Tank Buster Unit Assessment Request

Recent

Hottest

Forum Index » General Discussion
◄ 1 2 3 4 ► Go Go to page...

Author

Message

Jun 21, 2017 20:07

Subject: Re:Tank Buster Unit Assessment Request

simsverd

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

@WormDog

Here is the post about balance changes : http://forum.uniwar.com/posts/list/2879.page

Passive healing means that the unit would get +1 (or +2) at the start of a turn. It would not not be affected by nearby healers or healing pad (othervise it would be OP)

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

Jun 21, 2017 23:37

Subject: Re:Tank Buster Unit Assessment Request

Duaneski

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

Wormdog-

Sorrry I never did get a chance to spam the rest of the top 50

As for post length.... yeah there's something wonky with that. What you can do is type your post up in a notepad and copy paste it

As for your new recommendations:

- if saps and khral have 9 mobility tanks... and you want to increase the plasma to 7... that doesn't seem adequate for Titans. Unless you intend to give the plasma a defense boost in the range of...3? Lol. Or that +3 repair or something hah. I would be real steamed if the 500 cost tank was the worst.

- MAA on wyrm makes sense from a Balance perspective imho. But from a flavor perspective I feel like this clearly infringes on the battery.....

I would much rather see something I've been begging for on the wyrm:
*bury*

(i will pay 650 for a burying wyrm!)

... otherwise... MAA probably helps to protect it from blasters..

- cluster damage: I thought this was being saved for the upcoming super destructive units? If not, then yeah this could be excellent on the artillery units

Jun 22, 2017 03:06

Subject: Re:Tank Buster Unit Assessment Request

LkASr

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

Duaneski wrote:Wormdog-

Sorrry I never did get a chance to spam the rest of the top 50

As for post length.... yeah there's something wonky with that. What you can do is type your post up in a notepad and copy paste it

I'd rather keep Pinzer at 8 mobility and buff it with something else like defense (+1 mobility for Tank, +1 def for Pinzer, Plasma gets both)
Wyrm's pretty strong, but I guess MAA doesn't sound bad either, but buff Battery in return with something and buff Walker a bit too
SLINGER INTENSIFIES

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

Jun 22, 2017 16:27

Subject: Re:Tank Buster Unit Assessment Request

The Impaler

Messages: 147,
Joined: Jun 07, 2017,
Location: 221B Baker St.
Offline

wormdog i feel your proposed changes take it way too far. multiple buffs to tanks and multiple nerfs to anti tank is kinda crazy. id be careful with nerf stacks. keep in mind that increasing tank defense/speed, passive tank healing, decreasing borfly GH attack and decreasing borfly Air attack are all borfly nerfs, be it direct or indirect. each adjustment needs to be considered before a second adjustment can be added

the proposed wyrm chage of moving after attack is too much for its cost i feel. if that is done, i feel it must be moved to $600. keep in mind that unless it is attacked by infantry, it trades VERY well, unlike the battery and walker who are glass cannons.

re: 3 classes, dont worry about that, it was a throwaway point... i heard discussion earlier about making speeders and marauders a ground medium type, which would allow for better balancing (but would be way too much work to balance and rework every unit...) by adding in armor piercing, they essentially circumvented this issue, so now some units can do more damage to tank classes without demolishing the pseudo medium classes.

i also find buffing eclipse to be a potentially good idea,but again dont let multi buffs stack. reducing antitank GH is a buff to eclipse, so just keep that in mind. my biggest gripe with the eclipse is that borfly trade so well with them, so reducing borfly should help.

I spoke with thetraxis and we both feel the bopper is in a pretty good place (disagreeing with kikoho) but -1 GH could be good. overall we both feel -1 GH for borfly and bopper could be good, and guardian should not be nerfed. I think some tank/long range buffs might be in order but i caution a barrage of buffs and nerfs all at once, it will be hard to know the interplay of each change before it comes into play

spoke more with thetraxis and we both feel buffing tanks can have some negative repercussions. extra defense means they will never really be killed by anything besides tank busters, and extra heal is going to promote turtling. maybe extra movement wouldnt be so bad... im not sure what i hink of that yet.

i sent him this link so he will share his thoughts directly

This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at Jun 22, 2017 19:23

Member of the balance team
Moderator
Highest Score: 2685
Highest Rank: #4
Current Rank: N/A
Highest Championship Ranking: 4th
Highest Tournament Ranking: 4th
Current Record: 131W, 14D, 4L
Winner of Duaneski's mapmaker challenge
Winner of Angkor's 2v2 Grand mapmaking challenge
Winner of Lkasr's 3-Minute Tournament

Jun 25, 2017 04:28

Subject: Re:Tank Buster Unit Assessment Request

StarryBlink

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

simsverd wrote:@WormDog

That's a brilliant idea to increase tanks usefullness !
Sure it require additional coding. But I think it should be a simple one.
Jusy +1hp to all current player's tanks before the player start his turn. Regardless of support unit or heal pad.

