Balance Ideas (Unit Changes)

Discussion of all aspects of multiplayer development: unit balancing, map development, server development, and so forth.

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

Post Reply
User avatar
Rigor
Posts: 941
Joined: September 27th, 2007, 1:40 am

Re: Balance Ideas (Unit Changes)

Post by Rigor » January 29th, 2011, 11:12 pm

i wanted to clarify how i meant my proposal:

give cavs 7 mp default, and as a trait they could have what they have anyways, healthy, strong, intelligent, and instead of quick, they would have "scout" giving them +2 mp, thats 9mp, like the default fast cav. how could that help? instead of attacking and being able to decide to go back to the healing village during every turn, they would be more exposed at retreats, unable to heal when coming back to their own forwarded villages because with 18 hp or poison on them they would be easy prey. furthermore, the loys player would be faced with either a strong healthy intelligent cavalry, which could combine 2 factors, so you would have a fast killer, a smart killer, a fast tank, a smart tank, a smart scout, a strong scout...

you could play loys with cavs as scouts, and with scouts as the monsters they are right now. meaning i also think they are awesome for the gold they cost. changing resists wouldnt do any good because during their powerplay the can eat that damage, and still go on without blinking. reducing their mp is an entirely different thing: you would cut off their instant-healing chance right after their raid so that the other player can finally strike after long suffering.


Image
Figure: thats what i think about changes on that matter. Evil Cavs. :mrgreen:

ill provide a game with a full chatlog and hope neki u can use it for ur special channel, i havent heard u talk about me since the TGT! was awesome to watch too, heres the RP...

http://ladder.subversiva.org/download-r ... %3A51%3A13

and here the details

http://ladder.subversiva.org/gamedetail ... %3A51%3A13

User avatar
Sapient
Inactive Developer
Posts: 4453
Joined: November 26th, 2005, 7:41 am
Contact:

Re: Balance Ideas (Unit Changes)

Post by Sapient » January 30th, 2011, 7:43 am

If quick is already the best trait in the game, then scout would be the über-best.
So wouldn't the proposed scout trait increase the random influence of traits to unacceptable levels?

Also, I'm not sure I agree with your argument that this will have less impact on matchups than adjusting for hp or resistance. If you force the Loyalists to use more horsemen then that is potentially a bigger impact on matchups than adjusting for hp or resistance.

Finally, even if we assume that cavs are OP, I don't think the HODOR replay from neki was a really good proof. Trappers attacking mainly from grassland aren't exactly an ironclad strategy. The reason he gave for no thunderers was that they miss too much, and the reason he gave for no guardsmen was that they slow down the game too much. Again, I'm not questioning that cavs are OP but some of the logic seems flawed on that.

The idea of the cavalry being a portable damage sink has always seemed a bit odd to me anyways. People might make more use of HI if you reduce the ability of the cavalry to tank. Of course you still want it to be able to soak up cold damage since the HI can't do that (or maybe some other unit could steal that role).
http://www.wesnoth.org/wiki/User:Sapient... "Looks like your skills saved us again. Uh, well at least, they saved Soarin's apple pie."

Radament
Posts: 136
Joined: January 14th, 2007, 12:50 pm
Location: Germaica

Re: Balance Ideas (Unit Changes)

Post by Radament » January 30th, 2011, 9:43 am

7mp is still more than enough to throw those armored beasts into your face and still retreat faster than the run-of-the-mill fighter.

If anyone knows how to deal with cavs as rebel or knalgan, tell me how.

So if you, the gracious commander of the rebel army, decide to step out of that forest, which the cav has been avoiding nicely, you need 6/8 hits on a quick-int cav with a dextrous archer. You may try slow & chop, but in any case the loy will get medieval on everything standing on grassland the very next turn.

Same for the drunk Great King of the dwarven halls - it takes balls to shuffle thunderers around on 30% against loyalists. Poachers do very good against cav, but thing is, the cav are nowhere around at night, lest you managed to trap one. You can go running after them, but the only thing you get to use will be the breadcutter for 3x2 damage while getting poked to death.

I would propose blade resistance down by 10%, but then again I won't, as it will have to be applied to the horseman as well for KISS reasons, and that will just open up pandora's box. Im not so sure about damage reduction, could be considered, but the most elegant solution would be to increase cost by 1.

