|
| Thread: Balance Mod for ToE - post your opinions here |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
posted February 18, 2008 02:31 PM |
|
|
I guess the repair ability is considered better and that's why master gremlins are weaker.
crossbowmen ignore defense and marksmen has no range penalty, right?
I don't know about crossbowmen, but I fought marksmen a few times and they are very powerful. fortunately they are easy to kill and slow.
I first would say, arcane archers and high druids are imbalanced imo.
not only arcane archers deal insanely high damages but they also are fast. they have a good chance to anihilate any of your stacks (especially your shooters since it is very likely they are slower) before you get a chance to do anything against them.
high druids are almost fines except the ability which gives power to the hero is way too powerful imo.
____________
|
|
Guarder
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted February 18, 2008 05:03 PM |
|
|
Well, marksman ignores defense if the enemey is three squares or nearer. Crossbowman have no range penalty
____________
|
|
Drunk_Lord
Known Hero
very happy hero :)
|
|
posted February 18, 2008 05:26 PM |
|
|
For the arcane archer I think the "defense-reducing" ability should be nerfed minimum to 15% ignorance of defense and to increase the archer's HP. This will make them a bit less dangerous and a bit more durable 
____________
|
|
Elvin
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Endless Revival
|
|
posted February 18, 2008 05:52 PM |
|
|
Err they are durable enough for archers.
____________
H5 is still alive and kicking, join us in the Duel Map discord server!
Map also hosted on Moddb
|
|
Drunk_Lord
Known Hero
very happy hero :)
|
|
posted February 18, 2008 05:54 PM |
|
|
Yes, they're "durable". As much as an archer can be
____________
|
|
Seraphim
Supreme Hero
Knowledge Reaper
|
|
posted February 18, 2008 06:20 PM |
|
|
Maybe reducing the health and initiative would help.As for Inferno and Necropolis,in the mod it should be included to buff infernos early game and necropolises dragons for late game.
____________
"Science is not fun without cyanide"
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 18, 2008 09:20 PM |
|
|
hum ok. actually in french, the "arbalétrier" ignore defense, and "arbalétrier" means crossbowman in english.
marksman means "tireur d'élite"
I am currently playing my 1st game with inferno and I was happy with the power of my quasit at the beginning of the game. in the other hand, demons totally suck. hell hound are decent.
____________
|
|
unixmage
Known Hero
Demon Slayer
|
|
posted February 19, 2008 05:49 AM |
|
|
|
Orson becomes a Skeleton Captain. Gives similar bonus as ingvar.
|
|
Lesij
Famous Hero
|
|
posted February 19, 2008 09:47 AM |
|
|
1. Ingvar gets smaller bonus
2. Nymus (as a duel hero) looses Phantom Forces (they made Deleb balanced but overepowerd Nymus the same time -_-)
3. Orcs need more perks ( now they have the smallest amount of the skills ). Also there could be more warcries (especially decursing one)
4. All alternative upgrades should be balanced:
War Dancers need No retailation (at least if they make their combo)
Master Hunters need another type of arrow. For example the one whith hexing attack. And more defence.
High Druid should be given more attack and more damage.
Horned Grunt need 1+ defence and 1+ life
Seduction should be castable but cost lots of mana. Only Vermin's Syphon Mana could activate it.
Plague Zombie should get bonus. For example 1+ to speed or 1+ to initiative...
Spectre should be given +2 to initiative.
Archlich should have better attack and damage than the Lich Master.
Berserker should be given something called The Shiled Of Rage which would work as Blood Rage (assimilate some damage) but its assimilating ability would depend on how many hit points did berserker take.
Goblin Trapper should have 3 attack... Even don't try to tell me that his snares are less sharp than the leg of the Witch Doctor...
Centaur Nomads need more to attack and 1+ to initiative. ( or even 2+)
Mauler needs Double Attack in spite of that stupid Assault or Bash at the begining (assault stays then) and at the 3rd level of rage doubl;e attack.