It's just the right fix. Increase tanks's endurance in the frontline. While not become too strong against non-blaster units.
Also it's not increase complexity to the users. Since they don't have to do anything. The repair is automatic.

Other options I think it's OK to help tanks are either increasing their mobility or reducing their cost.

Just don't increase tank's defence or increasing their repair rate.
Those things will make tanks become overpowered again.
Then blasters will be the only option left to kill tanks.

About blasters. They're still overpowered now.
And their anti-tank are really too strong.
Now 2 gardian in the forest/mountain can kill 10hp tank. That seem like tanks are made from plastic.
I think we should reduce their % armor piercing against tank.
Since by decrease its % armor piercing you can also make plasma tank high defence become prominence against other tanks again.

And blasters should have some weakness. I think they should be weak against aerial & light infantries.
Their anti-air should be reduced a lot.
They should have no armor piercing against amphibians or infantries.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at Jun 25, 2017 06:07

Jun 25, 2017 17:41

Subject: Re:Tank Buster Unit Assessment Request

Kohtar

Messages: 40,
Joined: Oct 12, 2016,
Offline

I think that for now we should be careful not to overchange things: especially there is a possibilty that newer units screw the balance again. For example, imagine bew units with splash damage. This would increase the tank usefulness (they would be virtually immune to it) while making the anti-tanks more vulnerable. But right now I feel that tanks are actually not that far from being balanced (except plasma I think). Actually I see more tanks than artillery recently. It's been ages since I last saw a battery.

Jul 09, 2017 01:59

Subject: Re:Tank Buster Unit Assessment Request

Cpt Hawaiian

Messages: 199,
Joined: Sep 12, 2010,
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Offline

Main problem with borfly is that all split base map types (where bases are somewhat scattered and there are multiple fronts), titan stand no chance against krhal and it is only a matter of time to be defeated. Borflys are ridiculously cheap and on top of that aerial and can get middle positioning no matter what the terrain, so they can be massed and then they can seige titan bases with no repercussion so titans can't even spawn effective counters. I think the value of all units needs to be considered for the cost. For example, aerial capability is a huge advantage in and of itself. And then ranged attack is HUGE. Giving damage before being able to receive damage is exactly how to overpower your opponent and get their number of fielded units down to less than yours. Borflys are way overpowered for their cheap cost. It would be nice if they were nerfed so that the Khral theme of weak units but overwhelming numbers can work better.

---------------------------------------
MODERATOR has spoken.

Jul 09, 2017 17:35

Subject: Re:Tank Buster Unit Assessment Request

The Impaler

Messages: 147,
Joined: Jun 07, 2017,
Location: 221B Baker St.
Offline

StarryBlink wrote:

About blasters. They're still overpowered now.
And their anti-tank are really too strong.
Now 2 gardian in the forest/mountain can kill 10hp tank. That seem like tanks are made from plastic.
I think we should reduce their % armor piercing against tank.
Since by decrease its % armor piercing you can also make plasma tank high defence become prominence against other tanks again.

Its important to not only consider ideal situations when analyzing. how did they get 2 guardians 2 spaces from your tank? They are worth 700 cumulative, so they SHOULD do better than a single 400 tank. That said, you should be accounting for their agression and punish them with marines accordingly. If you hit each with a marine as a retaliation, thenits a favourable trade for you, not your opponent.

If we just make up situations ideal for the unit you want nerfed, then why not imagine 15 walkers behind a river? They would win for sure! Unfair! I mean this in good fun, I don't mean to be rude.

You need to take into account the power of guardians and prepare accordingly. I never let a guardian hit me without hitting it back. Admittedly the 3 range of boppers and borfly are much more difficult to punish though.

Every unit has strenths and weaknesses, and the only thing we should be considering is
1) units that never see play EVER (situational units are fine)
2) units that consistently obtain more value than their cost. I believe borfly is the only blaster that does that, though the same can be said for marauders and speeders in most cases.

Context guys. Any unit is overpowered in a perfect situation for it.

