Flying units

[Tienety]

I think flying units should be stronger against the siege weapons and buildings. This was their main function in vanilla and old version. I have a feeling that Fellbeast and Eagles are useless without this function in 4.1.1. Four fellbeasts or three eagles can't destroy a single building.

What do you think?

[Linhir]

Against siege weapons? Good idea. But against buildings? Nope, they would just crashed themselves against the wall.
Instead, they should be stronger versus infantry or cavalry. ^^

[ThorinsNemesis]

I also think that they should be stronger against both structures and siege weapons. In the current version they are weaker and that's the big issue for me, because I used Eagles, Fellbeasts and Smaug solely for those two purposes 
I hope the Team will fix this issue for the next patch. Or, at least, I hope they fix it before the Misty Mountains faction gets released, so I can enjoy playing my favorite hero, Smaug

[TiberiusOgden]

Honestly - I think that in vanilla game and in the previous version were used (or at least I used them) primarily against siege units and buildings and only occasionally against units.
It's simple - we had many possibilities how to deal with normal units but definitely not too possibilities how to destroy buildings or siege machines.
And now - we have completely different purpose of flying units and maybe that is the reason why they are problematic for us, problematic to play with them.

[Walküre]

Honestly - I think that in vanilla game and in the previous version were used (or at least I used them) primarily against siege units and buildings and only occasionally against units.
It's simple - we had many possibilities how to deal with normal units but definitely not too possibilities how to destroy buildings or siege machines.

True, I mainly used them too for these specific purposes in the previous version.
I regard all the flying units as 'special' means, with which you can pass through the enemy lines and get rid of the threat of possible attacks from distance of catapults and trebuchets.

Regarding the structures, the flying units should be far more effective against them, a serious threat from the Sky; obviously, their effectiveness from above has necessarily to be balanced with a concrete possibility to counter them with archery units 

[Adrigabbro]

I think they should deal much more damage to siege weapons, especially catapults. However I'm not too sure about buildings damage, since buildings are very likely made of concrete stone and I can't see how an eagle could damage stone. Also, they would be overpowered if they were good against siege weapons, buildings AND units.

[Linhir]

As Adiggabro said, eagle or feelbeast vs. stone = stone wins. ^^

[Tienety]

I think they should deal much more damage to siege weapons, especially catapults. However I'm not too sure about buildings damage, since buildings are very likely made of concrete stone and I can't see how an eagle could damage stone.

Very interesting argument but this is just a game, not a simulator. How can swordsman, fire arrows, hammers or ents with melee attack destroy the stone? 

Also, they would be overpowered if they were good against siege weapons, buildings AND units.

So, you're saying that eagles are overpowered in bfme 1, bfme 2 or 3.8.1.

[CragLord]

Simply, why you guys think so general, "concrete stone", wtf,Tolkien world has some modern science and construction business? 

I am for idea about massive/instant damage against some siege weapons, and to add damage improvement  against buildings, not so big damage buff like in vanila.
Those flying units are special after all, they deserve some damage buffs, their armor is currently weak and that should stay same, after all they shouldn't resist many arrows...

[Linhir]

There's difference between ogre, ent, mumakil etc. and fellbeasts and eagles.
Ents and co. are more massive, heavier and stronger. Eagles for example have "empty bones", that's why they are so light. So, imagine now this fight Gvaihir vs. average stone wall.

[Walküre]

There's difference between ogre, ent, mumakil etc. and fellbeasts and eagles.
Ents and co. are more massive, heavier and stronger. Eagles for example have "empty bones", that's why they are so light. So, imagine now this fight Gvaihir vs. average stone wall.

All interesting things, but this is not a scientific essay, we are talking about a game, set in a fictional and fantastic World 

By the way, Giant Eagles can't be compared to normal birds, in Tolkien's lore; they are magical and sentient (they think and 'speak' like Elves and Humans) creatures of Manwë, and only to Manwë obey; I think that their strength and resistance can be compared for instance to the ones of the Balrogs, or are quite similar.
In the First Age, Thorondor, the King of the Great Eagles, was able to permanently wound Morgoth in the face and 'save' the dead body of Fingolfin; the Eagles of Manwë fought also against the terrible Winged Dragons in the War of Wrath.
Not so common qualities, I guess 

[CragLord]

Exactly, and here we talk about flying units in general, there are fellbeasts and dragons too. And they don't have "empty" bones. 

