Balance changes for 1.18

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

Moderator: Forum Moderators

User avatar
Hejnewar
Posts: 250
Joined: September 17th, 2016, 11:01 am

Balance changes for 1.18

Post by Hejnewar »

Drakes:
Spoiler:
Dunefolk:
Spoiler:
Knalga:
Spoiler:
Loyalists:
Spoiler:
Northerners:
Spoiler:
Rebels:
Spoiler:
Undead:
Spoiler:
As always, I'm only human and oversights are probably more than likely, honest mistakes probably not so much but still can happen and I do realize that a lot of the stuff might seem weird but well I'm trying to overhaul the whole xp balance, as well as high level gold costs so I guess that's pretty natural.
Last edited by Hejnewar on April 23rd, 2023, 4:04 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Lord-Knightmare
Discord Moderator
Posts: 2383
Joined: May 24th, 2010, 5:26 pm
Location: Somewhere in the depths of Irdya, gathering my army to eventually destroy the known world.
Contact:

Re: Balance changes for 1.18

Post by Lord-Knightmare »

All these changes seem agreeable.
Especially nice to see the Undead ghoul-line getting some attention from the devs finally.

Keep up the good work!
Creator of "War of Legends"
Creator of the Isle of Mists survival scenario.
Maintainer of Forward They Cried
User:Knyghtmare | My Medium
MisterEcho
Posts: 11
Joined: February 7th, 2022, 2:36 pm

Re: Balance changes for 1.18

Post by MisterEcho »

That moment when a system is working yet you try to change it by making it worse. Wesnoth has been on a decline sadly in that regard. I am pretty sure the community of Wesnoth would agree with me a lot of the changes described here are ridiculous and noone would be okay with them. Changing resistances of cavalrymen? What happening with HI? Prices of gryphon and charger? I thought modders job was to improve Wesnoth, not damage it. Take into consideration that your changes offers are outrageous and would highly disbalance Wesnoth. :| :hmm:
User avatar
egallager
Posts: 590
Joined: November 19th, 2020, 7:27 pm
Location: Concord, New Hampshire
Contact:

Re: Balance changes for 1.18

Post by egallager »

I'm having a hard time telling whether a change is a buff or a nerf just by looking at any given line (my mind is too lazy to do the math every single time); could you maybe add some sort of visual indicator to the post to make it easier? e.g. text coloration or something...
User avatar
Krogen
Posts: 310
Joined: January 1st, 2013, 3:43 pm

Re: Balance changes for 1.18

Post by Krogen »

Hejnewar wrote: April 17th, 2023, 4:27 pm Drakes:
Changes:
Level 1:
Fighter - xp changed from 42 to 41.
Clasher - xp changed from 43 to 41.
Glider - xp changed from 35 to 39.

Level 2:
Warrior - xp changed from 70 to 81, cost changed from 32 to 31.
Arbiter - hp changed from 62 to 63, xp changed from 105 to 81.
Thrasher - xp changed from 95 to 77.
Flare - xp changed from 80 to 86.
Fire - xp changed from 80 to 84.
Sky - xp changed from 80 to 76, cost changed from 28 to 32.
Ambusher - hp changed from 36 to 38, ranged attack strikes changed from 2 to 3, xp changed from 55 to 59 cost changed from 24 to 22.
Soothsayer - melee attack strikes changed from 2 to 3, mp changed from 6 to 7, cost changed from 25 to 28.

Level 3:
Blademaster - cost changed from 47 to 62.
Warden - cost changed from 46 to 62.
Enforcer - cost changed from 44 to 58.
Flameheart - cost changed from 51 to 66.
Inferno - cost changed from 51 to 64.
Hurricane - cost changed from 43 to 59.
Flanker - hp changed from 47 to 50, mp changed from 7 to 8, cost changed from 46 to 44.
I like the xp changes to the clasher line, it always felt a little too difficult to level up. Now glider is another story, right now they level up relatively fast with int against UD, i'd say its a nerf to drakes in that particular matchup thats uncalled for.
There are some strike changes on saurians, but it doesnt say how it affects their damage per strikes, or if it even does. That could influence my opinion on those changes.
I like that units at higher levels come closer in terms of required xp. Clasher line always felt way too difficult to level up compared to fighters while in powerlevel there is not that much of a difference. Xp requirements at lvl 2 and above really weren't done too well in most factions, its good they get some attention.
Hejnewar wrote: April 17th, 2023, 4:27 pm
Dunefolk:
Level 1:
Burner - hp changed from 34 to 35, xp changed from 40 to 36.
Herbalist - cost changed from 14 to 13, xp changed for 39 to 36.
Rider - hp changed from 34 to 33, xp changed from 47 to 49.
Rover - hp changed from 32 to 33, xp changed from 43 to 40.
Soldier - cost changed from 18 to 17, xp changed from 43 to 39.
Skirmisher - xp changed from 34 to 36.

