[Search] Search   [Recent Topics] Recent   [Hottest Topics] Hottest   [Login] Login
Next Balance Update Discussion April 2016
Forum Index » General Discussion
[Avatar]
Apercent

Messages: 744,
Joined: Sep 08, 2015,
Offline

[Avatar]
Apercent

Messages: 744,
Joined: Sep 08, 2015,
Offline
  LkASr wrote:I made a proposal on how changes would look like:

The current stats and my proposed changes:

http://imgur.com/a/VeQc4


1. I like the idea of having very fast Tanks in the field, that way it can support better despite of the armor shedding

2. I didn't like the idea of Marauders getting their (only) strength nerfed
-
3. Since the Swarmer is pretty squishy, why not give it an ability called Vulture, which basically means that it can attack again after killing a unit, but it can't move

4. I thought of the idea of making Garuda as another Marauder, shedding stats for double actions, making the Garuda a more optimal anti-heli and anti-swarmer, but being weaker to ground units

5. Pinzer would be ruining the balance of PvH fights so as well as ruining the balance if should the Garuda overhaul be agreed with, so I'd suggest putting it back to 2

6. Leviathan's vision is a complete joke, so having 5 is better
-
7. As of the meta of Plasmas, they're too slow on desert-rich maps, why not buff its mobility a bit, but at a cost of power vs aerials

8. I'd like Speeders to be more annoying so, how about buffing their move after attack mobility by 2

9. Eclipses are really devastating against aerials, which can really be a problem sometimes, why not nerf it a bit, since it can shoot up to 2 tiles away

10. Walker can only attack or move in a single turn and it can get to a lot of trouble when anything gets too close to it when there could be obstacles that can put a death sentence to it, add its mobility by 1.

11. Hydronauts would really dominate in 1on1 sea battles because of its vision, costing other races a lot of credits to shut it down, nerfing it by 1 would equate the outcome, I mean, a Hydronaut shouldn't be fighting by itself and should be in a small group.
-

12. I thought of the idea of making unique terrain advantages to the infantries, Marines would be advantageous in the mountains, Underlings would be advantageous in forests, Mechas would be advantageous in bases and also, I'd want their penalties be reduced a bit, just like the advantages above, Marines suffer less in deserts, Underlings suffer less in swamps, and Mechas suffer less offensively in deserts and defensively in swamps.


My thoughts: too much change. It will effect the unit structures too much. I'm not saying their bad ideas, but they more so belong in new races like the hilangi.
.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at Apr 09, 2016 13:52

[Avatar]
Apercent

Messages: 744,
Joined: Sep 08, 2015,
Offline

[Avatar]
Apercent

Messages: 744,
Joined: Sep 08, 2015,
Offline
Um OK so the leviathan vision thing does not sound good. I'd rather give the battleships a vision advantage. A horde unit doesn't really need vision.

Walkers are fast enough as it is.

I'm not sure how the mecha thing would help but it sounds fun

I like maruader speed were it is. In fact, I think it should get 9 g.l again. Play on rockymaps to see how useless the maruader has became.

Actually I love vulture. It works especially well for units like the swarmer.

I think pinzer air is fine. Perhaps the garuda should get more g.h like that other player said

Plasmas are fine. They don't need more antiair (Titans already have eclipse ) and it doesn't need to be faster (if it was, it'd be harder to spam speeders on t v t).

Idk. If eclipses were nerfed to 8 or 9 air and costed only 350 I'd be down with that. For now, I just wish it wasn't so easy to kill air with eclipse

I'd just love having a more annoying speeder too. I'm thinking that +2 after attack would be nice. But I'm not sure how this would effect t v k and t v t.

I think the tank and garuda ideas classify as "too much". And probably the mecha idea too. I think the mecha idea would be cool because it adds uniqueness. But perhaps not necessary
[Avatar]
StarryBlink

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

[Avatar]
StarryBlink

Messages: 184,
Joined: Jan 04, 2012,
Offline
In general the game become much more balance after waves of balance adjustment this year.
Thanks a lot. Now we can hope this game to reach the absolute balance in the near future.

Here's my opinions for further refining.

Kharl vs Sap is still a problem.
In my random match-up with players rating around 2300s like me, the one who pick Sap is almost always win.

Suggested solution :
+1 or +2 swarmer's ground-light attack.

After the February swarmer nerf it become a bit too weak.
Keep in mind that it was overpowered unit before.
Increase its infantry attack will make them deal better against marines and slightly-overpowered mecha.
While it still weak against ground-heavy and aerials.



Sap vs Titan is still slightly favor for titan on most map.
But much better than before.

Suggested solution :
+1 engineer's defense or mobility.

