[Search] Search   [Recent Topics] Recent   [Hottest Topics] Hottest   [Login] Login
18 New units are coming...
Forum Index » New Feature Request
[Avatar]
Duaneski

Messages: 1019,
Joined: Nov 27, 2015,
Offline

[Avatar]
Duaneski

Messages: 1019,
Joined: Nov 27, 2015,
Offline
  medricel wrote:
  Duaneski wrote:That would work. Could have increased cost for Titan walls since they're stronger

My problem w this is that it promotes a defensive play style. So I don't Love that about it

Of course Titan walls would be more costly. Wouldn't the ability to make mountain tiles also favor defensive? At least tankbuster/AoE, or anything good with heavy can destroy the walls.


Yeah it would. I don't think it should be possible normally. I made it so if you get rid of 3 dunes you can make a mountain tile... so pretty unlikely more than 1-2 mountain tiles made
[Avatar]
LkASr

Messages: 752,
Joined: Sep 24, 2015,
Offline

[Avatar]
LkASr

Messages: 752,
Joined: Sep 24, 2015,
Offline
Idea for mines: Put them into mountains, as in you can literally mine into the mountains themselves, or at least make it as a modifier for mountains

Never surrender when you still have the chance.
"I have achieved navel superiority" -myself 2017
All the good stuff [WoT Generals Beta Tester, Uniwar Beta Tester, Vainglory Hero Suggestions List Contributor]
Come look at my profile for more info
medricel

Messages: 11,
Joined: Aug 30, 2016,
Offline

medricel

Messages: 11,
Joined: Aug 30, 2016,
Offline
  LkASr wrote:Idea for mines: Put them into mountains, as in you can literally mine into the mountains themselves, or at least make it as a modifier for mountains

This idea is nice, but I think that swings the tide too much for players who have purchased that unit. I'd rather see a mine as a tile such as the repair base. You'd have to put a unit on it (maybe limit it to infantry/healer/terraformers) and have them perform a specific mining action that takes their turn, but instantly gives you a base's (or configurable) amount of credits. Would probably want that to be the default option over Repair if able.

But thqt is beyond the scope of the subject of new units
[Avatar]
Corrin

Messages: 34,
Joined: Apr 08, 2016,
Offline

[Avatar]
Corrin

Messages: 34,
Joined: Apr 08, 2016,
Offline
Let's assume I spent the time to create an essay on each unit idea I imagine and argue its boons and feasibility while proving evidence it's balanced... what are the odds my idea will be actually used inside UniWar?

どうぞよろしく。わたしはトビンです。おなまえは?
[Avatar]
japhib

Messages: 47,
Joined: Jul 13, 2016,
Offline

[Avatar]
japhib

Messages: 47,
Joined: Jul 13, 2016,
Offline
  Corrin wrote:Let's assume I spent the time to create an essay on each unit idea I imagine and argue its boons and feasibility while proving evidence it's balanced... what are the odds my idea will be actually used inside UniWar?


Seems like, as long as your ideas fit into the 6 new units for each race that Xavi mentioned, your chances are actually pretty good. Xavi's probably being vague on purpose ... Although only he and/or Simsverd and/or anyone else in that "inner circle" can answer definitively.
[Avatar]
StarryBlink

Messages: 184,
Joined: Jan 04, 2012,
Offline

[Avatar]
StarryBlink

Messages: 184,
Joined: Jan 04, 2012,
Offline
Few comments :

1) terrain modification unit - I don't think it's a good idea.
If the map is already balance, it's better leave its terrains as it is.
Just modifying a single tile of it, then you're likely to screw all its delicate balance.

While if the map is unbalance, its unlikely that terrain modification by player playing in the game will fix it.
Better let the map fall to the bottom of the list by voting down.

If you want a new strategy to break the stand off, a transport amphibian unit maybe the better option.
It won't destroy the balance of maps.
Yet you'll have a lot of new strategies break the enemy's fortress.
Like sending a walker and 2 plasma tanks behind the enemy line.
Or send a marauder across a wall of plasma tanks to hurt walkers from behind.

I know Simsverd ever said that you don't want a transport unit since it will be too much of new features.
But as now you're talking about terrain modification, why don't rethink about transport units again.



