|
|
magnomagus
Admirable
Legendary Hero
modding wizard
|
posted September 22, 2019 09:17 PM |
|
|
For most factions with creature ini between 8-12, the mathematical value of chain/stun/ma is similar to a magic hero with lightning bolt or ice bolt + stun (not empowered), for them it costs a little mana but it also costs less slots and in the end more damage. In main hero vs main hero fights both alternative routes preparation or Armor spikes+ma are potentially more powerful.
____________
MMH5.5 Downloads | MMH5.5 Translations | MMH5.5 FAQ
|
|
thGryphn
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted September 22, 2019 10:38 PM |
|
Edited by thGryphn at 22:42, 22 Sep 2019.
|
frogo said:
It is not about eleminating them all, but putting them into the right balance. You could make a perk giving the hero infinite dmg while creeping, and sure while there are other ways to achieve big victories, that one would still look kind of overpowered.
Right now, basically any might hero will immedialty go down the stunning strike + ma route, as its creeping potential is unmatched. You can also achieve this combo way before lvl 20, need no spells and not much of an army. It works for any might race alike, with the same perks (except for seers... because they dont have combat. they surely would go down that route aswell if they could). I would never recommend trying to deny the player from doing these sort of "abusing" victories, because coming up with ways to deal with huge creeps with a way weaker army is one of the things that makes creeping exciting and also one way to differ between skill levels of players. This combo doesnt need much thinking tho, it works always for basically any might hero. I for one do not care that much if its nerfed or not, but i ll have to admit that i would surely still pick stunning strike if its reduction was 0.3 instead 0f 0.4. Also, generally i would consider myself more of a magic player, but recently i found myself playing might pretty much every game, because i feel like its just the stronger way to go, mostly because of this simple combo.
Martial Arts perk is not effective until the hero is of high level. At low levels hero does little damage so doubling it is not important. What makes difference at low hero levels is the stunning effect and only with really high init creatures it becomes a impossible-battle winner. Most of the times, it just helps but at most as much as Master of Ice or Master of Lightning.
Wasp Queen is also very powerful, as is the hero spec that hastens the hero with the Wasp Swarm spell. Couple those with Sorcery, and again you have an extremely effective stack-disabler. Expert Summoning + Summon Hive is probably the most effective combo to beat impossible creeping battles, and many heroes can get there at level 5 (you don't even need Expert level to creep very effectively).
On and on and on. Many ways to achieve the same result, and I don't see how Chain + Stunning Strike + MA is OP among them.
Forgot to add Swift Mind. So yeah, you get the picture...
|
|
frogo
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted September 22, 2019 11:47 PM |
|
Edited by frogo at 23:55, 22 Sep 2019.
|
As i said, i wasnt claiming that there arent any other methods for creepping. The method you present does only work for summoning heroes,
and while it at some point may be an effective way of creeping (at which point i think there are superior ways, but what ever works), its just not comparable to the combat combo. Summoning Hive at lvl 5 is already where i feel like its far from realism.
So basically you disregard any growth or money buildings in your town in order to build a t4 magic guild. Now you have a 1/3 chance of actually being lucky enough to get summon hive. Then you have a lvl 5 hero, that has maybe enough mana to cast a Hive, but that Hive 1. does no dmg because you lack spellpower and 2. wont actually cast anything because each wasp swarm summoned by the hive drains your mana aswell, which you certainly wont have at lvl 5.
What actually works on lvl 5 is the stunning combo - you get all perks, no mana requiered, no spell requiered, no buildings requiered, you actually do dmg (you dont only need lvl ups to have the knowledge for the Hive and the wasp swarms, you also need lvl ups for spellpower. Try and click that spellpower up for waspswarm and see when you actually get close to the dmg an MA hero does. its far from lvl 5, obviously depending on unit). So the stunnng strike does all that that a hero casting wasp swarm + Hive would do (2 units dmging and stunning), only that the stunning combo does it better in pretty much every way. Or better said, looking at all the things you need before you can pull of the Hive version: the stunning strike combo actually does it, while the other version can not be pulled of in nearly simular fashion at earlier stages.