We know engineer is undoubtedly the weakest support unit today.
Then buff it a little will enable it to stand par with assim & infector.
Also this doesn't affect battle sap vs kharl at all.



Titan special problem.

After mecha buff and jeep & swarmer nerf, now titan is strong against both sap & kharl.
But it still become very weak in map with a lot of forest & mountains.
In map like that it can't fight neither kharl nor sap unless the titan player has very higher skill.

Suggested solution : Adjusting eclipse to make it a more all-around unit.

My eclipse's stat adjustment are :
+2 its mobility ( from 10 to 12 )
+1 its ground-heavy attack ( from 4 to 5)
and -2 aerial attack ( from 12 to 10).

This should transform eclipse from a anti-air specialist to a mobile & good all-around unit.
It still strong against aerial but not unbeatable.
[Avatar]
simsverd

Messages: 921,
Joined: Dec 02, 2010,
Location: Bergen, Norway
Offline

[Avatar]
simsverd

Messages: 921,
Joined: Dec 02, 2010,
Location: Bergen, Norway
Offline
@Kroeger: I think discussions about evolving units would be ok for all to discuss... but detailed balance adjustments require more skill/experience.
Perhaps set a limit to who should post (recomendation) at 2000+ ? (no offence meant to some of the posters, but i think the thread is is somewhat cluttered with comments that dont add sufficent usable input)

I think balance is pretty good now, but i agree that Sap still has a little edge on Khral.
I suggest swarmer +1/+2 GL

Moderator of gamechat and forum. Tourney admin.

Send me a PM here or invite me to a game if you want to ask me something, suggest a map for tourney or just wanna play a game
[Email]
[Avatar]
Apercent

Messages: 744,
Joined: Sep 08, 2015,
Offline

[Avatar]
Apercent

Messages: 744,
Joined: Sep 08, 2015,
Offline
Not to be problematic (I know I can be) but can't we put a time limit on instead? Like perhaps, for uniwarriors who've been on for six months or 3 months or something? I feel like it takes time more so to understand this game than scores.

Or perhaps that's just me trying to stay in the argument.
[Avatar]
simsverd

Messages: 921,
Joined: Dec 02, 2010,
Location: Bergen, Norway
Offline

[Avatar]
simsverd

Messages: 921,
Joined: Dec 02, 2010,
Location: Bergen, Norway
Offline
  Apercent wrote:Not to be problematic (I know I can be) but can't we put a time limit on instead? Like perhaps, for uniwarriors who've been on for six months or 3 months or something? I feel like it takes time more so to understand this game than scores.

Or perhaps that's just me trying to stay in the argument.

you are making my point...
[Email]
[Avatar]
LkASr

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

[Avatar]
LkASr

Messages: 752,
Joined: Sep 24, 2015,
Offline
have you seen my suggested balancing sheet yet, sims? It's in the very end of the 1st page

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
[Avatar]
Duaneski

Messages: 1021,
Joined: Nov 27, 2015,
Offline

[Avatar]
Duaneski

Messages: 1021,
Joined: Nov 27, 2015,
Offline
  simsverd wrote:@Kroeger: I think discussions about evolving units would be ok for all to discuss... but detailed balance adjustments require more skill/experience.
Perhaps set a limit to who should post (recomendation) at 2000+ ? (no offence meant to some of the posters, but i think the thread is is somewhat cluttered with comments that dont add sufficent usable input)

I think balance is pretty good now, but i agree that Sap still has a little edge on Khral.
I suggest swarmer +1/+2 GL


Sims, I see what you're saying but we have 2 other, IMO bigger problems:

1) no one is giving input here (other than the same 3-5 forum goers. Who happen to be <2000 ?)

I tried to post in chat on a couple occasions. No interest. I don't get it. :p

2) the people who post here don't follow what Kroeger is asking for. Personally I think that's the problem versus the scores of the ppl posting. I think ppl could have insight at Lower scores but they don't seem to understand that this balancing is for SMALL adjustments to unit stats to create balance versus a BIG change to how the game works. Additionally, few if any people posting here are citing high level games as Kroeger has requested.

Sooooo... I dunno. Maybe just start executing people who don't follow 2). Not sure how to drive up numbers of people interested. No clue

But I agree with you on the +1/+2 swarmer as detailed in my previous post....

:love
[Avatar]
simsverd

Messages: 921,
Joined: Dec 02, 2010,
Location: Bergen, Norway
Offline

[Avatar]
simsverd

Messages: 921,
Joined: Dec 02, 2010,
Location: Bergen, Norway
Offline
  LkASr wrote:have you seen my suggested balancing sheet yet, sims? It's in the very end of the 1st page

it was barely readable, and the suggestions seems way off. You must read all the recent history and the logic behind the latest changes. Then you (hopefully) will see that what you are proposing is "out of scope" and in my opinion poor suggestions that are way to big (no offence meant).
Only minor adjustments are needed at this time.