User avatar
Rigor
Posts: 941
Joined: September 27th, 2007, 1:40 am

Re: Balance Ideas (Unit Changes)

Post by Rigor » January 30th, 2011, 12:52 pm

Sapient wrote: If quick is already the best trait in the game, then scout would be the über-best.
So wouldn't the proposed scout trait increase the random influence of traits to unacceptable levels?
i am prepared for this argument. no it would not be the case. the cavs are now at this very moment exactely what u suggest would be über-powered. the scout trait would apply only to the cav line so wheres the problem? the random influence would simply nudge the loys strategy towards cavs as fighters or cavs as scouts, thats all. actually the same influence comes from the traits where players decide how to use ulfserkers: the strong and healthy ones are the ghost busters. so this is obviously no problem at all.
Sapient wrote: to use more horsemen
not sure more players would use more horseman because of the scouting abilities if all they have to hope for is a cav with a scout trait, which is 50% i believe.
Sapient wrote: Finally, even if we assume that cavs are OP, I don't think the HODOR replay from neki was a really good proof.
now u have a game with a shovelful of cavalries, i hope u saw my replay. if u understand german u could even read the nice post-game chat i have had considering some of the points above.
Sapient wrote: Again, I'm not questioning that cavs are OP
this is more than i expected! i hope we can find a good solution on that.
Radament wrote:most elegant solution would be to increase cost by 1.
so far we are here at this point of the discussion and i am glad that some of us see it as an elegant solution already. you could rename the cavalries in your head to "warhorses" then it would make sense why they are slower than charging horseman...somehow ...and cavalries are still powerful.

User avatar
Doc Paterson
Drake Cartographer
Posts: 1973
Joined: February 21st, 2005, 9:37 pm
Location: Kazakh
Contact:

Re: Balance Ideas (Unit Changes)

Post by Doc Paterson » January 30th, 2011, 4:10 pm

Rigor wrote: i am prepared for this argument. no it would not be the case. the cavs are now at this very moment exactely what u suggest would be über-powered. the scout trait would apply only to the cav line so wheres the problem?
I'll tell you where the problem is. :)

On many maps, there are castle hexes where player 2 absolutely needs to recruit an 8mp unit to avoid potential village theft. A 50 percent shot at that is not acceptable to me. Now, I could make it so that in all of these situations, the village is only 7mp away, but I doubt people would like that, and I don't think moving villages closer to keeps is a good way to go, in general.

So, you'd be back to the questionable concept of "use horsemen as your village-grabbing scouts." My instinct tells me that that'd be trouble, because again, you'd have several maps where P2 would have to recruit 2 expensive horsemen to avoid potential theft. And I know a lot of you hate the other option (besides moving vills closer to keeps), which is when I put a map on the rack and stretch it. ;)
Rigor wrote:you could rename the cavalries in your head to "warhorses"
http://doc-paterson.deviantart.com/art/ ... 40988&qo=5

http://doc-paterson.deviantart.com/art/ ... 40988&qo=7
I will not tell you my corner / where threads don't get locked because of mostly no reason /
because I don't want your hostile disease / to spread all over the world.
I prefer that corner to remain hidden /
without your noses.
-Nosebane, Sorcerer Supreme

User avatar
pauxlo
Posts: 1046
Joined: September 19th, 2006, 8:54 pm

Re: Balance Ideas (Unit Changes)

Post by pauxlo » January 30th, 2011, 4:29 pm

To all that propose changes now:
- you can make an era as a copy of default era with a modified cavalry, and test it on default maps.
- if you want to be able to test it without your players needing to download anything, you can modify the scenario with a recruit event, which changes every recruited cavalry.

I think some replays will give more base for discussion than any theoretical arguments.

User avatar
Cackfiend
Posts: 436
Joined: January 28th, 2007, 7:36 am
Location: Florida, USA
Contact:

Re: Balance Ideas (Unit Changes)

Post by Cackfiend » January 31st, 2011, 12:32 am

Radament wrote:7mp is still more than enough to throw those armored beasts into your face and still retreat faster than the run-of-the-mill fighter.

If anyone knows how to deal with cavs as rebel or knalgan, tell me how.

So if you, the gracious commander of the rebel army, decide to step out of that forest, which the cav has been avoiding nicely, you need 6/8 hits on a quick-int cav with a dextrous archer. You may try slow & chop, but in any case the loy will get medieval on everything standing on grassland the very next turn.