Level 2:
Explorer - xp changed from 80 to 73.
Swordsman - cost changed from 30 to 28, xp changed from 75 to 68.
Capitan - cost changed from 30 to 29, xp changed from 75 to 74.
Spearguard - cost changed from 30 to 29, xp changed from 75 to 74.
Scorcher - ranged damage changed from 9 to 10, cost changed from 25 to 23, xp changed from 70 to 60,
Raider - cost changed from34 to 35, xp changed from 70 to 77.
Swiftrider - xp changed from 65 to 62.
Sunderer - xp changed from 76 to 85.
Apothecary - cost changed from 27 to 23, xp changed from 65 to 50.
Falconeer - hp changed from 38 to 39, cost changed from 27 to 28, xp changed from 78 to 68.
Strider - hp changed from 39 to 42, cost changed from 27 to 28, xp changed from 74 to 61.
Ophidian - hp changed from43 to 44, cost changed from 22 to 24, xp changed from 76 to 62.
Ringcaster - hp changed from 40 to 41, cost changed from22 to 24, ranged damage changed from 7 to 8, xp changed from 71 to 62.

Level 3:
Blademaster - hp changed from 69 to 76.
Spearmaster - hp changed from 67 to 68.
Cataphract - mace melee attack damage changed from 14 to 15, lance damage changed from13 to 14, cost changed from 62 to 65.
I really haven't played this one for years, can't form an educated opinion.
Hejnewar wrote: April 17th, 2023, 4:27 pm
Knalga:
Level 1:
Fighter - xp changed from 41 to 45.
Thunderer - xp changed from 40 to 35.
Guardsman - ranged damage increased from 5 to 6, xp changed from 47 to 35.
Footpad - xp changed from 36 to 35.
Thief - xp changed from 28 to 29.
Poacher - xp changed from 29 to 28.
Gryphon Rider - cost changed from 24 to 23, xp changed from 38 to 46.

Level 2:
Steelclad - xp changed from 74 to 88.
Thunderguard - cost changed from 27 to 24, xp changed from 95 to 65.
Stalwart - hp changed from54 to 59, ranged damage changed from 8 to 9, xp changed from 85 to 78.
Outlaw - cost changed from 26 to 24, mp changed from 7 to 8, xp changed from 77 to 71.
Rogue - xp changed from 70 to 77.
Trapper - hp changed from 45 to 49, melee damage changed from 4 to 5, xp changed from 65 to 73.
Gryphon Master - cost changed from 38 to 40.

Level 3:
Lord - cost changed from 50 to 69.
Sentinel - cost changed from 44 to 63.
Dragonguard - cost changed from 46 to 61.
Fugitive - mp changed from 7 to 8, cost changed from 53 to 55.
Huntsman - cost changed from 50 to 43.
Ranger - cost changed from 52 to 43.
Great to see my Ladder Era change on Guardsman implemented. I'm not too sure about xp changes on lvl1s though, especially thunderer, will be very easy to level up with intelligent. Changing xp on core units at this level can have unexpected consequences. Thunderguard got hp buff recently, and now its that much easier to achieve.
Stalwart already got buffed, i thought it was strong enough, now plus hp, pls ranged dmg (last buff was melee) and easier lvl3, its too much.
Trapper buff also looks insanely good, i dont think both hp and dmg would be necessary, one or the other. Its a very easy lvl up to have.
And again, im all for bringing closer unreasonably high xp requirements and crazy low reqs on core units. So i agree/am fine with all those.
Hejnewar wrote: April 17th, 2023, 4:27 pm Loyalists:
Level 1:
HI - left in the void.
Cavalryman - blade resistance changed from 30% to 20%, xp changed from 40 to 44.
Bowman - xp changed from 39 to 30.
Fencer - xp changed from 42 to 38.
Horseman - cost changed from 23 to 24, xp changed from 44 to 54.
Merman - xp changed from 36 to 34.
Mage - xp changed from54 to 42.