[Adrigabbro]

I think they should deal much more damage to siege weapons, especially catapults. However I'm not too sure about buildings damage, since buildings are very likely made of concrete stone and I can't see how an eagle could damage stone.

Very interesting argument but this is just a game, not a simulator. How can swordsman, fire arrows, hammers or ents with melee attack destroy the stone? 

Also, they would be overpowered if they were good against siege weapons, buildings AND units.

So, you're saying that eagles are overpowered in bfme 1, bfme 2 or 3.8.1.

In the previous versions, eagles were dealing less damage to units than they currently are (if I'm not mistaking).
You're right about the stone thing though.

[Gandalf The Gray]

Flying units should be strong only against units on the ground because i think if they will be stronger against building too then they will be lil bit to op i think

[Walküre]

Flying units should be strong only against units on the ground because i think if they will be stronger against building too then they will be lil bit to op i think

I think that their effectiveness against siege weapons and structures will be well balanced by their vulnerability to archery units 

[Draco100000]

I think they should deal much more damage to siege weapons, especially catapults. However I'm not too sure about buildings damage, since buildings are very likely made of concrete stone and I can't see how an eagle could damage stone.

Very interesting argument but this is just a game, not a simulator. How can swordsman, fire arrows, hammers or ents with melee attack destroy the stone? 

Also, they would be overpowered if they were good against siege weapons, buildings AND units.

So, you're saying that eagles are overpowered in bfme 1, bfme 2 or 3.8.1.

Eagles wasnt OP on previous versions because of the enormous dmg of Archers and towers. Now archers have much less dmg so Eagles and fell beast must be do reduce dmg to something, or good against Units, or good against structures and sieges, not both things at the same time.

[Altarius]

I think that the Flying Units should be better against Siege Equipment especially, but also Buildings.
They are currently near-useless against both, and so they are not worth using unless you are Mordor looking for the Ring with a Ring-Hunter.
An Eagle or Fell Beast, and especially a Dragon, should be able to break Siege-Equipment and Buildings. The comment about Eagles smacking into a Brick-Wall is not exactly true because they can instead use their strong wings and claws to pull the building apart, rather than blunt-force break them.

[Gandalf The Gray]

I think that the Flying Units should be better against Siege Equipment especially, but also Buildings.
They are currently near-useless against both, and so they are not worth using unless you are Mordor looking for the Ring with a Ring-Hunter.
An Eagle or Fell Beast, and especially a Dragon, should be able to break Siege-Equipment and Buildings. The comment about Eagles smacking into a Brick-Wall is not exactly true because they can instead use their strong wings and claws to pull the building apart, rather than blunt-force break them.

true but still the balance the flying units should be strong against units on the ground but weak against archers but not buildings atleast not so strong

[TiberiusOgden]

According to poll and discussion - flying units should be definitely stronger and more effective against siege units and we can say that "normally" stronger against buildings as well.
I think that argument for it can be that feelbeasts are very expensive units and eagles are available only for some time.

[Darkslayer]

As Adiggabro said, eagle or feelbeast vs. stone = stone wins. ^^

Not Smaug though 

[Walküre]

Not Smaug though 

Smaug is kind of another matter 

He will be the most powerful hero of the Misty Mountains and the Ring Hero too, having access to a wide range of destructive abilities; don't mind him 

[Odysseus]

Good day,

I am a little late on joining this discussion, but nonetheless I joined in.

I think what must be taken into consideration is the role of these aerial entities in the movie, in the classic BFME game, in the Edain mod and perhaps the view of the team on them and what kind of role the team wishes to have for them.

In the movies, they were primarily used to disrupt unit formations and cause terror and panic amongst enemy ranks and in the siege of Minas Tirith, we could occasionally see Fellbeasts disrupting trebuchet crews.

This is also largely what they did with them in the most recent Edain patches and that's (largely) the role they perform as of now. One could say that it is simply a change of role and we have to adapt since we are so used to them being strong against most entities.