On top of that, stunning works on anything, there are plenty of units immune to wasp swarm.
Again, i m not saying there is no other way to creep then the stun combo. Obvioulsy there are plenty of ways, that doesnt mean one looks a little to strong, easy to get and like a solution for everything.
EDIT: also note that i dont mind if it stays as it is, tho i would prefer the stun to be a 0.3 atb reduction. But that comparison to Hive is just lacking in so many ways. Actually its a good comparison to see how much stronger the stunnng combo is compared to a magic version of an equal effect.
Also it is to note that a Magic Hero has to invest one more thing into the Hive version: His stats. A might hero needs no knowledge or sp stats to pull off his version, giving him way stronger unit while still pulling of this super strong abilities.
____________
|
|
bulya
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted September 22, 2019 11:51 PM |
|
|
@thGryphn
I didn't say I wanted to eliminate ways of doing incredible creeping. As you mentioned yourself there are many of those. There are WM heroes that can do it with Tripple Balista + Flaming arrows, Ingvar and perhaps a few other heroes can do it with Retaliation strike and very durable creatures.
But still, the ways I just mentioned are either available to certain heroes (those that get their Balista boosted with level ups, like Sheltem, or those who have very durable cheap creatures like Ingvar).
For all other might heroes getting Chain + Stunning + MA is way superior to any other way they can do it in their arsenal, even though they have some.
On ARMG maps might heroes do well due to not that many wells available on the map for magic heroes while combat and WM do not require any mana. Even on rich maps like Lets Fight! might heroes seem to do a little better (Sheltem is perhaps the best example, and while he was slightly nerfed, he remains as a hero that is superior to almost any other hero on that map).
So on one hand toning down might heroes a little, and on the other hand making it so that might heroes have a reason to pick other routes then Chain + Stunning + MA can be a very good thing. For now, only a few go for other routes because they have the tools to make it as strong as the default route, while all others pick the same. Variety is good for the game by many means, and as I said toning down might heroes to a degree is a good thing I think.
The strategies you mentioned are part of what magic heroes can go for. And the one picked is usually dependent on the class, the specialization of the hero and his starting skills. You mentioned some that are good for elementalists, but warlocks usually do it in other ways. And the variety is good for the game.
Though I feel like there is less variety when it comes to might heroes. And nerfing the default rout a little won't do any harm to might heroes who feel quite strong anyway.
I played might classes of almost any faction, and while I found some heroes that can do well in some other way then chain + stunning + MA, there aren't many of them.
My suggestions were about toning down this path, for example taking MA out of the equation while still making chain + stunning available. Or making it so that putting the chain takes a full hero turn rather then half a turn is also an option. There are many ways it can be toned down a little.
That will leave it as a strong strategy, I'm certain that some factions will be going for it anyway, while other factions will have a good reason to consider other strategies.
For now, the heroes I found very powerful were slightly nerfed (Ingvar, Sheltem, Warlocks). But they remained strong even after their nerf, and I think they remain as some of the best heroes in the game to play a PvP with even though they were nerfed.
Toning chain + stunning + MA will simply do the same for a few other heroes that are in the Ingvar and Sheltem category, and put more variety to the builds of might heroes. Both of which are good for the game.
|
|
strigvir
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted September 23, 2019 08:32 AM |
|
|
Why is it a problem anyway? Magic heroes aren't very diverse in their spellcasting arsenal either. Like is there any situation where you wouldn't want dark magic if it's available in your hero pool?
Stunning strike combo ensures there isn't a massive gap between underperforming might heroes and OP ones in the first few weeks of the game.
|
|
magnomagus
Admirable
Legendary Hero
modding wizard
|
|
posted September 23, 2019 03:38 PM |
|
|
-Might heroes are not OP, they recently got the biggest nerf with mass spell cost x4
-Combat is not an obligatory skill, in fact the dmg bonus to retaliation strikes are weaker in practice than the bonuses from offense /defense, this has been thoroughly analyzed and calculated, for factions like dungeon that don't rely much on defensive tactics and retaliation this component of the skill is even weaker.