Level 2:
Javelineer - ranged damage increased from 11 to 13, cost changed from 25 to 24.
Pikeman - cost changed from 25 to 24, xp changed from 65 to 69.
Swordsman - xp changed from 60 to 80.
Knight - cost changed from 38 to 56, but I'm inclined to leave it at 50 to the fun of AoH WC players lol, xp changed from 120 to 100.
Lancer - cost changed from 44 to 53.
Shock Trooper - cost changed from 35 to 28, xp changed from 110 to 65.
Red mage - cost changed from 38 to 35, xp changed from 100 to 83.
White mage - cost changed from 38 to 31, xp changed from 136 to 75.
Dragoon - cost changed from 28 to 29, xp changed from 95 to 80.
Longbowman - cost changed from 26 to 23, xp changed from 68 to 65.
Duelist - xp changed from 90 to 70.
Merman Warrior - cost changed from 26 to 24, xp changed from 80 to 60.
Lieutenant - cost changed from 34 to 31.

Level 3:
Halberdier - cost changed from 44 to 52.
Royal Guard - cost changed from 44 to 52
GK - lance damage changed from 17 to 19, cost changed from 58 to 80.
Paladin - hp changed from 65 to 72, lance damage changed from 15 to 16, melee damage changed from 8 to 9, cost changed from 58 to 77.
Iron Mauler cost changed from 50 to 49.
Archmage - cost changed from 59 to 63 xp changed from 220 to 128.
Mage of Light - cost changed from 60 to 59.
Cavalier - cost changed from 52 to 62.
Master Bowman - cost changed from 46 to 50.
Master at Arms - cost changed from 44 to 54.
Hoplite - cost changed from 43 to 45.
Triton - cost changed from 43 to 46.
General - cost changed from 54 to 62, xp changed from 180 to 100.
HI - lol idc.
Cav change, im actually fine with it. It was nerfed in LE and its still strong enough, if i could have it for 17 gold still with a little less blade res, i'd choose that over 18 gold current one. Its not that significant vs Drakes and UD, and out of the other 3 matchups i'd say the only one where default loyalist shouldnt take a nerf is with Rebels. With all the insane leaders they can get...
Intelligent bowman becomes a two-kill level up, int mage a three-kill. Those are kind of insane. Longbowman definitely shouldnt be accessible after two kills, its a tank and a heavy hitter at the same time.
Javelineer buff seems kind of insane, i think dmg at 12 would be enough.
The rest are whatever.

To be continued...
"A lion doesn't concern himself with the opinions of the sheep." - Tywin Lannister
User avatar
IPS
Posts: 1304
Joined: December 6th, 2009, 6:36 pm
Location: Venezuela

Re: Balance changes for 1.18

Post by IPS »

I'm big fan of lv3 to lv4 XP adjustments, rarely these units were really worth for something because of the huge XP demand. Also all loy secondary units (fencer and HI's) aren't a waste of XP's anymore which looks healthy. Right with all undead lv2 changes.

Still, there are things that are odd to me (Personally), like white mage's cost 31g and XP to just 75 if it's literally the strongest healer in all default era, also illuminates aura unlike of leadership can of work as well on units of same level to help them to +25% dmg's. 136 XP to lv3 is just insane, but either think that 75 is bit too low.

Lv3 drakes pricing in my head would be around 55's gold and used to be underpriced, I'm neutral on this :hmm:

still it looks weird to me the high costs in lv2 knights at costing twice as much as two lv2 swordsmen :hmm: while only featuring more movement, few more HP's and the lance attack, likely that you need to archieve 1 kill to make it cost efficient, but the lots of HP you're missing by spending such expensive lv2 is doubtful worth it unless playing with like 600g's and babysitting it to avoid it dying (defeat by Ruin if playing 150g or lower and considering these units, but should be a good idea focusing the mount of starting gold you want to balance AoH).