2) Splash damage - it's something lacking in Uniwar.
In most war game there will be a unit which make a splash damage.
Typically it's a grenadier throwing grenade explode in the group of enemy. And sometimes also hurting its own friend.
Splash damage is fun to play with. And increase depth of the game strategy.

How about making your new tank-buster and anti-air units make a splash damage ? Should be interesting.



Overall I'm very happy to known you'll bring a lot of new units.
And waiting eagerly to play on them. Whatever your decision

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at Oct 11, 2016 11:52

[Avatar]
Duaneski

Messages: 1019,
Joined: Nov 27, 2015,
Offline

[Avatar]
Duaneski

Messages: 1019,
Joined: Nov 27, 2015,
Offline
  StarryBlink wrote:Few comments :

1) terrain modification unit - I don't think it's a good idea.
If the map is already balance, it's better leave its terrains as it is.
Just modifying a single tile of it, then you're likely to screw all its delicate balance.

While if the map is unbalance, its unlikely that terrain modification by player playing in the game will fix it.
Better let the map fall to the bottom of the list by voting



Okay let's look at a map like Deadmonk. Very simple straightforward. Let's say for 200 credits saps can cut down a tree. This is one turns worth of income - and an arbitricatly decided cost of course. But just for example. So you open up the path to the other side a little more at a non significant cost.

Is it worth it?

That's half a tank, or an engineer.

What will decide whether this is actually a good move is:
- the map itself. Credits per turn, the choke points, and your enemy of course. (And cost). These are all hugely variable, which means that sometimes it will be a good decision and sometimes not, even on the same map and in the same matchup.

On Deadmonk if I am playing SvT and my opponent builds all speeders, and I try to clear a forest, I am probably not helping myself. Because the counter is tanks so having extra marauder maneuverability wouldn't help me. And at a high cost this would be very counter productive.

If my opponent builds an early Walker on the other hand, being able to open up another choke point for the Titan to defend... would be very interesting, and may well be worth the one turn of income.

So... this is my thought. It's a cost to benefit evaluation the player will get to make on an ongoing basis. I think a lot of people are having knee jerk reactions of "ohhhhh that doesn't sound good" , but haven't really explored what it means to spend 300-400 credits to change one tile.

--- edit: if the map is balanced, that is GOOD for this unit archetype. Then your goal in building it is to make the map imbalanced in your favor... meanwhile, your opponent gets a big credit advantage. Note that Xavi said he is considering a cost to transmute each tile in addition to the unit cost. I am imagining 100-200 cost per tile, plus 200+ unit cost ... not insignificant on most maps

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at Oct 11, 2016 12:29

[Avatar]
LkASr

Messages: 752,
Joined: Sep 24, 2015,
Offline

[Avatar]
LkASr

Messages: 752,
Joined: Sep 24, 2015,
Offline
  Duaneski wrote:
  StarryBlink wrote:Few comments :

1) terrain modification unit - I don't think it's a good idea.
If the map is already balance, it's better leave its terrains as it is.
Just modifying a single tile of it, then you're likely to screw all its delicate balance.

While if the map is unbalance, its unlikely that terrain modification by player playing in the game will fix it.
Better let the map fall to the bottom of the list by voting



Okay let's look at a map like Deadmonk. Very simple straightforward. Let's say for 200 credits saps can cut down a tree. This is one turns worth of income - and an arbitricatly decided cost of course. But just for example. So you open up the path to the other side a little more at a non significant cost.

Is it worth it?

That's half a tank, or an engineer.

What will decide whether this is actually a good move is:
- the map itself. Credits per turn, the choke points, and your enemy of course. (And cost). These are all hugely variable, which means that sometimes it will be a good decision and sometimes not, even on the same map and in the same matchup.

On Deadmonk if I am playing SvT and my opponent builds all speeders, and I try to clear a forest, I am probably not helping myself. Because the counter is tanks so having extra marauder maneuverability wouldn't help me. And at a high cost this would be very counter productive.

If my opponent builds an early Walker on the other hand, being able to open up another choke point for the Titan to defend... would be very interesting, and may well be worth the one turn of income.