-I played a bit with yrwanna yesterday on ARMG map and it actually took me just as long to setup the whole thing ma+stunning strike as it could have taken me to build a level 4 guild without t7 building. combat first showed up at level 6.
-My previous post was ignored in above posts, the idea that combat that chain attack would be obligatory even for factions with slow units, conflicts with mathematical reality.
-between chain/retaliation and avenging strike, chain will always be better in creeping phase, this is unavoidable related to the reliable way to trigger it.
-skills that compete with stunning strike, don't necessarily need to be better at creeping if they are better at something else = main hero vs main hero battle.
____________
MMH5.5 Downloads | MMH5.5 Translations | MMH5.5 FAQ
|
|
frogo
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted September 23, 2019 04:36 PM |
|
Edited by frogo at 17:11, 23 Sep 2019.
|
- I really liked the spell to mass spells, the new cost aligns way more with their effictiveness compare to their single-target respective. While this certainly doesnt help might, i by any means wouldnt call this "the biggest nerf". They dont care about spells in creeping phase mostly (and if they do, its not mass spells but regeneration/vampirism/ressurect or even buffing single creatures with blessing etc., but never mass spells) and in a final fight scenario, at also most likely wont have much of an impact. A hero can still squeeze out one or 2 mass spells if he so desires, and more generally isnt needed anyway. A big portion of the fight is decided early on, where you can keep your hero busy by choosing a target for your combat perk, getting out one mass spell and in the later stages of the fight single target spells or stunning strike hits by the hero are the way to go anyway.
- I do understand that the numbers for combats bonus need to be bigger than for attc/def. Noone has been complaining about the skill itself, although i didnt do the math, it does look rather balanced to me.
- Sure, it can happen. Especally Overlords are considered "risky" or "inconsestent" heroes, and thats only because they rely heavily on combat but there is a chance that you dont get it early on.
I wouldnt see this as a plus, more a minus that a single skill is so strong, getting it or not getting it fast enough can decide a game.
Also i dont see how we are still comparing that to the summon Hive. Yeah, sure, you can build your magic guild up to lvl 4 until then. But how on earth is that a valid thing? there are other things that need to be build. You cant just ignore all that, put your days and ressources into a magic guild lvl4 in the hope that a 33% chance for summon Hive kicks in so you got a weaker version of what a might hero gets for free, which on top you wont be able to really cast in early stages as that spell eats mana like crazy. And you cant even decide who you want to stun.
- But sadly that is how it is. I played a lot of Haven lately. Slowest shooters there are, but chain-> stunning really is what gets you on a whole diffrent lvl of creeping. So, even for a suboptimal unit like marksmen/crossbow, it still is the way to go, ignoring that these 2 things seeminlgy have no synergy.
- I agree, there is no problem with chain being maybe the best for creeping out of those in a general scheme while the others perform a little better in a final fight (not necesarrily true, because chain is needed for stunning, and stunning can be devastating even in a final fight), but dont you think with a 0.3 reduction all these would still hold? only maybe in a more balanced way? Noone wants to throw it all out, just tweak it a little.
- Sure, at some point a Hive or what ever the hero casts is stronger than the stunning combo. But this is so obvious and blantly needed, that i m not sure what the point of that comparison is.
A magic hero will invest into his spells his whole hero:
- The stats are knowledge and sp heavy
- Basically all skills and perks of magic heroes go into his spellcasting.
A might hero invest into stunning combo:
- no particular stats are needed. His stats go into making his units stronger
- 3 perks (compared to a FULL skillset of a magic hero).
you might say he also invests 3 ups in the combat skill, and thats partly true, but he also gets something out of that which is not going into the stunning combo directly
So if the stunning combo was only anywhere comparable to what the magic hero puts on the field in the lategame with his spells, why would i bother investing a whole hero with stats and perks into it, if i can have it for nearly free on a might hero?