And lv1 loy calvarymen nerf, they're already a not very good unit with the previous nerf of -4 HP and the lv2 is quite weak 6-4 melee ... maybe with some more health lv2 dragoon could work well these changes for 1.18's .

Also HP in lv3 fighters used to be bit underpriced, but Draug now costing 70g is quite too much as it will die quick considering it's not that hard to exploit its weaknesses. As well mages are now in a much better meta at having more similar cost to lv3 fighters.

Also personally I don't think marksman is worth costing only 1g less than red mage, fire is a much better attack type because it complements much better to more cost efficient fighters, as well marksman will not likely work well in defense.

But in resume, I see a lot of necessary and healthy changes in a tons of underpowered Lv2 XP management, while some others are really odd and needs to be reviewed more closely again.
Creator of: Deathmatch new in 1.12 server.
Co-creator of: Era of Magic in 1.16 server
Developer of: Empires in 1.12 server, Ageless Era in 1.10 to 1.16 servers (but innactive recently)
Try My winning Orocia Guide
User avatar
ThroneGame
Posts: 31
Joined: June 16th, 2021, 6:11 pm

Re: Balance changes for 1.18

Post by ThroneGame »

Seems nice overall
What's the point of changing cost for lvl3 units though if they are unaccessible for recruitment?
Co-developer of the Great Steppe Era (GSE): viewtopic.php?t=53932
My deviantart account: https://www.deviantart.com/coredove
User avatar
Spannerbag
Posts: 579
Joined: December 18th, 2016, 6:14 pm
Location: Yes

Re: Balance changes for 1.18

Post by Spannerbag »

Hejnewar wrote: April 17th, 2023, 4:27 pm ...
As always, I'm only human and oversights are probably more than likely, honest mistakes probably not so much but still can happen and I do realize that a lot of the stuff might seem weird but well I'm trying to overhaul the whole xp balance, as well as high level gold costs so I guess that's pretty natural.
Thanks for putting in the effort, much appreciated. My overall impression, based admittedly on a very quick skim, is that many units require less xp to level up which might be better for networked players and make surviving the RNG easier but will tend to encourage campaigns to be shorter?

Personally, as a mostly campaign player, I quite like large cost/xp/power differentials between various unit types and I'm not sure about some of these changes.
I feel some units, such a mages or sorceresses should be very powerful but correspondingly expensive and xp hungry, thereby making such units rarer and more valuable. So rather than making mages require less xp I'd've preferred to maintain balance by increasing cost and ranged damage and, maybe, resistances (but not blade or pierce, nor would I signficantly increase hitpoints) so they are still vulnerable to a grunt with a rusty sword :)

I do agree that the White Mage needed a bit less xp to reach L3, that was always a long haul...

Of course I could always make my own era if I felt really strongly about this but to be fair I'll try out the changes at some point and see how I get on.

I guess you'll never keep everyone happy all of the time :)

Just my tuppence worth.

Cheers!
-- Spannerbag
SP Campaigns: After EI (v1.14) Leafsea Burning (v1.17, v1.16)
I suspect the universe is simpler than we think and stranger than we can know.
Also, I fear that beyond a certain point more intelligence does not necessarily benefit a species...
User avatar
Lord-Knightmare
Discord Moderator
Posts: 2383
Joined: May 24th, 2010, 5:26 pm
Location: Somewhere in the depths of Irdya, gathering my army to eventually destroy the known world.
Contact:

Re: Balance changes for 1.18

Post by Lord-Knightmare »

Personally, as a mostly campaign player, I quite like large cost/xp/power differentials between various unit types
You can use [modify_unit_type] to adjust recruitment cost, max_experience to level, advancement choices. Maybe try those if you don't like the planned changes.
What's the point of changing cost for lvl3 units though if they are unaccessible for recruitment?
Some Eras (Era of Legends) allow these level3 recruitment and some campaigns allow AI sides to recruit them so adjustments to them is also welcomed
Creator of "War of Legends"
Creator of the Isle of Mists survival scenario.
Maintainer of Forward They Cried
User:Knyghtmare | My Medium
User avatar
Spannerbag
Posts: 579
Joined: December 18th, 2016, 6:14 pm
Location: Yes

Re: Balance changes for 1.18

Post by Spannerbag »

Lord-Knightmare wrote: April 19th, 2023, 4:21 pm
Personally, as a mostly campaign player, I quite like large cost/xp/power differentials between various unit types
You can use [modify_unit_type] to adjust recruitment cost, max_experience to level, advancement choices. Maybe try those if you don't like the planned changes.
Could do, but as I said, to be fair I'd like to try out the new changes first... but not any time soon, way too busy right now...

