a relatively contemporary invention.

    1. Magic
    2. You are aware that technology in out unmagical world has been capable for thousands of years to supply short-term air supplies (diving) as well as enclosures sealed enough to prevent the intrusion of water (ships), which is about as easy to seal of from as air is?
    Given the skirmish-nature of AoW combats as well as the advanced crafting methods necessary to build especially dreadnought units, the creation of hermetically sealed interiors for combat deployment seems rather feasible.

    in reply to: Tigran Race Governance: a couple of problems #208243

    There is one big thing with Cheetahs being how they were. You can rush with them. Sprint, Hurl Net, Pounce… a stack of 6 of those Cheetahs

    Not saying they needn’t some nerfing (like say Sprint moved to gold), but all the points of powerful cheetahs assume significant numerical superiority.
    They’re still the weakest racial melee unit in the game and at best had a useful, but unreliable disable.
    This made them better than other irregulars, at clearing enemies, but that’s damning with faint praise. I think their major power came simply from the fact how they integrated with and worked well against standard approaches people have gotten used to over the past year.

    Also, Prowlers are proto assasins, so having net and making them the Hunters of the Tigrans makes sense to me.

    I’m disliking it from another angle.
    The Tigran racial units are all about one unit creating an opening and another exploiting that opening. Be it Bleed/Bloodthirsty or Net/CdG. With Prowlers being pure exploiters before elite.
    The two exceptions below elite rank were Berserkers and Manticore riders.
    With the change, Veteran Prowlers (very easy to get especially as you need to have a War Hall built) have the Net/CdG interaction, which makes this whole racial synergy thing mostly redundant. Sure, more bleeding is nice, but as the unit you are already encouraged to use as a finisher now has the Net, it devalues all the other units, and pushes Tigrans into a direction of pure Prowler army composition. Like the price reduction RG did before their price increase.
    That’s boring and uninteresting.

    Also I predict “nerf prowlers” threads soon.

    in reply to: Tigran Race Governance: a couple of problems #207808

    I do dislike the changes. It takes away Tigrans unique way of war and makes them more boring. RG1 makes them tougher which was what they intentionally lacked and RG2 reduces cheetah usability and prowler synergy to make prowlers synergize with themselves and Sun Guards.

    I think Tigrans will need quite a few more changes now to function and fear they’ll end up playing a lot less different than before.

    It’s ‘War effort’ for each Tigran city that builds obvservatories, on top of the +5 tigran bonus it’s incredible. Dwarf gains +3 gold from mines, human +15 gold/100 pop with a harbor etc, those feel more balanced.

    Observatories are a bit of an effort to build for Tigrans, and far less commonplace than “have gold mines” or “built next to water”.
    I think it is quite right for a race that has a gold bonus. And especially now that the opportunity cost is giving up netting.

    You’re wrong, my friend, because you forgot about Collect bones ability of collector.

    As Gloweye said that requires a substantial amount of corpses generated in the fight, and spending the time to collect them, while the opposing forces aren’t killing it.
    If you manage that you have won already and are just wasting time.
    And if you manage it to decide the battle, then that is a desired outcome in a rare edge case, not a problem.

    Problems begin when Necro feeds him to unit with 300 hp and 40 attack. Shrine will hav no chance against such unit and other theo units too.

    That would require over 20 cadavers or over 3 additional army stacks of them to be positioned right and sacrificed for this one battle. I’m not sure that is a problems instead of working as intended.

    Maybe we should turn the collector into a full undead machine. spirit weakness of 60-80% buffed by machines +100%. That would make the susceptible to sabotage as the most significant difference.

    The main issue of guerilla tactics is the really limited amount of troops that can get it making it really situational with only few niche uses..

    The idea is to engage and then flee both strategically and tactically.
    But Most infantry and irregulars have difficulties doing the tactical aspect well enough to pay off.
    Orc Spearmen with Sprint are some of the best units to utilize it, and they’re weak.
    There are two units that can make it shine though. The Draconian Warlord that starts with it. Properly leveled and kitted (especially if you find an obsidian wyvern)he can be a terrorizing force.
    And Sphinxes. Flying, ranged attacks, fast and though enough to take the odd hit. They can actually hit and run.

    Because you are a new/casual player and like the Sorcerer class description?

    Not everything has to be aimed at experienced players and having a classes gameplay organically guide you towards the playstyle it should follow is good design.

    The issue isn’t that the dragons can all breathe, the issue is that at times you have to attack stacks of dragons, and the starting positions are such that the defending dragons can fly and breathe very effectively as the first thing that happens.

    It is not that dragons are strong, but that the way the battlefield and starting positions are set up let’s them utilize their power far better than any comparable unit.
    Attack a stack of X dragons and your army leader will get X breath attacks in his face. No way to mitigate that without gaming the AI. That is the problem at hand.

    in reply to: Evangelists -their use? #206102

    Evangelists are a support unit and melee unit. Their best use is to stand behind crusaders and throw their buffs and debuffs around. And occasionally to open a flank or exploit one.
    Their problem is that racial supports are better at standing behind the lines and dealing damage and crusaders are better at melee. So as a result you bring them for convert (and soon denounce) and a slight bit of versatility.
    I personally like to have to keep them at one per stack unless they’re draconian or human as I think that’s where they bring most to the table without taking up too much space.
    The other exception is dwarven evangelists. They can get very durable with the right MCUs and server as a rather tough and dangerous frontline.

    in reply to: Help Me Understand Arch Druid #206098

    Trolls are one of the best recruitable units fro the AD anyway.

    The difficulty of the AD is that it is a hybrid class. It combines mobility, summoning and some concealment, and you need to get all of those working in tandem. Your summons for example are good, but all they supply you with is bruisers.
    You need to get the rest from recruiting. And your hunters and shaman don’t fill always the same niche the racial archer and supports do.

    So basically you will still rely on your race for some part.
    One with elements and Fertile domain means you can get big cities rather fast and have higher morale on racial units. Poison domain is a really powerful defensive spell on border cities and your class units tend to be rather mobile and able to hide, so you can send some stacks into the enemy heartlands.

    Basically the Warlord will outfight you, the Rogue outhide you and the Sorcerer outsummon you, but against each one you have the edge on the two other aspects.

    I think it is because the apprentice is that cheap because while not necessary it encourages a summon-heavy playstyle, thus encouraging sorcerers to go for their summons.

    In contrast the reanimator is a necessity sooner or later and just augments the playstyle the necromancer already is going for, and there is this thing with a slow necro economy, so while early research is similar to other classes, it still takes longer.

    Heroes will be randomly selected among the races you have absorbed. If those run out you will get new offerings from random other races that are still free.
    Rejected heroes are removed from the global pool though rarely they show up again, I’m uncertain how exactly that works.

Viewing 30 posts - 31 through 60 (of 457 total)