Same for the drunk Great King of the dwarven halls - it takes balls to shuffle thunderers around on 30% against loyalists. Poachers do very good against cav, but thing is, the cav are nowhere around at night, lest you managed to trap one. You can go running after them, but the only thing you get to use will be the breadcutter for 3x2 damage while getting poked to death.

I would propose blade resistance down by 10%, but then again I won't, as it will have to be applied to the horseman as well for KISS reasons, and that will just open up pandora's box. Im not so sure about damage reduction, could be considered, but the most elegant solution would be to increase cost by 1.

this is pretty funny to me honestly, because everyone knows Orcs are the only real main problem when it comes to cavs.

reducing cavs blade/blunt resists by 10% to reflect the same resist as a horsemen (which means nothing needs to be done to horsemen) would give orcs a much easier time with cavs

either that or increase orc archers from 5-3 pierce to 6-3... the unit is barely ever used as is
"There's no love in fear." - Maynard James Keenan

I'm the guy who's responsible for 40% Gliders in all hexes... I can now die a happy man. =D

silent
Posts: 244
Joined: February 20th, 2009, 5:53 am

Re: Balance Ideas (Unit Changes)

Post by silent » January 31st, 2011, 5:15 am

Cackfiend wrote: either that or increase orc archers from 5-3 pierce to 6-3... the unit is barely ever used as is
I'd also like to see this. The orc archer is really pathetic and could do with a buff. The only reason for buying it is against rebels when they buy a wose, and even then it's a terrible waste if you can't hit the wose. Even against undead it's a terrible unit, because strong troll whelps do a much better job.

Even though seeing both it's ranged attacks at 6-3 would never happen, as much as I'd like to see it happen, I'd like to at least see the orc archer with 6-3 pierce and 8-2 fire.

Radament
Posts: 136
Joined: January 14th, 2007, 12:50 pm
Location: Germaica

Re: Balance Ideas (Unit Changes)

Post by Radament » January 31st, 2011, 9:00 am

Cackfiend wrote:

this is pretty funny to me honestly, because everyone knows Orcs are the only real main problem when it comes to cavs.

reducing cavs blade/blunt resists by 10% to reflect the same resist as a horsemen (which means nothing needs to be done to horsemen) would give orcs a much easier time with cavs

either that or increase orc archers from 5-3 pierce to 6-3... the unit is barely ever used as is

Glad you find it funny and thanks for the royal feedback. I was beginning to loathe myself for posting something other than what everyone knows.

But yeah, horsemen indeed only have 20% blade and 30% impact, which I never noticed. Maybe the cav could use a resistance nerf after all. Thing is, does that change a lot?

@silent, a single orc archer with 8 fire would kill a ghost at night.

User avatar
HODOR
Hodor
Posts: 8
Joined: February 10th, 2007, 2:38 pm
Location: Hodor
Contact:

Re: Balance Ideas (Unit Changes)

Post by HODOR » January 31st, 2011, 2:38 pm

Cackfiend wrote:After some extensive play and discussion with other high level ladder players I would like to submit these unit balance ideas for consideration in future patches.

It is suppose to be a scout unit with melee capability but is actually a Melee unit with scouting capability. Strong cavs at day do a devastating 9-3 dmg

and are far too effective especially against Orcs and Dwarves.
Cackfiend wrote:this is pretty funny to me honestly, because everyone knows Orcs are the only real main problem when it comes to cavs.
Hodor?

The Black Sword
Posts: 373
Joined: October 13th, 2008, 4:35 pm

Re: Balance Ideas (Unit Changes)

Post by The Black Sword » January 31st, 2011, 3:05 pm

Hey guys,
I think cavs are a bit too good in other matchups than just orc. Other factions tend to have good counters to them but 1.the cavs usually still win at day and can run away at night and 2.often you have to overcompensate with these counters which weaken you against other loy units(though this does make for a fun dynamic).

I'd be in favour of changing the mp to 7(which btw I suggested on page 1 :P ). There are 2 problems with this change, the initial village grabbing and the loyalist scouting abilities.
The village grabbing is worth somewhere between 0-6 gold once at the start of the game without map changes. I don't think this is too excessive. Village stealing is a more important worry but any village steal will occur at daytime with a weak scout unit. I don't think loyalists should have much trouble regaining the village and maybe even making a kill.

As far as the scouting goes, I really don't believe that seeing 1 hex less will make too much of a difference, especially when there are also horseman and the possibility of quick. It might make it easier to trick people with horsemen and gryphs waiting in the back but horsemen means a mirror and loys already have an advantage vs dwarves IMO. Any other real damage makers should be pretty easy to see and once again I'd stress that its only 1mp less sight range.