Cheers!
-- Spannerbag
SP Campaigns: After EI (v1.14) Leafsea Burning (v1.17, v1.16)
I suspect the universe is simpler than we think and stranger than we can know.
Also, I fear that beyond a certain point more intelligence does not necessarily benefit a species...
User avatar
IPS
Posts: 1304
Joined: December 6th, 2009, 6:36 pm
Location: Venezuela

Re: Balance changes for 1.18

Post by IPS »

Yo, posting again, just helping a quite bit with the pricing issue.

Lich: it was wrong it costing only 50g , but 80g is way too much for the unit. Intuitively unit cost in my head deserves price of 60g-65g aproximately. It's really an irriating unit to deal at night specially because of drains in melee and also the extra movement point that liches have, but on the other hand, recruited liches will not have traits unlike leveled up sorcerers which is a slight cons.

Ancient lich: An approximate of 110g could be fine, which is about twice as much as lv3 liches for 1/3 more HP, 1/4 more mele strikes and +66% extra ranged strikes.

Draug: defenetively, that unit don't costs 70g, it gets punished way too easily by its weaknesses and often enemies will be faster than it because of no chances of quick trait. I stimate it at 52-56g aproximately.

Elder Wose: ehmm.... new pricing here it's too cheap, I know it has nearly the same HP of lv1 wose, but it has massive 19-2 melee impact. With some care, this unit should be costing 27-29g aproximately, they're not as bad as HI's lol.

Ancient Wose: considering lv3 fighters are now more expensive, I think lv3 woses should be costing around 46-48g's maybe.

Elvish Marksman: no, too expensive now, they cost only 2g less than steelclad? but not bring the lots of utility as them. Used to like more their previous price of 31g's (-4g less than red mages, seems rasonable)

Drake Warden / Enforcers: they're brutal units and deserves to at least cost more than royal/halberds, intuitively their cost should be between 56g and 58g's. On here pricing wasn't that bad and was an overall improvement.

Blade Master: Great mobility , still 8-3 fire ranged which is valuable, but they often die even faster than royal guard / halberds. 70g is likely too much for them, maybe try something like 57g or 58g.

Sky: Used to like their previous price quite more, it has lv1 damages at both melee and ranged... even lv1 HP. Find fine it's price of 28g as it allows you to regain that golds in bigger maps, but I personally doubt it's not more efficient to just buy x2 lv1 gliders and it's why I think 28g is better.

Hurricane: try a cost of 50g's , just because of the fact they're 50% flat defense.

Inferno: they used to be real underpriced, maybe 61-63g's could be fine on them.

Specters / Nighthaunt: in lv3 recruit list and more starting gold, it will be easier to prepare better to deal againist most type of units, I think their price being around 60g's would be better for them, they're not that special in high level matchups.

Dragoon: lv2 underpowered in default era, 6-4 melee with poor 12-1 ranged, either more damage or tankyness or lower XP to lv3 would be appreciated. They used to rock but the HP's reduction from a previous balance change made them among worst scouts now.

White Mage: I would personally recommend XP values around 90 to 105 , illuminates bonus is really powerful.

Dwarvish Lord: they rule at smaller maps, but in big random generated maps they will struggle going further, maybe 62-65g's instead?
Dragon Guard: maybe 57-59g?
Sentinel: for 56-58g's?