Shamans need Cleasening badly. On Expert Level of course. Casting it should be dependable on sacrifiecing the gobiln...
Executioner should be given 5+ life.
Foul Wyver should have more life then PaoKai has.
That's all...
____________
|
|
Momo
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted February 19, 2008 11:14 AM |
|
|
I'd like to state the obvious here: balancing =/= everyone is equal. Rock/Paper/Scissors is a perfectly balanced game, but if you are Rock and I am Paper, chances are that I will overpower you no matter what.
Making Magic factions strong late-game and respectively, Might factions strong early-game will result in a mess, and -here's the tricky part- some faction will rise up as broken. Usually, when you try to make a system where everyone can win against everyone, it turns out it's not exactly so, because something slipped out of the designers control and breaks the game. Predicting strategy, counter-strategy and counter-counter-strategy is almost always the most rewarding design.
But, one can ask, where's the strategy in that? In a homemade game I'll chose Magic in a small map and Might in a big map. And I win! This is too shallow!
Not really. For instance, Magic needs to rush, but it doesn't mean it auto-loses on big maps. My usual countermeasure is to rush toward another town so to have double the economy my opponent (let's assume it's a might player) has, or even better early-rushing to conquer a might town to exploit late-game. This is just an example to show that while factions have strenght and weaknesses, they don't autopilot themselves, and the game isn't decided as soon as the faction is chosen accordingly to the map.
As for the alternative upgrades. In most situations these are PAINFULLY obvious to chose, one is plain good and the other is plain bad (Academy is partially an exception) a design choice from Nival I can't definitely approve. But, it's not completely pointless as a design policy. I hope no one hates me for my habit to mention game-designing articles, ecause I'm making another reference: in some article by Mark Rosewater (currently, head designer of Magic: The Gathering) he explains that he thinks bad cards are necessary for the game. Why? Well, one reason is that bad cards are skill-leveraging, because the best player is not going to play them, while the newbie will because he thinks they're cool; this gives to the better player an advantage he/she would not have if all cards were equal.
Let's assume I play against a less experienced (it does not take much to be less experienced than me, but still) player and we both chose Sylvan. If he/she choses War Dancer and Master Hunter over Wind Dancer and Arcane Archer because the former look undeniably cooler, I have an advantage, one that it's my right to have. On the opposite respect, Rosewater also states that bad cards do appease some people in some other way -for example, my girlfriend, who loves the aesthetics of War Dancer and Master Hunter and isn't a power player as I am. Lastly, when a game is really well-designed, there's a chance that the "bad choice" turn to be better in some narrow case -for example, I heard Master Hunter overpowers Arcane Archer if you find a certain artifact (too bad I don't think a similar case exists for War Dancer vs Wind Dancer)*. The "plain good vs plain bad" thin is even more skill-testing when good and bad are not so plain, like Archdevil vs Archdemon, or Dragon Graveyards -whose most player come to build and upgrade (not me, after my first game) because a lvl 7 creature SHOULD be some good.
*incidentally, I believe that Nival would have done better if they created similar cases to "Master Hunter < Arcane Archers yet Master Hunter + Unicorn Bow > Arcane Archers" for every alt.upgrade; sadly, they apparently didn't.
In short: strenght and weaknesses balance the factions; plain good vs plaing bad upgrade is not particulary brilliant design, but makes skill matter. That's my two cents (plus usual wall of text).
____________
|
|
okrane
Famous Hero
|
|
posted February 19, 2008 11:35 AM |
|
|
About the first part:
This is not about making factions equivalent all the time.
In general, magic factions have a really bad time end-game. i.e. They're near to useless, especially if they have bad luck with their spells.
A might faction can obliterate a magic one, in the end-game, in just a couple of rounds. So, my opinion is, they need to stand at least a chance. Some do. But not all of them, and not in all the cases.
The same goes with might heroes early game. Ok, you can pick triple flaming ballista, but it seems to me that this has become the only viable choice and it's turning the game into a too simple routine. There's no variety when everyone goes for the same thing. And this game was meant to be variated.