Moderator of gamechat and forum. Tourney admin.

Send me a PM here or invite me to a game if you want to ask me something, suggest a map for tourney or just wanna play a game
[Email]
[Avatar]
simsverd

Messages: 921,
Joined: Dec 02, 2010,
Location: Bergen, Norway
Offline

[Avatar]
simsverd

Messages: 921,
Joined: Dec 02, 2010,
Location: Bergen, Norway
Offline
@Duaneski: There are high level discussions also that dont reach the forums... and sometimes i am tempted to do this as a google docs discussion with all 2000+ players that want to participate
...but since i am not the one in charge i am merely being grumphy here at the forum. Kroeger is organizing the discussions and the devs have the final say.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at Apr 12, 2016 15:21


Moderator of gamechat and forum. Tourney admin.

Send me a PM here or invite me to a game if you want to ask me something, suggest a map for tourney or just wanna play a game
[Email]
Abie

Messages: 98,
Joined: Oct 16, 2015,
Offline

Abie

Messages: 98,
Joined: Oct 16, 2015,
Offline
It is not so easy to use a game as an example. For example my Garuda thoughts where I never use it how can I provide example of a game? I never use the stupid thing.

With regards to K units having abilities, well what can you say? How can you produce a replay of giving a Garuda Or Swarmer a Move after attack?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at Apr 12, 2016 17:09

[Avatar]
Apercent

Messages: 744,
Joined: Sep 08, 2015,
Offline

[Avatar]
Apercent

Messages: 744,
Joined: Sep 08, 2015,
Offline
  simsverd wrote:
  Apercent wrote:Not to be problematic (I know I can be) but can't we put a time limit on instead? Like perhaps, for uniwarriors who've been on for six months or 3 months or something? I feel like it takes time more so to understand this game than scores.

Or perhaps that's just me trying to stay in the argument.

you are making my point...


Well I have been here for six months .
Kroeger

Messages: 26,
Joined: Jun 19, 2015,
Offline

Kroeger

Messages: 26,
Joined: Jun 19, 2015,
Offline
  simsverd wrote:@Duaneski: There are high level discussions also that dont reach the forums... and sometimes i am tempted to do this as a google docs discussion with all 2000+ players that want to participate
...but since i am not the one in charge i am merely being grumphy here at the forum. Kroeger is organizing the discussions and the devs have the final say.


Sims,

Anytime you have an idea, feel free to google chat me on it. In this case, I would love it if you made a google doc and invited whoever you want. (It might be nice if you give me the privileges to invite others as well just in case I think of someone you don't.)

Also, I like the idea of the 2000 point cap. I will set those limits on future threads. I think that will help.



@Apercent: as you continue to master this game, you will find that your score will reflect your understanding. I hope that you will reach 2000 by the next balance discussion.
Kroeger

Messages: 26,
Joined: Jun 19, 2015,
Offline

Kroeger

Messages: 26,
Joined: Jun 19, 2015,
Offline
Thank you everyone for your input. It seems like we all agree that +1 or +2 G.L. would serve the Swarmer well. I will give Xavi my best recommendation on this.

I have a concern I would appreciate being discussed.

With added team play, I am noticing that mecha expansion is in many team maps is unstoppable. Currently, if you are playing team ranked and don't have a titan, I believe you will loose 33% immediately due to maps. Let's brainstorm a solution. The only solution I have heard that I like is to reduce the Mecha's sight while he is disabled. This would dramatically slow down the titans rate of expansion, right? This would also help cut down extra "undo exploration" from the titans. Please discuss pros and cons?
Abie

Messages: 98,
Joined: Oct 16, 2015,
Offline

Abie

Messages: 98,
Joined: Oct 16, 2015,
Offline
  Kroeger wrote:Thank you everyone for your input. It seems like we all agree that +1 or +2 G.L. would serve the Swarmer well. I will give Xavi my best recommendation on this.

I have a concern I would appreciate being discussed.

With added team play, I am noticing that mecha expansion is in many team maps is unstoppable. Currently, if you are playing team ranked and don't have a titan, I believe you will loose 33% immediately due to maps. Let's brainstorm a solution. The only solution I have heard that I like is to reduce the Mecha's sight while he is disabled. This would dramatically slow down the titans rate of expansion, right? This would also help cut down extra "undo exploration" from the titans. Please discuss pros and cons?


I agree with Titan Mecha vision reduction when it teleports and is disabled. It's a fantastic idea! Why didn't I think of that?

Secondly, can we address the Garuda??
Forum Index » General Discussion
Powered by JForum 2.1.9 © - 2020-04-14 v124 - UniWar website