Many units still missing in my list (royal guards, halberds) as I'm sincerely not sure if their previous pricer or newest price is better and more correct, and I preffer to not rate dunefolks as I do not know them really well and rarely used them in long games... I stil have my suspect that these loy units their correct price is around 48g's and it's why I'm not sure if their new or old prices is better :lol:
Creator of: Deathmatch new in 1.12 server.
Co-creator of: Era of Magic in 1.16 server
Developer of: Empires in 1.12 server, Ageless Era in 1.10 to 1.16 servers (but innactive recently)
Try My winning Orocia Guide
gnombat
Posts: 743
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 8:49 pm

Re: Balance changes for 1.18

Post by gnombat »

Hejnewar wrote: April 17th, 2023, 4:27 pm As always, I'm only human and oversights are probably more than likely, honest mistakes probably not so much but still can happen and I do realize that a lot of the stuff might seem weird but well I'm trying to overhaul the whole xp balance, as well as high level gold costs so I guess that's pretty natural.
It's not really clear what the goal of all these changes is exactly. In particular I'm not sure what all the XP changes are intended to accomplish. For example, looking at the Rebels faction, it looks like there's essentially an XP reduction across the entire faction:
Fighter - xp cost changed from 40 to 36.
Merman Hunter - xp changed from 35 to 33.

Level 2:
Hero - xp changed from 90 to 70.
Captain - xp changed from 90 to 80.
Marksman - cost changed from 31 to 34, xp changed from 80 to 65.
Ranger - xp changed from 90 to 75.
Rider - cost changed from 28 to 25, xp changed from 75 to 53.
Druid - cost changed from 27 to 25, xp changed from 80 to 50.
Sorceress - cost changed from 32 to 34, xp changed from 100 to 58 (?).
Elder Wose - cost changed from 27 to 23, xp changed from 100 to 61.
Merman Netcaster - cost changed from 27 to 26, xp changed from 80 to 54.
Merman Spearman - cost changed from 27 to 22, xp changed from 80 to 54.
The changes in the other factions, too, seem to be primarily XP reductions (although there are some exceptions - there are a few units which have had their XP increased). I'm not sure what the purpose of this is - it doesn't really seem like a balance change exactly. Is the goal here to perhaps make multiplayer more interesting by making it generally easier to level up units to level 3? That might be a worthwhile goal, but as pointed out above, that might have a significant effect on single-player campaigns too. If that's the goal, would it be better to simply make a change to multiplayer to reduce the experience modifier, rather than changing the XP for (almost) every individual unit?
User avatar
Lord-Knightmare
Discord Moderator
Posts: 2383
Joined: May 24th, 2010, 5:26 pm
Location: Somewhere in the depths of Irdya, gathering my army to eventually destroy the known world.
Contact:

Re: Balance changes for 1.18

Post by Lord-Knightmare »

I have been emailed to comment my remarks on balance changes in more detail. So here I am.

My view is that Hejnewar is trying his best through analysis and review to optimise each of the seven factions for more entertaining games in multiplayer. The result of this should be that MP games with Default Era units have been improved in quality.

The drawback is that when unit balances are changed, units are used in both MP and SP. So, yes.
The balance of SP campaigns are affected as well. Lower XP means campaigns/scenarios can get easier, assuming that the campaign is unchanged.

And this is where I introduce to you another underlying issue: among the mainline campaigns, only 1-4 campaigns actually receive dev attention for rebalance and improvements.
The rest are neglected, even if you see commits for those campaigns, it's mostly duct-taping to ensure it's no breakage.

Let me remind you all: What did AOI do wrong? DiD, Liberty, THoT, UtBS had been reworked, but why not AOI? Why just scissor it off? Answer: Bias.

Thus, if these changes affect SP mainline campaigns, I think they should be rebalanced to restore the same difficulty level. I do not mean significant change like re-design or what not. Just basic usual gold/income/turn tweaks or just incrementing the experience_modifier for that campaign. Neglect is not a good Dev behaviour. Consider all mainline campaigns equally. All Mainline campaigns matter.
If that's the goal, would it be better to simply make a change to multiplayer to reduce the experience modifier, rather than changing the XP for (almost) every individual unit?
On one side, I mean yeah, adjusting the experience modifier value in MP scenarios in core MP can bring about almost the same change...

