28. Mär 2024, 10:12 Hallo Gast.
Willkommen Gast. Bitte einloggen oder registrieren. Haben Sie Ihre Aktivierungs E-Mail übersehen?

Einloggen mit Benutzername, Passwort und Sitzungslänge. Hierbei werden gemäß Datenschutzerklärung Benutzername und Passwort verschlüsselt für die gewählte Dauer in einem Cookie abgelegt.


Select Boards:
 
Language:
 


Autor Thema: General Balance Discussion  (Gelesen 77687 mal)

Hamanathnath

  • Gefährte der Gemeinschaft
  • **
  • Beiträge: 414
Re: General Balance Discussion
« Antwort #30 am: 23. Mai 2016, 17:53 »
Yeah I'll try to get the replay soon.  It was a 3v3 so balance is kinda hard to determine, and of course, play wasn't completely perfect, but the rams basically replaced the Isengard players army.


Sawman

  • Wanderer des Alten Waldes
  • *
  • Beiträge: 68
Re: General Balance Discussion
« Antwort #31 am: 23. Mai 2016, 19:56 »
I am all for a nerf to rams, siege in general ruins the game for me at least, but nothing makes me more angry with this game then when I'm off helping a teammate or creeping and my enemy makes 10-15 rams and kills me like that or destroys most of my base because my army isn't there to stop it, it ruins the game when people play like that. This might sound a bit drastic but I have seen some botta mod things and they limit the amount of siege you can have which I would be all for in this mod with the way siege is and how people use it currently. Some people may not agree and if not then a straight nerf to ram health and armor would at least make a little more difficult for people to ram rush/spam maybe increase their price as well.

That's my thoughts cheers

Skeeverboy

  • Orkjäger vom Amon Hen
  • **
  • Beiträge: 870
  • Bankai Senbonzakura Kageyoshi
Re: General Balance Discussion
« Antwort #32 am: 23. Mai 2016, 20:17 »
The problem is, that the balance is designed for 1v1 with two equal strong players and not for a game with more players. In a game with more players you can often use different strategies as in a normal 1v1 game, like only towerguards, only cavallery and such things.
You can counter a ramrush easy, when you have some units in your base which can kill them fast.
Video, how a player has couter a ramrush

So I agree with Mandos too.

Hamanathnath

  • Gefährte der Gemeinschaft
  • **
  • Beiträge: 414
Re: General Balance Discussion
« Antwort #33 am: 23. Mai 2016, 20:35 »
In the LPS Cup Patch, Rams were specifically changed to where ranged attack did barely anything to them, while making melee to more damage to them.  That isn't how Rams work right now. 

In 4.3.2.1, only the bases where defenses can kill these rams effectively are Gondor and Mordor (I'll assume this is because Fire Arrows do more damage to Battering Rams then Forged Axes/Silverthorne Arrows/Steel Bolts). 

I completely agree that games need to be balanced around the 1v1s.  But how would 1v1s be unbalanced from Rams taking more damage from Ranged?  I don't get why Forged Axes/Silverthorne Arrows/Steel Bolts should do so much less damage to Battering Rams then Gondor/Mordor's Fire Arrow Towers, and also why Rams are pretty much immune to normal arrows (I can understand this one a bit more, but I think they should deal at least slightly more damage to Rams).  Most of these defenses cost a lot of money, so I don't think this would make towers overperform.

Adrigabbro

  • Gesandter der Freien Völker
  • **
  • Beiträge: 392
Re: General Balance Discussion
« Antwort #34 am: 23. Mai 2016, 20:52 »
I don't think rams are too strong at the moment, but I do agree with you about ramrush being ridiculous and dumb. I wonder if something like rams take way more damage when no ally troops are nearby could be possible.


"That still only counts as one!"

Hamanathnath

  • Gefährte der Gemeinschaft
  • **
  • Beiträge: 414
Re: General Balance Discussion
« Antwort #35 am: 24. Mai 2016, 01:53 »
Ok I got permission from everyone, so here is the replay:
3v3: Angmar (PythonX35) Isengard (martin) and Dwarves of Erebor (Hamanathnath..... so me :D) VS Gondor (Sawman) Lothlorien ([BMD]Dmitry) and Angmar (DevilsDaemon).

I know play isn't perfect here, but hopefully the point comes across.  I would suggest paying most attention to the northern part of the battle, was that is where most of the action happens. Enjoy :)




Elendils Cousin 3. Grades

  • Administrator
  • Ringträger
  • *****
  • Beiträge: 5.677
  • German, Motherfucker! Do you speak it?
Re: General Balance Discussion
« Antwort #36 am: 24. Mai 2016, 02:57 »
So... I watched up until the Gondor base was destroyed and I saw literally nothing that indicates rams are too strong. The Gondor player first bought nothing but heroes and one Beacon and one or two Tower Guards, had his gate open and fought with them elsewhere which allowed Isengard to get in unharmed. Outplayed. When Gondor sits in base and does nothing, you build siege to destroy the fortress.

Then later on Gondor again leaves the base completely undefended, there is literally no unit or hero to protect it. Only some defensive structures. Since we all know that siege counters buildings, what did you expect? 10+ rams attacking a fortress which is, again, completely undefended! Yeah sure he was fighting somewhere else, but guess what, that's what happens in teamgames - if you don't want that, then play 1v1s (they're a lot more fun anyway :P) or keep some melee units there to protect it. Or close the gate and use the repair spell to buy some time, be creative.