A new thought just occured to me - perhaps 3 range (instead of 2-3) would suit borfly well. without the borflies armor piercing, how do you expect k to deal with a plasma tank?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at Jul 09, 2017 17:38

Jul 09, 2017 19:33

Subject: Re:Tank Buster Unit Assessment Request

Duaneski

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

The same way we always dealt with plasmas - buried underlings plus a mix of Garuda / pinzer / wyrm

Jul 10, 2017 06:40

Subject: Re:Tank Buster Unit Assessment Request

simsverd

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

Duaneski wrote:The same way we always dealt with plasmas - buried underlings plus a mix of Garuda / pinzer / wyrm

thats the old "meta"...

We will not change borfly so much... but we might nerf it a little in GH or AP vs GH..

We will evaluate this after we see the effect of the new aquatic units (we will not do any balance adjustments before that)

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

Jul 17, 2017 02:42

Subject: Re:Tank Buster Unit Assessment Request

The Impaler

Messages: 147,
Joined: Jun 07, 2017,
Location: 221B Baker St.
Offline

simsverd wrote:

Duaneski wrote:The same way we always dealt with plasmas - buried underlings plus a mix of Garuda / pinzer / wyrm

glad to hear it. as always, glad we have you on the balancing team, Sims.

Jul 18, 2017 19:39

Subject: Re:Tank Buster Unit Assessment Request

butz

Messages: 18,
Joined: Oct 17, 2011,
Offline

simsverd wrote:
We would also have liked "passive healing" for tanks - but that is currently out of scope since it would requre coding (and green light from Xavi)

This is a GREAT idea! And I think this idea alone would 'fix' the Plasma.
+1 heal on movement or attack and +2 heal on a healing turn. Imagine the new strategies to the Plasma and other units this would introduce!

Hope this can happen! Already excited for this one!

ps. I like all your other suggestions as well.

Stief wrote:...the games of only tank and artillery don't need to come back.

This. So much this. It was getting very old and these updates with the new units have been godsend!

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at Jul 18, 2017 19:43

Jul 22, 2017 15:35

Subject: Re:Tank Buster Unit Assessment Request

The Impaler

Messages: 147,
Joined: Jun 07, 2017,
Location: 221B Baker St.
Offline

No one wants the old plasma tank line of defense meta to come back... i think thats only a good idea after the area of effect units come in

Aug 05, 2017 19:50

Subject: Re:Tank Buster Unit Assessment Request

Hawaiian

Messages: 6,
Joined: Aug 05, 2017,
Offline

After playing a lot more, I do like the units as they are. I agree that old tank walls were boring, so I'm happy about tank busters in general. For now, though, until new units are released, plasma tanks are absolutely useless. Two borflys cost less than a ptank, can fly anywhere, have 3 range, move after attack, and can obliterate plasma tanks, making the ptank 100 percent useless. Never build plasma tanks anymore at all. Never build regular tanks much either. Pinzers are still useful despite the antitanks though. Not sure what to be done about tanks generally right now, but I think borfly may need a slight nerf somehow.

Aug 30, 2017 22:45

Subject: Re:Tank Buster Unit Assessment Request

Hawaiian

Messages: 6,
Joined: Aug 05, 2017,
Offline

Okay yet another update haha. Tanks are not useless, but they are extremely situational. Not bad considering where they were before. I extremely rarely buy a tank. Once it's out, the other team builds anti tank, then it's never built again. I understand why the guardian does not heal. Titans are turtlers. If they are going to be able to take out your heavys, in the process that unit should be expended, essentially. That way they can't jump away and heal and make the titan player absolutely invincible. So you get a slightly better exchange because the guardian is 350, whereas the other tanks are 400, 450, and 500. Thus when your guardian dies (or becomes permanently maimed in the process) you still gain a slight credit advantage. I have always liked the idea of expendable units. I like the direction water units are going. Excited to see what submarine units can do. Now the last thing I wish we could do is bring variety to aerial matches. Aerial units are great but are mostly unaffected by terrain, so the game board means almost nothing to them. So khral vs sapien matches can be kind of boring. I think anti-air units would be great, ones countered by ground heavies. The eclipse comes to mind. I wish there was something to make it more useful. Perhaps no cooldown on warp. I don't know. It's just kind of a blah unit. Not useless, but extremely situational. I think it's ok though, considering swarmers were nerfed against GH. So all in all, moving in the right direction with all the units thus far.

I think the next step is something to counter mass speeders/marauders moreso than just heavy units. It could be that heavy units are just buffed against them significantly. Just some thoughts. I think it would be great if all tanks got significant damage bonuses to speeders and marauders.

Forum Index » General Discussion
◄ 1 2 3 4 ► Go Go to page...