but that's where the the other issue is: what else gets affected? Every other Era. So, I don't think the maintainers of Ageless, EoMa, EoM, WoL, GSE, AoT, AoM, EoC, RE, IE and FE would be okay with this (They would have to recheck and readjust the XP value of almost all their era's units). The rebalance load would simply be too much (especially for Ageless, 1200+ units). Would I want to undertake such a time-consuming task requiring weeks of testing? No.
I think Hejnewar considered this and decided adjusting the XP primarily of core units was the optimal method.
  • One thing I might suggest is that allow [era] to have a experience_modifier key which force sets the XP modifier to what value the era author/maintainer has decided to state. Might be the solution you all wanted. Like Default Era changes the core units when it's played, and the campaign part is left alone.
  • Another thing I would like to suggest (I did suggest it earlier) is extensively using the [modify_unit_type] tag to adjust XP and cost inside the campaign/era (Default era in this case). To ensure MP and SP stay segregated and all these arguments would be instantly resolved. Well, the cost and XP changes mostly. The Damage and Hp changes do not seem to be supported.
Whether you consider my suggestions are not, is up to you. I was asked and I remarked. I go back to wesbreak now, good day, people!
Creator of "War of Legends"
Creator of the Isle of Mists survival scenario.
Maintainer of Forward They Cried
User:Knyghtmare | My Medium
name
Developer
Posts: 580
Joined: January 6th, 2008, 3:32 am

Re: Balance changes for 1.18

Post by name »

Overall these look like nice improvements. I hope the changes you proposed in your youtube videos are still happening too (perhaps in early 1.19 ?)

The Cavalryman change is the only one that bugs me for the "thematic" reason that it is supposed to be a heavy cavalry unit. With its earlier -4 hitpoint loss versus the lightly armored horseman and now this loss of its blade resistance it no longer seems all that armored. Could it get a cost increase from 17 to 18 gold along with this 30% to 20% drop in blade resistance, but then receive some buffs to make it tankier in other ways, like restoring it back from 34 to 38 hitpoints and/or reducing pierce vulnerability from -20% to -10% ?
gnombat wrote: April 21st, 2023, 12:26 am Is the goal here to perhaps make multiplayer more interesting by making it generally easier to level up units to level 3? That might be a worthwhile goal, but as pointed out above, that might have a significant effect on single-player campaigns too.
From my experience, I would say these changes will have almost no balance effect on single player campaigns. Campaigns are very loosely balanced compared to competitive multiplayer and these changes are almost entirely to experience points, which has no effect on campaign enemies and only a small effect on player armies (which are primarily limited by gold, not experience).

These changes will also improve single player by making many fun and interesting units less tedious to acquire, for example the upper shaman tree units. One of the biggest issues with our campaigns is limited unit variety, so they definitely deserve to receive these conservative improvements as well.
User avatar
Krogen
Posts: 310
Joined: January 1st, 2013, 3:43 pm

Re: Balance changes for 1.18

Post by Krogen »

Hejnewar wrote: April 17th, 2023, 4:27 pm
Northerners:
Level 1:
Naga - xp changed from 32 to 33.
Wolf Rider - xp change from 30 to 36.

Level 2:
Warrior - cost changed from 26 to 23, xp changed from 60 to 67.
Pillager - cost changed from 28 to 31.
Troll - cost changed from 26 to 25, xp changed from 66 to 58.
Rocklobber - ranged damage changed from 17 to 22, cost changed from 25 to 21.
Naga Warrior - cost changed from 24 to 22, xp changed from66 to 56.
Crossbowman - melee damage changed from 4 to 6, ranged pierce damage changed from 8 to 9, ranged fire damage changed from 10 to 12, hp changed from 43 to 46, cost changed from 21 to 22, xp changed from 80 to 43.
Slayer - cost changed from 26 to 21, xp changed from 64 to 62.