However, I do think they need a slight little boost, since the damage they deal to siege engines and buildings has not been nerfed, it has practically been gimped to the point of being questionable. It takes them ages to even remotely damage a building. I think a squad of ork labourers does more damage (I'm exaggerating ofc) than the aerial units against buildings and siege engines.

I do think a buff is in order, if only a small one, since it will force the opponent to react, forcing the siege engines to relocate and your opponent to move his archers to defend the building against aerial threats.

However, I do not think that they are useless. I think their attack frequency is spot on and I find them to be very useful in dealing with blobs. A decent opponent will be forced to react instead of taking massive losses from them, so they are already effective as both disruption and a psychological threat, but maybe just a little on the underperforming side. They don't need to take down a building on its own of course.

All of this is neatly counter-balanced by the fact that they have relatively slow attack speed, are very vulnerable to arrows, take massive damage from single target abilities and, in the Eagles' case, possess a timer.

I hope the team will at least consider some of it.

Kind regards.

[Adrigabbro]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZhjCbuZj7sA

I had to bring this topic to date after watching this replay from Isil. ^^

Even if you watch no more than half of the video, you will see that it is very hard to counter  multiple catapults, especially with elves who have no real cavalry (by the way, I agree they didnt play perfectly in the video because none of the three elves even thought about beornings who would have been undoubtedly helpful).

That's why I think the team needs to raise the damage of flying units against siege weapons. It would be a nice counterplay to catapults, not too frustrating given the cooldown of the eagles/how hard it is to get fellbeasts.

[Elendils Cousin 3. Grades]

Linking a timestamp of eagles/fellbeasts vs catapults would be helpful, the video is quite long.

[Adrigabbro]

Well, the only time he summons the eagles is 59:50, but they don't really focus the catapults. My comment doesn't follow a particular minute of the video but more like a global feeling.

[Odysseus]

I hear you man. At least against siege weapons, they could use some improvements, in my opinion. I am indifferent with how flying units perform against buildings, but siege weapons are incredibly effective in Edain, even more so than in vanilla, in my opinion because they are less vulnerable and have thus fewer counters. I can take down a 3000+ fortress with two battering rams worth a total of 600 when supported by a few troops. I hope that at least that siege, which is made of wood and carried by flesh, would be more vulnerable overall. I think the spamming of battering rams and catapults is still very much a thing, but I suppose that is off-topic. Factions that lack cavalry have a tough time dealing with a wall of catapults.

I wonder if it will ever return... I sure hope ET is willing to test that change at the very least.

[CragLord]

Results of poll are pretty clear, some improvement should be done.
Personally I voted for first option, because I dare to say, not all building are of dwarven or metal quality in game, in that kind of thinking I think damage of those flying units do should be increased against buildings in not so greater scale. No matter about that opinion of mine, I really think change which is of primary importance is increase of damage against siege weapons. For example I don't know do you know, but approximately  around 10 or even more hits from Eagle is needed to destroy Mordor's catapult (Last time when I played in this situation). So is that normal? It is serious "lapsus" in game in my opinion! Or Mordor's catapults are made of titanium? 
Increase of damage against siege is really important in current situation.

Regards,
CragLord

[Walküre]

I agree with CragLord.
And, I too was among the ones who supported the option of an improvement, against structures as well in my case.

As far as I can say as a Moderator, this thread made possible a serious and constructive debate, and the poll was like a very clear and legitimate reflection of this (like all polls shoud be), via which the majority of the English Community largely expressed the desire of a change, whether structures are involved as well or not.

Therefore, I can't really do something more other than waiting for the feedback of the Edain Team as everyone else 
Or, if someone wants to express other further opinions, it's obviously and welcomingly legitimate to do it.

[Elite KryPtik]

Joining in late, but I also agree that flying units definitely need to do more damage to siege weapons, and buildings would be nice too.

[CragLord]

So, I have finally checked, it took 12 times for an eagle to hit a Mordor's catapult in order to destroy it.
I summoned 3 eagles, and they needed 4 times to hit it together so that it could be destroyed.