So, by balance I mean, little things that can be used to lessen the differences. For example, increasing markman precise shot to 4 squares would make it easier for Haven to take those huge stacks of lvl 7 which Magic factions take on easily pretty early in the game.
About your second part:
I totally disagree. What's the point in alternate upgrades if there is hardly a choice between them. That they look good and noobs like them. This is really simplistic. A pro player already has a huge advantage against a new one, and that's experience. This should be enough. You're saying that newbs should be even more disadvantaged for not seeing the difference between them. I say this is a major flaw.
What's the point of even having Master Hunters in the game is no one is gonna choose them. And they are not better with Unicorn Bow as the Armor ignoring effect of the Arcane Archers makes them better all the time.
My final point is, even if usually the choice is obvious there should be times when the other choice becomes valuable. A good example would be crossbowmen/marksmen. For general creeping Crossbowmen are better but for taking big stacks marksmen are great. Now this is the case with a good number of upgrades but not all.
|
|
Momo
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted February 19, 2008 12:03 PM |
|
|
Quote:
So, my opinion is, they need to stand at least a chance. Some do. But not all of them, and not in all the cases.
In that way, I agree. Point being, it's really hard to pull off such a degree of balance.
Quote:
I totally disagree. What's the point in alternate upgrades if there is hardly a choice between them. That they look good and noobs like them. This is really simplistic. A pro player already has a huge advantage against a new one, and that's experience. This should be enough. You're saying that newbs should be even more disadvantaged for not seeing the difference between them. I say this is a major flaw.
As I explained, I don't like this choice too. At all. I am merely explaining what policy there is beyond filling the game with plain good and plain bad choices. Plus, given how the most problematic thing in playing a game is often introducing a new player to it, I agree even more that increasing the gap between a newbie and a pro isn't exactly a good idea.
Still, the designers are going to answer you that if some player is more experienced, the designer should give him chance to show it, meaning not all choices can be equal -some have to be wrong.
Of course, the next step is that some choice as to be the "wrong choice", then it could be the "wrong choice if" wich makes every option in the game have some uses, and makes the game better (and ultimately makes me agree with you). But once again this is hard to pull off, complicates the game, and complicates the life of a designer. So you don't meet that in most games.
____________
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted February 19, 2008 12:19 PM |
|
|
While I think your post holds several excellent points, Momo, I do agree with Okrane that the point of alternative upgrades is not only offering a good and a bad choice. It's true, that within certain limits, it can be good to have some units being weaker than others (for instance, this allows for the tactical differentiation and planning that makes a good player), but that's not the point with alternative upgrade.
What alternative upgrades can is offer different uses for the units. An excellent example of this done the right way are the Treants: The Ancient Treant offers a hyper defensive unit, whereas the Raging Treant offers a much more offensive built. Which is best very much depends on the individual situation - and both have their pros and cons. Other good examples of alternative upgrades done the right way are Archangels vs. Seraphim, Elemental Gargoyle vs. Obsidian Gargoyle, Vindicator vs. Squire, and Skeleton Warrior vs. Skeleton Archer.
The alternative upgrades go wrong, when they offer two units with virtually the same use - most of the Sylvan upgrade including the Dancers, the Hunters and the Dragons offer excellent examples of this. When this happens, almost inevitably one of the two will come out as the superior in virtually all cases, which will render the other obsolete.
However, one should be aware that sometimes the same can happen when the first approach is taken, if the strength of the two units is two far apart. In many ways, the Wind Dancer is a good example of this: The Wind Dancer was probably thought of the defensive alternative to the War Dancer, but ironically, it ends up being so tough that it actually is a much better offensive unit than the War Dancer. Naturally, this is down to the overgrown Agility ability, which is simply way off balance (change it to +1 Defence for each tile moved, and it would still be very good!).
So I think in the end, the key to succesful alternatives lies in two points: ALTERNATIVE uses (key point) and approximate ballance (secondary point).