Level 3:
Warlord - cost changed from 48 to 52.
Direwolf Rider - cost changed from 44 to 52.
Troll Warrior - cost changed from 44 to 49.
Myrmidon - cost changed from 48 to 47.
Nightblade - cost changed from 43 to 53.
Slurbow - cost changed from 43 to 37.
Rocklobber has one strike so i dont mind the big buff to damage there. But generally i dont prefer units getting more than 1 damage buffs or nerfs at the same time, it can easily go over the top. So Crossbow would be fine at 5 melee. Also both Rocklobber and Crossbow are anti-undead units with huge buffs. And orc already wins the level-up game against UD, when it comes to trading lvl2s, they mostly come out ahead. That's also just a huge general buff to Crossbow, four different things buffed, its just gigantic for a unit that sometimes levels after two kills. Also Rocklobber sometimes participates in rushes, so on second thought im not sure i'd wanna face a first night rush against a rock that deals 27 damage. Thats 33 with -20% res, so its just 1 dmg shy of one-shotting a skeleton. Or imagine that landing on a Deathblade leader. Or 14 damage on a ghost. Ok, just imagine that landing on ANYTHING. xD
Hejnewar wrote: April 17th, 2023, 4:27 pm Rebels:
Level 1:
Fighter - xp cost changed from 40 to 36.
Merman Hunter - xp changed from 35 to 33.

Level 2:
Hero - xp changed from 90 to 70.
Captain - xp changed from 90 to 80.
Marksman - cost changed from 31 to 34, xp changed from 80 to 65.
Ranger - xp changed from 90 to 75.
Rider - cost changed from 28 to 25, xp changed from 75 to 53.
Druid - cost changed from 27 to 25, xp changed from 80 to 50.
Sorceress - cost changed from 32 to 34, xp changed from 100 to 58 (?).
Elder Wose - cost changed from 27 to 23, xp changed from 100 to 61.
Merman Netcaster - cost changed from 27 to 26, xp changed from 80 to 54.
Merman Spearman - cost changed from 27 to 22, xp changed from 80 to 54.

Level 3:
Champion - cost changed from 48 to 54.
Marshal - cost changed from 54 to 63.
Sharpshooter - cost changed from 51 to 52.
Avenger - cost changed from 53 to 58.
Outrider - cost changed from 43 to 41.
Shyde - cost changed from 52 to 39.
Enchantress - cost changed from 55 to 48, xp changed from 180 to 100 .
Ancient Wose - cost changed from 48 to 45.
Entangler - cost changed from 46 to 42.
Javelineer - cost changed from 48 to 55.

Level 4:
Shyde - cost changed from 67 to 82.
Again, fighter is the core unit, messing with xp will be a huge buff. At lvl2, Marksman is a really a force to recon with, i think its xp reqs for lvl3 were justified. Also with Sorc 58 is overkill. Im fine with the rest.
Hejnewar wrote: April 17th, 2023, 4:27 pm Undead:
Level1:
Skeleton - xp changed from 35 to 40.
Ghoul - xp changed from 35 to 30.
Blood Bat - cost changed from 22 to 23, xp changed from 70 to 37.

Level 2:
Revenant - cost changed from 31 to 28, xp changed from 85 to 78.
Dark Sorcerer - cost changed from 33 to 34, xp changed from 90 to 105.
Shadow - cost changed from 38 to 35, xp changed from 100 to 77.
Wraith - xp changed from 100 to 90.
Necrophage - melee damage changed from 7 to 9, cost changed from 27 to 23, xp changed from 120 to 61.
Bone Shooter - cost changed from 26 to 24, xp changed from 80 to 60.

Level 3:
Draug - cost changed from 47 to 70.
Lich - cost changed from 50 to 81.
Necromancer - ranged cold damage changed from 17 to 19, ranged arcane damage changed from 12 to 16, cost changed from 50 to 81.
Nightgaunt - cost changed from 52 to 69.
Specter - cost changed from 52 to 72.
Ghast - melee damage changed from 10 to 12, cost changed from 43 to 50.
Banebow - cost changed from 41 to 52.

Level 4:
Ancient lich cost should be 187.
I kinda liked Skeletons as they were, 3 kills+1 fight level ups. Sure, Deathblade gets a lot, but its very fragile, it usually gets killed, doesnt always manage to pay for itself. Necrophage and Ghast buffs are long overdue. Lich also overshadowed Necromancer, so good to see a buff there. Though i think its too much again, Lich deals 12x3 and now Necro would do 19x2. I feel like Lich should hit harder still. Or at least as hard.

Overall its all good, other than a few over the top changes, that in my opinion are mostly uncalled for. Especially the ones affecting lvl 1 balance heavily and leaders.
"A lion doesn't concern himself with the opinions of the sheep." - Tywin Lannister
Post Reply