Having said all that, perhaps +1g would be a lot simpler and elegant solution. :wink:

I agree with pauxlo that replays with the change would be good and I might try to add a recruit event to some maps later this week if I have time.

Kolbur
Posts: 122
Joined: April 29th, 2009, 9:33 am

Re: Balance Ideas (Unit Changes)

Post by Kolbur » January 31st, 2011, 6:11 pm

The Black Sword wrote:Hey guys,
I think cavs are a bit too good in other matchups than just orc. Other factions tend to have good counters to them but 1.the cavs usually still win at day and can run away at night and 2.often you have to overcompensate with these counters which weaken you against other loy units(though this does make for a fun dynamic).

I'd be in favour of changing the mp to 7(which btw I suggested on page 1 :P ). There are 2 problems with this change, the initial village grabbing and the loyalist scouting abilities.
The village grabbing is worth somewhere between 0-6 gold once at the start of the game without map changes. I don't think this is too excessive. Village stealing is a more important worry but any village steal will occur at daytime with a weak scout unit. I don't think loyalists should have much trouble regaining the village and maybe even making a kill.

As far as the scouting goes, I really don't believe that seeing 1 hex less will make too much of a difference, especially when there are also horseman and the possibility of quick. It might make it easier to trick people with horsemen and gryphs waiting in the back but horsemen means a mirror and loys already have an advantage vs dwarves IMO. Any other real damage makers should be pretty easy to see and once again I'd stress that its only 1mp less sight range.

Having said all that, perhaps +1g would be a lot simpler and elegant solution. :wink:

I agree with pauxlo that replays with the change would be good and I might try to add a recruit event to some maps later this week if I have time.
With only 7 mp there will be situations where you can only advance 3 hexes for scouting if you need to go back the same distance again, so there the scouting would actually be 2 hexes worse. 2 hexes are a lot already imo. Also due to the bad movement type, reducing cav mp to 7 may reduce the scouting range by 2 hexes around forests, hills, caves or mushrooms. All in all it could reduce the scouting range under certain circumstances by 3 hexes. :P

User avatar
IPS
Posts: 878
Joined: December 6th, 2009, 6:36 pm
Location: Venezuela

Re: Balance Ideas (Unit Changes)

Post by IPS » January 31st, 2011, 10:14 pm

Cackfiend wrote:After some extensive play and discussion with other high level ladder players I would like to submit these unit balance ideas for consideration in future patches.

Cavalry: Reduce resistance from 40% blud and 30% blade to Horsemen levels of 30% blud and 20% blade.

Reason: Considered to be one of the most unbalanced units in the game currently, Cavalry are too effective as a main attack unit. It is suppose to be a scout unit with melee capability but is actually a Melee unit with scouting capability. Strong cavs at day do a devastating 9-3 dmg and are far too effective especially against Orcs and Dwarves. I have also heard the ideas to lower their hps by 2 or so... either change would be good for the unit IMO.



Dwarves: Make all dwarf units (not outlaws or gryphons) only receive half damage from poison OR bring back the ability from healthy to reduce poison damage to half.

Reason: Orc spamming assassins vs Dwarves is currently OP when played at a high level. Healthy was recently changed to ALWAYS rest heal effectively making it a mini regeneration (10 hps in a village) which is great but for some reason it was thought that its old property of making poison only do half damage was unbalancing with the new buff. I think we have play-tested this long enough to conclude that this is not the case. The healthy trait is still the main reason I personally hate the dwarf faction since it lowers the potential to have Quick dwarf units. I played vs a dwarf the other night and he recruited all NINE dwarf units that were Healthy... it was quite sad.

EDIT:
I forgot to mention the Trapper leader for dwarves needs to be removed from the random pool of leaders for the dwarf faction. It is by far the worst leader that someone going Random can get.


I have other ideas too like lowering loyalist Spearman to 6-3 damage but I will keep that argument for another day :twisted:

Please discuss.