Its obvious and needed that the magic hero has stronger turns than the might hero, given his investment.
EDIT: all that being said; if it stays how it is right now - so be it, even if i disagree. Its not like i wouldnt enjoy the mod either way  So thanks for putting all that work in to you, dred and everyone who invests time into this!
____________
|
|
magnomagus
Admirable
Legendary Hero
modding wizard
|
|
posted September 23, 2019 06:04 PM |
|
|
Quote:
So if the stunning combo was only anywhere comparable to what the magic hero puts on the field in the lategame with his spells, why would i bother investing a whole hero with stats and perks into it, if i can have it for nearly free on a might hero?
Its obvious and needed that the magic hero has stronger turns than the might hero, given his investment.
The current hero combat damage was modeled so that on avg it has roughly the same dmg output as an unempowered eldritch arrow, so with 70% boost it comes an unempowered ice bolt.
Clearly a magic hero can do much better, a circle of winter is equal to 3-4 ma/stunning strikes simultaneously with 0.33 atb reduction and then you can still empower that and boost it another 50% with artifact.
In the new duel mode it will be very easy to test the frequency at which the chain attack occurs in a regular fight, so I will do just that somewhere in near future.
____________
MMH5.5 Downloads | MMH5.5 Translations | MMH5.5 FAQ
|
|
frogo
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted September 23, 2019 06:12 PM |
|
|
As i said, i wasnt denying that magic hero obviously makes more dmg than a might hero late game on his turns. I was just stating that this comparison is pretty obvious and not saying a lot about balance, given how much the magic hero invests into having strong hero turns. Its a given that with that kind of investment, he will have stronger hero turns. Also i dont think the hero-hit dmg itself is to strong.
____________
|
|
magnomagus
Admirable
Legendary Hero
modding wizard
|
|
posted September 23, 2019 06:23 PM |
|
|
but there is no difference in investment, might heroes need to get all 3 weak combat basic-expert slots and magic heroes already have fireball and chain lightning at basic destructive and the required knowledge comes naturally.
____________
MMH5.5 Downloads | MMH5.5 Translations | MMH5.5 FAQ
|
|
frogo
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted September 23, 2019 06:35 PM |
|
|
Still the combat ups arent nothing. I said you could argue that it can be partly seen as an investment, but you are getting something (compared to for example a magic school, the gain from that goes 100% into the cast, nothing else). Also how is the investment that a might hero has to put into the stunning combo comparable to a magics heroes investment into his spells?
A magic hero goes sorcery, occultism, enlightment, magic school itself, gets perks for more knowledge/sp, cheaper spells and so on. That is not an equal investment.
Also the magic hero getting the knowlege naturally doesnt make it any less of an investment. The knowledge is primary for casting spells. The might hero gets attc/def instead, buffing his army. None of it goes into his stunning combo. The investment is not comparable.
____________
|
|
magnomagus
Admirable
Legendary Hero
modding wizard
|
|
posted September 23, 2019 08:40 PM |
|
|
I did some testing with Irina vs Erling on L25 duel map, as expected you get around 10 hero attacks for every 7 enemy spells. Considering the amount of mana erling had and arcane training cost reduction that could have been 7 meteor showers.
But more importantly if you take into account other factors, chain strike is really the weakest of strikes in might hero vs hybrid/magic hero combat. It is so useless you probably shouldn't even use it, to avoid the atb penalty.
This is because the enemy hero will immediately counter it with an action that is secondary to what it was already going to do anyway.
This is because the chained creature was either a shooter or fast melee and therefore already among the high priority targets. A destructive caster will just stun the chained creature with its next spell, a dark caster will just frenzy or blind it. a summoner can simply hypnotize it. Weaker casters can block it with arcane crystal, sorrow it or catch it in a mass slow.
Avenging strike is obviously better since it will be placed on the enemies most important stack, the enemy will either have to deal with that problem and delay its next action or ignore it and suffer the consequences.