So... this is my thought. It's a cost to benefit evaluation the player will get to make on an ongoing basis. I think a lot of people are having knee jerk reactions of "ohhhhh that doesn't sound good" , but haven't really explored what it means to spend 300-400 credits to change one tile.

--- edit: if the map is balanced, that is GOOD for this unit archetype. Then your goal in building it is to make the map imbalanced in your favor... meanwhile, your opponent gets a big credit advantage. Note that Xavi said he is considering a cost to transmute each tile in addition to the unit cost. I am imagining 100-200 cost per tile, plus 200+ unit cost ... not insignificant on most maps


he also mentioned amphibian transports, which already said, it's a big no on the new units post

Never surrender when you still have the chance.
"I have achieved navel superiority" -myself 2017
All the good stuff [WoT Generals Beta Tester, Uniwar Beta Tester, Vainglory Hero Suggestions List Contributor]
Come look at my profile for more info
Phill_the_ll

Messages: 8,
Joined: Oct 30, 2015,
Offline

Phill_the_ll

Messages: 8,
Joined: Oct 30, 2015,
Offline
Thank you xavi for new units!! I like most uniplayers are totally exited to use them.

However, I do not like the idea of a terrain transformers unit. First of all, if they are cheap they will quickly run the map out of balance. But, if they are more expensive, by giving a "terrain change cost" or some other way, then the unit will become very situational and rarely useable. Almost like the old tank that was only used against titans, and even then not well.

please reconsider.

Thanks.
[Avatar]
Duaneski

Messages: 1019,
Joined: Nov 27, 2015,
Offline

[Avatar]
Duaneski

Messages: 1019,
Joined: Nov 27, 2015,
Offline
  Phill_the_ll wrote:Thank you xavi for new units!! I like most uniplayers are totally exited to use them.

However, I do not like the idea of a terrain transformers unit. First of all, if they are cheap they will quickly run the map out of balance. But, if they are more expensive, by giving a "terrain change cost" or some other way, then the unit will become very situational and rarely useable. Almost like the old tank that was only used against titans, and even then not well.

please reconsider.

Thanks.


Phil,

That is a very thoughtful post. I agree with you that this would likely be a very situational unit if Costed appropriately. I think this brings up a couple good questions that hopefully you'll help me in considering:

- in the context of what the existing units do, and what the new other 5 units per race will do, is there design space that should be filled more urgently than this terraforming unit? (If yes, then what?)

- we can agree that the terraforming unit should have strict limitations and elevated cost. Would it make sense to give the unit a secondary function (think of healing, conversion, and ability on engineer) to perhaps keep this unit relevant in matches where terraforming is not a priority? Perhaps this would help to fill some design space from question 1...
(Consider this: give khral an out of activation heal, give saps combat stats, give Titans a buff to adjacent unit defense. Just some random ideas, but there's room for flavor there)

- could or should terraforming mean "affecting the environment" versus changing tiles permanently? Is this even an option? (Let's say setting fire to all connected forest tiles for 1-3 turns. Raising a structure such as a tank spike on a plains tile that can be destroyed. Freezing swamps to make them temporarily like a plains) ?

- is the fun factor of this type of unit significant enough to make its niche play "worth it"?

- are there enough potentially positive tactical uses for this unit - even with an elevated cost - that it would be "worth it" ?


Disclaimer: I have my opinion about some of the above questions, some I have no frickin clue. Since there seems a lot of unhappiness about this unit type, I think these are important things to consider. I could see either way.. and I am thinking it is likely there are other possibilities. Dunno.
[Avatar]
wookieontheweb

Messages: 485,
Joined: Jan 27, 2016,
Location: Southampton, UK
Offline

[Avatar]
wookieontheweb

Messages: 485,
Joined: Jan 27, 2016,
Location: Southampton, UK
Offline
Is this something that should be added to the healer unit's abilities rather than a new unit?

i.e. the engineer can clear forests, but has a cool down of 3 turns, during which time the engineer is inactive in a similar fashion to a titan teleport (insert lumber jack animation). When the 3 turns have expired the engineer is standing on a plains tile. If they are killed during that time then the tile remains as forest.
Possibly (though this might be too complex) unlike teleport cool down, this action can be cancelled.