About calvaries

I'm not right with the suggerence about calvary nerfing. Maybe the calvary has awesome ressistances (40% to impact, 30% to blade, 20% to cold and arcane but -20% to pierce) but the calvary of all the scouting units is the one with worse movement cost (needs 3 squares to move in a forest square, can't move in mountains, 4 movement needed to move in mushrooms, cave and shallow water, but with an interesting adventage in the frozen of 2 movement points). If you compare it next to the elvish scout you can look the calvary deals 6-3 blade mele (18 dammage), the elvish scout deals 4-3 mele (12 dammage) and 6-2 ranged (12 dammage) you can see here the elvish scout has better offensive than the calvary (not in an atack, but 2 atack distances with 12 dammage is good) And the elvish scout can pick if to use a 2 medium ranged power strikes or 3 weak mele strikes. Also the adventage of having the offensive of the 2 distances very well balanced in the elvish scout makes it a good complementation from elvish fighters, archers, etc. You can see too the elvish scout has better movement costs than the calvary ... 1 in forest instead 3 ; it can move in the mountain, 3 movement required in water instead 4 from calvary ; 2 movement required to move in mushrooms instead 4 from calvaries ; the elvish scout has an aditional movement ... this mixed with better movement costs it does compense the ressistances from the loyalist calvary.

If you compare the calvary with the glidder/gryphon it's obvius what the flying adventage from the both units it's really useful. The gryphon rider deals 13-2 (26 of dammage) and also has 50% def everywhere (exept in caves and mushrooms) if you include the defense in the ressistances of the gryphon rider (changing that 50% def to 40% but with ressitance's upgarade) the gryphon rider must have 20% to fire, cold, blade and pierce (exept if magical), 36% res to arcane (4/5 of 80 is 64, so the difference is 16% of less dammage ; if no magical) and also 4% res to impact (1/5 of 120 is 24, 120% - 24% = 96% ; exept if magical) all this in every terrain, then with the changes the gryphon must have better ressistances than the loyalist calvary, better offensive, it have fly ... all this for +7 gold coins, so a calvary must cost only the 70% of gold of a gryphon rider.

With the glidder you can also do a stuff like that, but sure the glidder must be weaker, but the glider has 3-3 marskman in it's ranged what is useful againist undeads and ouwtlaws ... and 6-2 (2/3 of the mele offensive of the calvary ... againist a calvary it must deal 4-2 due the 40% res to impact from the calvary but it must be foolish to use the kick atack of the glidder in a calvary when the ranged deals 1 more dammage ... the glidder can fly, that adventage is very important to include like in the gryphon, it has 40% almost everywhere but enough to be anoying to kill by spearmen if the drake is sorrounded by water.


Those are the reassons why the calvary is that ressistant, it does not fly, no have ranged, no have marskman. And the calvary dies easly againist bowmen/spearmen/thunderers/goblings all the factions has pierce and this is one of the most common elements of atack in default era.


About knalgans and poison


If you hate that much the orcish assasins, why do not have some ulfsekers to kill them? an ulfseker with some luck can kill atleast 2 assasins. The ulfseker unit was made mainly to kill those anoying orcish assasins surely, to kill the dark adept without taking dammage, to kill every ranged unit with bad mele and for a high chance kill (this is just to compense the no magic atacks from this faction). Always when an assasin poisons you it it's exposed to be atacked by an ulfseker or for any other unit, you can explode this horrible disadventage with ulfsekers or with mages (Having poisoned units does not matter me, I know how to cure my units early of the poison and also a mage with 1 hp can be useful to atack orcish grunts)
Creator of: Deathmatch new in 1.12 server.
Developer of: Empires in 1.12 server.

silent
Posts: 244
Joined: February 20th, 2009, 5:53 am

Re: Balance Ideas (Unit Changes)

Post by silent » January 31st, 2011, 11:35 pm

Radament wrote:@silent, a single orc archer with 8 fire would kill a ghost at night.
Asides from the fact that's only a 25% chance to happen, what was your point? Northerners need help in this matchup. And I wouldn't even bother with a ghost when I could just blast my way through the horde with adepts and skele's, or simply corpse spam until I have a ridiculous amount of units.

User avatar
Cackfiend
Posts: 436
Joined: January 28th, 2007, 7:36 am
Location: Florida, USA
Contact:

Re: Balance Ideas (Unit Changes)

Post by Cackfiend » February 1st, 2011, 1:16 am

IPS wrote:

About calvaries

test

im not sure comparing the cav to other scouting units is the best idea here. the problem is its an extremely mobile tank unit and its disadvantages of crappy movetype thru certain hexes is mostly a non factor on most maps
"There's no love in fear." - Maynard James Keenan

I'm the guy who's responsible for 40% Gliders in all hexes... I can now die a happy man. =D

Post Reply