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
Elvin
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Endless Revival
|
|
posted February 19, 2008 01:13 PM |
|
|
I'm with Alc on this one, besides it does not take much to see that it would be a poor choice. You play a couple of times, realize some are crap, everyone starts using the same  In the end it proves to be a liability and sheer hindsight. As a player it is in my best interest to use the best combinations or those to which the opponent has a (relative)weakness but if one is better nine out of ten times there is no strategy behind it. I could even accept that some have creeping purposes only but that is not the case either.
____________
H5 is still alive and kicking, join us in the Duel Map discord server!
Map also hosted on Moddb
|
|
okrane
Famous Hero
|
|
posted February 19, 2008 01:38 PM |
|
|
ok. So we agree on something.
Here's my list of creatures who need looking into:
Marksmen
Weaker than their counterparts. They are only useful for precise shot abuses which is tricky to use. I would suggest increasing the radius to 4.
Horned Overseer
Compared to the leaper they are crap. They hardly get a hit in and die really fast. Some extra defense could be good.
Cerberus
The +1 damage it has compared to the firebreather does not compete. A cursing attack or something could improve them a bit, but I don't know exactly.
Nightmare and Hell Stalion
They are too similar. But as the HS has more damage and a better aura makes them the better choice in spite of the extra init of the Nightmare.
Pit Lord
Yes. I think they are weak. Low init, low mana points, with spells that lose their effectiveness fast, it seems to me that they are weak. I could be wrong though.
Arch Demon
Slower than the Arch Devil, seems to me again a weaker choice.
Zombies
Well, nobody cares about these guys anyway, but the Rot Zombies are better. A +1 to the init/speed of the Plague Zombie could make them a little better as a more offensive variant.
Spectre
Mana stealing does not compensate for the +1 speed imo. Plus, the mana of the enemy creatures is usually depleted until these guys get to them. Again they're too similar.
Banshee
Crappy Crap Lvl 6 skeleton with even weaker stats. Give it more defense maybe?
Sprite
A little more useful early game, but the only thing superior to those dryads is the extra init point which doesn't seem much.
Wind Dancer
It is too strong for a lvl 2 unit. With Sylvan's high defense they get unkillable. A -1 to speed maybe.
Arcane Archer
No Comment. Plz NERF.
High Druid
While I understand that early game the other Druids are slightly better I still think these guys are 90% of the choice. No idea how to balance them though. Maybe Give chanelling to the other one, weaken his offensive stats, and boost the attack damage of this one?
Assasin
Do you think he's obsolete or not?
Blood Witch
-2 init hurts them and they don't get much better. They fit the same role.
Brisk Raider
Obviously weaker, but he is the choice against Dark Magic Casters.
Shadow Matriarch
With the introduction of the melee variations they are worthless now. Some more mana for them maybe?
Battle Mage
Similar stats and no spells. Seems weaker to me.
Titan and Storm Titan
hmmmm... You can recruit them blindfolded. They are the same thing. Some variety please. Make one Melee or something.
Stone Defenders
Not being able to move them hurts them. How about giving them the Ancient Treants ability when they defend?
Rune Priest/Patriarchs
Again too similar.
Lava Dragon
Lesser Defense and HP for a crappy firewall breath. Magmas are the obvious choice, but maybe I'm wrong.
Centaur Nomads
+1 Damage, for No melee penalty and +1 HP. the marauders are much versatile.
These are all I can think about. If I missed one, or you disagree about some here let me know.
|
|
Momo
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted February 19, 2008 02:15 PM |
|
|
I'll state once again that i DON'T like Nival's work with the alt. upgrades. I'm just explaining the logic behind them. No, wait, some of them.