I honestly find it very unbalanced.
A spell like that might 'risk' to end up being not as useful as a spell of this kind ought to be.
I totally back all the proposals raised to our attention in this thread, and I sincerely wait for an official response by the Edain Team 

Best Regards,
Crag

[Odysseus]

Indeed. It is very strange. The slow attack speed of flying units makes it even worse.

[Saruman_the_wise]

I truly hope ET pays great attention to this matter.

[Elite KryPtik]

They have, LoM has made a post in the Lothlorien Balance discussion about it, and they read every post regardless, even if they don't respond to them all.

[Walküre]

I truly hope ET pays great attention to this matter.

What Elite KryPtik wrote 
The Edain Community has already done its contribution, now it's time to wait for the Edain Team's dispositions.

Regarding the thread itself, it's interesting noticing how the majority opted for an enhancement even against structures, one of the characteristics the flying units were known for as well since BFME1.
I personally support this too.
One of the multiple iconic elements from BFME1 that we couldn't/shouldn't do without, I would say 

[(Palland)Raschi]

We are discussing a new concept for flying units (for the fellbeasts to be exact) in the german part of the community now as well. I think it would be helpful to share this issue with the English Community.
It is supposed to change the way flying units attack and the way their abilities are used.
For instance:

The Player  to activates the Nazgul's "Ringhunter" form and uses his ability to take off with his Fellbeast close to a Mordor camp and the player can send him across the map as well. So far so good.
But in the mentioned concept the Nazgul is only able to attack through an ability which also needs time to recover. Additonally he can not attack like the most unit do and is easy to kill in this normal condition due to his low HP and Def.

The attack ability for instance makes the Nazgul invulnerable for any damage while he attacks a unit or siege weapon and additionally causes heavy damage to it (siege units are destroyed and standart bats loose about 80% of their units) and increases his flying speed as well. If the Nazgul achieves a higher level he also uses a scream during attacking causes units to flee.
After this single attack the Nazgul looses this invulnerability and is finally endangerd to be shot down as before.

The Player then need to send the Nazgul back to the camp for healing if the unit has been hit. The ability recovers after a certain time and is available for usage again.

This could be a good way to deal with most flying units and make them strong against units but also give them a certain weakness.

[Melkor Bauglir]

I'd like to add something to Raschi / Zauber(er) der Weihnacht as the reasoning for this idea is fairly complex to understand: Air units are in a very specific sense a balance nightmare.
If they get to powerfull they can easily destroy entire armies because only archers can attack them -so if they are too strong, they literally become uncounterable. However their stats are brought to the point where they may cause some damage this eventually overlaps with them being easily killed because while being only attackable by archers, they can't really run and hide.
While this problem could be solved if only few factions where in the game, it gets practically impossible, because of high the power level of archers is changing between each faction: You will e.g. never ever use Ringhunters against Lorien.
Also (because Edain revolves arround big armies and battles) there isn't really anything else air units can do than just attack people. Therefore at a certain point they utterly become useless because the ground armies (and with them the amount of archers) becomes too big to survive -still you can't buff them, because how uncounterable they are on the other side. This is an extremely fragile system which oscillates heavily between "overpowered" and "underpowered", and due to the amount of factions in the game, it is predetermined to stay this way.

Our idea now resolves arround the fact, that giving the Nazgûl secure, but limited attacks would essentially nullify the threat of being too strong (because you can't just spamm attacks into helpless ground units) while making it impossible to render Ringhunters useless if armies get too large (they have these guaranteed attacks even if they become more risky).
Also we brought up the idea of many different missions (e.g. attacking a single target or watching an area while being invulnerable and invisible). This is BTW perfectly in line with what the Nazgûl did in the WotR (book-version): They were given these missions (watching the Dead Marches, checking what happened with the Palantir in Isengard, terrorize MT during the siege and so on). It was also adapted into the movies where there are numerous shots of Nazgûl circling Barad-Dûr or watching Mordor.


Greetings
Melkor Bauglir

[Tiberius Ogden]

Problem with flying units was strangely solved by removing them from the spellbooks.
They remain only in Gondor, in Lorien you probably summon Radagast on the foot or riding the sledge.
But still we have four ringwraiths who can mount fellbeasts ... and mainly Misty Mountains will bring Smaug whose dragon's skin should be impenetrable ...