____________
MMH5.5 Downloads | MMH5.5 Translations | MMH5.5 FAQ
|
|
frogo
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted September 23, 2019 08:50 PM |
|
|
As mentioned a few times ( all that stuff with investment ), i am quiete aware of the fact that at some point a magic hero will have a stonger hero-turn than a might hero, obvioulsy. And yes, chain is the weakest out of the 3, as i alreay said aswell, also mentoning that stunning gets it back up a little again for which chain is needed anyway. Also, you are not forced to play the final fight like if it was a creep. You can also put your chain on a immune t7 unit, attacing the opposing t7 unit, or any sort of less targeted unit.
____________
|
|
magnomagus
Admirable
Legendary Hero
modding wizard
|
|
posted September 23, 2019 09:11 PM |
|
|
Quote:
i am quiete aware of the fact that at some point a magic hero will have a stonger hero-turn than a might hero, obvioulsy.
But that was not my point, I'm verifying that the stunning strike path is not OP and should not always be picked. If it was OP then it will be changed, but I need mathematical proof, since in general I cannot balance the game based on feelings people have about strategies they have used over and over, ignoring other options.
____________
MMH5.5 Downloads | MMH5.5 Translations | MMH5.5 FAQ
|
|
frogo
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted September 23, 2019 09:54 PM |
|
Edited by frogo at 22:08, 23 Sep 2019.
|
Well, as a mathematican i really like your approach. I aswell think that a subjective feeling gained over experience can often be lacking in a lot of ways. I aswell think that a lot of stuff in heroes balancing can be solved very effectively with a mathematical approach.
But in this case, while surely possible, you are asking for quiete a feat. You will need to be able to make a comparison with something (doesnt have to be something with equal effects, if done correctly, all sorts of things can be compared for balance purpuses), that you consider balanced. I for one cant seem to find something that would work well with reasonable effort.
____________
|
|
dredknight
Honorable
Supreme Hero
disrupting the moding industry
|
|
posted September 23, 2019 10:21 PM |
|
|
Guys, I dont want to interfere, but I just want to add some fluff to the conversation.
@Magno is right that math is correct and things are fine.
But as we know not all is math when it comes to strategy games and synergy.
The problem as I see it is not in too much dmg or stun but the excess of synergy the combination provides as follows:
- Chain attack (For PvE) doubles hero damage per turn till the end of the battle, each battle. (Note 1: Spell heroes cannot cast Lighting every turn; Note 2: Spell heroes cannot cast a lighting and Hit with normal attack in one turn)
- During PvE combat phase there is a balance between hero creatures and monster creatures which is somehow tilted because of 2 stuns per round on average. This drags the battle even more which allows the hero side to do even more damage with chain attack combo.
- "Chain attack" ability is controlled so combined with stun gains are larger than the mathematical estimation because experienced player always hits where gains will be highest.
Besides what is said above there is a hidden gains such as - less unit retaliations.
Magno for me this case is very close to when we discovered the hidden gains of "Frenzy" (does dmg, uses army action, wastes unit retaliation, gets more dmg from retaliation etc..) and rolled back the bonus dmg to adjust the strength.
On the other hand for the defenders of the IMBA theory:
- With the current technical capabilities we cannot do that much to make Might hero skill variety early game larger. And even if we can at some point it will take time we do not have (not this year for sure). May be swapping of perks in combat tree will help (@Magno I can script this in 15 mins so don't worry about the change) but that does not solve the core problem of the combo.
- slows down the battle
- value gets exponentially higher the less enemy stacks on the battlefield
- costs no slots.
On a side note - Combat skill by itself is not weak at all to be compensated by the perks.
Expert gives 45% bonus damage on top of bonus the unit gets if it has higher attack/defense ratio vs the unit that it is being retaliated to. Also with the combat going much slower due to the 5% to 2.5% primary skills nerf retaliation count is higher.
Another side note - I've always had some reservations towards Fortress T1, T2 and T5 units being too strong that I could not explain. But I never thought that because they are so beefy and usually are the last stacks on the battlefield, they do retaliate a lot and can be on par with Attacking units which is nuts. Now I remember it was usually against "Engineer" hero and they all picked "Combat" in their games.