For example, in Seraph vs Archangel there is a true alternative, so in Obsidian vs Marble (attack vs defense, anti-magic vs magic support). These are of course the better alt. upgrades, where Nival did a great job. However, Alcibiates, while I think that some were made as you say "unintentionally unbalanced" (like Poltergeist and Spectre - anti-shooter vs anti-caster, but more often than not the +1 speed overshadows the alternative choices) I can't help but think the purpose of some is to just obsolete the others. Wind Dancer is the best example because, statistically, it overshadows War Dancer on all fronts, and has also a better ability. Now, if I must put some faith in the makers of the game, I'll think that cases like this one are intentional, and the result of the policy I described above.
This is perhaps the time to make clear once again that I disagree with said policy for a number of reasons -one being, like Elvin said, that is not THAT skill-testing in the end; it takes much more skill to chose between two equally valid options the one that fits better to the circumstances.
That said, going concretely to the list from okrane, I agree for every single creature.
|
|
Elvin
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Endless Revival
|
|
posted February 19, 2008 02:27 PM |
|
|
Cerberus
I'd think cursing attack is too much, the cerberi don't need buffing. Maybe -1 min damage or initiative to the firebreathers? It's really a fine line, firebreath is not easy to balance.
Nightmare and Hell Stalion
Yes but -3 morale aura can be really good. Unless the map is loaded with artifacts and opponent ends up having 7 morale..
Pit Lord
Not weak but not on par with pit spawns. I'd give them back their HoF mana or boost initiative. +1 speed could also work.
Arch Demon
Seriously their stats sabotage their abilty, bad planning. Yes teleport other is good but not a justification for this. +1 speed.
Spectre
Mana stealing does compensate because in large battles you are better off shooting, not casting.
Banshee
I'd go for boosted special. Their wail is great fun but totally useless at the moment.
Sprite
Yes but they also have cleansing. Big deal, use those early, dryads later. They are not useless as others.
Blood Witch
True but on the other hand they are harder to kill.
Brisk Raider
His special should be 50% and even then I would not pick him too often.
Shadow Matriarch
Not worthless at all. If they play first they can hit hunters badly.
Battle Mage
Nope, just better for later.
Titan and Storm Titan
Actually it's a decent choice. Hasted, fast units act more often in the cloud so it hurts more than lightning overall. If the units do get out they have wasted a turn and you don't care because it's the wizard who does most.
Stone Defenders
I don't see why they are bad.
Rune Priest/Patriarchs
Absolutely not. The choice of firewall or two fireballs makes a difference.
Lava Dragon
No they are pretty viable.
____________
H5 is still alive and kicking, join us in the Duel Map discord server!
Map also hosted on Moddb
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted February 19, 2008 02:44 PM |
|
|
Well it seems we agree pretty much then, when it comes down to the bottom line.
I must also say that from what I gather, often the problem lies in the new abilities being superpowered: Agility (!), Force Arrow (!), Power Feed, Prismatic Breath, Invisibility (!!!), Leap ... all these abilities simply outrank the old equivalents, and while some of them might seem like reasonable additions (like Leap), they should have at the same time boosted the old versions of these units to make them comparable (for instance: What about making Explosion into something useful?).
That being said, I don't agree with your full list above. While Firebreathers may seem like the obvious choice, in fact during creeping you will have little (read: no) use of this ability, whereas the +1 damage may prove quite valuable. I regularly find myself picking Battle Mage over Arch Mage, simply because of the Eldritch Aura that makes the melee attack a viable option (particularly the case in longer games, where the spells become useless anyway). I still find the Sprite very usefull early game, which justifies their presence to me. Obviously, though, much of what you say is very true.
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
Elvin
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Endless Revival
|
|
posted February 19, 2008 02:51 PM |
|
|
Actually firebreathers do have their uses earlygame, it's a matter of setting the neutrals in line. Very useful against ghosts too.
____________
H5 is still alive and kicking, join us in the Duel Map discord server!
Map also hosted on Moddb
|
|
okrane
Famous Hero
|
|
posted February 19, 2008 03:22 PM |
|
|
|
Yes, they get a bigger chance of a double or even triple hit than the Cerberi. So the extra damage more than evens out.
|
| |
|
|