Further, I think the ability should be restricted for each race's healer unit e.g. it can only make 1 type of modification:
Engineer: forest -> plains, (lumber jack)
Infector: plains -> desert, (burrowing)
Assimilator: swamp -> plains, (flame thrower)

Android 9. Samsung Galaxy A50
DaKraK

Messages: 1,
Joined: Oct 16, 2016,
Offline

DaKraK

Messages: 1,
Joined: Oct 16, 2016,
Offline
Someone said something about a unit that can make a mountan each 3 desert tiles he remove. Well I just want to remind that ground heavy units can't go trough mountains, so in small maps (or not that small) that could be so unbalanced and literally block enemy ground heavy units from moving from a place

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at Oct 16, 2016 20:48

[Avatar]
Duaneski

Messages: 1019,
Joined: Nov 27, 2015,
Offline

[Avatar]
Duaneski

Messages: 1019,
Joined: Nov 27, 2015,
Offline
  DaKraK wrote:Someone said something about a unit that can make a mountan each 3 desert tiles he remove. Well I just want to remind that ground heavy units can't go trough mountains, so in small maps (or not that small) that could be so unbalanced and literally block enemy ground heavy units from moving from a place


Yep that was me.

Was a sorta off the cuff suggestion, but im notnsire thay a map exists that could be broken by that mechanic. If there is the map could simply get unranked. It should be reasonably difficult to trigger on most maps. And if you've got one hex wide choke points surrounded by mountains ... well ...
[Avatar]
firstkyne

Messages: 22,
Joined: Aug 22, 2011,
Offline

[Avatar]
firstkyne

Messages: 22,
Joined: Aug 22, 2011,
Offline
  join wang wrote:
  xavi wrote:
...

5. Anti aerial unit
Goal: to counter standoff aerial fights.

6. Terrain mutator units.
Goal: to transform terrain.


Thank you xavi finally we can have interesting naval battles. But are you sure about terrain mutations sounds a bit overpowered and tricky to balance.


YES to Air Defence!!!

I hope they are small barrage balloons, gas pods, or glowing shields, all which hover slightly above the terrain hex, like a flying unit.

This is how I would do it (I know you did'nt ask, but I have been waiting for this for SOOOO long!)

Air Defences are added to a normal terrain hex. An Engineer, Infector or Assimilator can add air defences to a neighbouring terrain hex instead of any other action that turn.

Air units cannot fly through them, or automatically take damage if they do (the attack strength perhaps being somewhere between a Marine and a Helicopter).
Air Defences also reduce the attack strength of ranged units firing through them (perhaps because they obscure the target).
Air Defences can be attacked by ground units in order to destroy them (perhaps they're defence is similar to a Marauder).

Air Defences can be added to a map by map designers.

- These are intended to challenge air units, which -if they outnumber their opponent's air units - usually dominate a game prematurely.
- This increases the importance of ground units somewhat as a result, which currently quickly become obsolete.
- adding defensive tactical choices increases the chance for a player who is losing (perhaps because he has not capped one, pivotal base) to survive longer and stay in the game rather than surrendering quickly.


YES to Terrain mutation. This is how I would do it...


Appearance: walls or sandbags around edge of hex

Fortifications can be built by Marines, Underlings, Mechas, Engineers, Infectors and Assimilators. The unit builds fortifications instead of any other action that turn.
Fortifications add +1 to the defence of any Marine, Underling, Mecha, Engineer, Infector or Assimilator occupying the hex.
They add +2 to defence against air and ranged attacks.
They can be built on any hex except water, mountains or bases.
Fortifications can be added to maps by map designers.
Capturing a fortification provides a one off award of 25 points.
They are difficult terrain, like forests.

This
-increases the importance of foot soldiers
[Avatar]
GreyWulf

Messages: 11,
Joined: Sep 02, 2015,
Offline

[Avatar]
GreyWulf

Messages: 11,
Joined: Sep 02, 2015,
Offline
Being able to make air defences and ground fortifications would make the game less and less about "Attack! Attack!" but that is good.

I can't wait for more tactical choice!
Forum Index » New Feature Request
Powered by JForum 2.1.9 © - 2020-04-14 v124 - UniWar website