My observations may be not entirely correct but I hope they help clear some blind spots if any.
P.S.
magnomagus said:
For most factions with creature ini between 8-12, the mathematical value of chain/stun/ma is similar to a magic hero with lightning bolt or ice bolt + stun (not empowered)
It is not because you can do 2 stuns per turn - one from chain attack and one from hero. This is twice by 0.4.
____________
Join our official discord channel | NCF Utility Beta
|
|
azalen
Responsible
Known Hero
|
|
posted September 24, 2019 01:56 AM |
|
Edited by azalen at 01:58, 24 Sep 2019.
|
I’m still not sold that Chain Attack/Stunning Strike actually needs a nerf (War Machines is comparable in power in myop) but one way you could nerf it ever so slightly would be to cost the hero a full action to place Chain Attack instead of a half action. I usually get Stunning Strike when the faction starts with Combat (death knight/knight), but otherwise favor War Machines.
Stunning Strike is a powerful creeping perk, no doubt, but no more so than any number of other different skill/spell combinations. Summoners, for example, can get Firewall from Pyromancy, and kill gatekeeper stacks wo ever building a mage guild using the firewall stacking tactic. There are a multitude of spell/perk combinations that are in the same ballpark of power as Stunning Strike that can achieve week 2 breaks.
|
|
magnomagus
Admirable
Legendary Hero
modding wizard
|
|
posted September 24, 2019 11:54 AM |
|
|
Quote:
combat tree will help (@Magno I can script this in 15 mins so don't worry about the change)
you modify thegryphns skillwheels with a script?
Quote:
On a side note - Combat skill by itself is not weak at all to be compensated by the perks.
yes it is I calculated all bonuses in battlelog and compared with offense/defense bonuses, nargott did the same thing, I think he recommended 60% but I kept it intentionally lower, so I could make martial arts a bit stronger and don't overpower preparation.
Quote:
It is not because you can do 2 stuns per turn - one from chain attack and one from hero. This is twice by 0.4.
this is a good point actually and a reason to lower the stun length
____________
MMH5.5 Downloads | MMH5.5 Translations | MMH5.5 FAQ
|
|
dredknight
Honorable
Supreme Hero
disrupting the moding industry
|
|
posted September 24, 2019 01:23 PM |
|
|
magnomagus said:
Quote:
combat tree will help (@Magno I can script this in 15 mins so don't worry about the change)
you modify thegryphns skillwheels with a script?
I am not sure if we speak about the same thing but. If you want to change perks location in the skillwheel and provide me example of the code that should be changed:
- What is it now code wise
- what it should be
Because skills.xdb code uses a perfect pattern I can do a code to reiterate based on that pattern knowledge and do the rearrangement for specific perk on all classes.
It may take me between 15 mins to 1 hour to code depending on what issues I bumped into but ultimately it will save us so much time.
magnomagus said:
Quote:
On a side note - Combat skill by itself is not weak at all to be compensated by the perks.
yes it is I calculated all bonuses in battlelog and compared with offense/defense bonuses, nargott did the same thing, I think he recommended 60% but I kept it intentionally lower, so I could make martial arts a bit stronger and don't overpower preparation.
Agreed. Forgot about that.
magnomagus said:
Quote:
It is not because you can do 2 stuns per turn - one from chain attack and one from hero. This is twice by 0.4.
this is a good point actually and a reason to lower the stun length
Agreed. I believe this nerf will hasten the pace of the battle.
____________
Join our official discord channel | NCF Utility Beta
|
|
thGryphn
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted September 24, 2019 01:48 PM |
|
|
I guess stun strength can be dialed down to 0.35 but I'm afraid nerfing beyond that would make it quite useless.
That two stuns in one turn works really effective when dealing with a single stack. Otherwise it doesn't really help when facing multiple stacks, which is most of the time.
I really do not think we should rearrange the perks in Combat; they're good as they are.
|
| |
|
|
This Popular Thread is pages long: 