Maybe the part you wanted to show is later in the replay, I don't know. Based on what I saw, there is no need to nerf rams unless its part of a bigger overhaul.

Hamanathnath

  • Gefährte der Gemeinschaft
  • **
  • Beiträge: 414
Re: General Balance Discussion
« Antwort #37 am: 24. Mai 2016, 05:19 »
I'm not saying that Isengard shouldn't have to use siege, because yes, Gondor fortresses are hard to take down, so Battering Rams are very useful.  But I still don't understand why the defensive structures, whose purpose is to defend your base, can't deal with Rams unless they have Fire Arrows.  Yes, the Gondor player should have gotten more Fire Arrow Towers, but that's not a excuse in my opinion for what he had to literally do nothing to siege.  Maybe this replay wasn't the best example becuase played could have been better, but there are still some cases of Battering Rams replacing armies. 

It's not like it's exclusive to this 1 match.  In many 3v3 or 4v4 I play in, there is a case where someone tries to Ram Spam.  It's a known problem that has a fairly decent solution in my opinion.  Nerfing Rams would not make them useless, just not able to be spammed and successful as they are now. 

And I really can't see only bases with Fire Arrows can damage Rams like they do.  Shouldn't the other upgraded Towers be able to do the same thing? 


PythonX35

  • Hobbit
  • *
  • Beiträge: 4
Re: General Balance Discussion
« Antwort #38 am: 24. Mai 2016, 05:31 »
Please don't nerf rams or buff the bases against them. Rams should be easily countered by all types of melee units and/ or heroes, if they die against the auto defense mechanism of the fortress they are useless.

The point is to mask the rams in with troops who act as a meat-shield.  If your doing a ram rush and your sending literally nothing but rams at the opponent, then you're doing it wrong.  The melee damage that rams take from units and hero's is fine as is at the moment, the problem is that they do not take enough damage from ranged attacks.

I know that its not very logical that they should be almost immune to arrows/ ranged damage, but it is the only intelligent solution gameplaywise.

In my opinion, this one of the reasons why the ram rush is too effective right now.  Rams are not susceptible enough to arrows/ranged attacks.  They need to take a little more damage from all types of ranged attacks since it is the primary source of most defensive buildings.

If you get destroyed by ram rushes often you should work on your map awareness and keep a unit of swordsmen or two close to your base to defend yourself. Then it will just be a huge investment on your opponents side without gaining anything.

Map awareness is not really the issue here, and leaving a unit or two of swordsmen will not be sufficient enough since, like I said above, most ram spams are combined with a small/large force to act as a meat-shield.

If your enemy has invested like 4000 to 6000 gold for rams you cant expect to beat that with units for 200...

Mordor and Isengard can easily get 10 rams for around 2100-3000 resources which is more than enough to do enough damage maybe even take out an entire castle that is defended...and who ever said anything about taking out rams with 200 resource units?

But you should notice that your enemies armies are weaker and smaller than they could be and you should be able to get map control AND defend from the rams - let's be honest, they are destroyed really easy if you got some units and the damage they deal wont harm you that much.

If you own the map, then you probably don't really have to worry about a ram spam in the first place.  If you don't own the map, then all the enemy has to do is deal with enough of your troops on the battlefield and then rush your fort with rams and the remainder of their army.  If the enemy is turtling, then you likely own the map and can simply blast the enemies fort away with catapults.  The point is that your argument is pretty weak here.

Isengard can get the defensive Warg Pit though, which is good against Rams.

This is not a valid argument at all in my opinion for the following reasons.  One, you're talking about a single faction.  Two the defence warg pit is a joke because it consumes a valuable build plot.  If it consumed a defensive plot, then this argument may hold a little more weight.  This building was more valuable in the free build plot system, but with a set number of plots it is not valuable enough and is the reason why no one ever builds it.


I'm not saying that Isengard shouldn't have to use siege, because yes, Gondor fortresses are hard to take down, so Battering Rams are very useful.  But I still don't understand why the defensive structures, whose purpose is to defend your base, can't deal with Rams unless they have Fire Arrows.  Yes, the Gondor player should have gotten more Fire Arrow Towers, but that's not a excuse in my opinion for what he had to literally do nothing to siege.  Maybe this replay wasn't the best example becuase played could have been better, but there are still some cases of Battering Rams replacing armies. 

It's not like it's exclusive to this 1 match.  In many 3v3 or 4v4 I play in, there is a case where someone tries to Ram Spam.  It's a known problem that has a fairly decent solution in my opinion.  Nerfing Rams would not make them useless, just not able to be spammed and successful as they are now. 

And I really can't see only bases with Fire Arrows can damage Rams like they do.  Shouldn't the other upgraded Towers be able to do the same thing?

I agree with everything Haman has said in this post.  I don't think rams should be nerfed into the ground, but making them more susceptible to all kinds of ranged attacks would be the right way to go towards proper balance.

Mogat

  • LPS-Sieger
  • Heiler von Imladris
  • *****
  • Beiträge: 236
Re: General Balance Discussion
« Antwort #39 am: 24. Mai 2016, 11:05 »
I agree With elendil and mandos. Rams are Ok now, there is no change needed imo.
Buildings should not be able to counter siege.


Cogito, ergo sum

Fine

  • RPG Team
  • Wächter der Veste
  • ***
  • Beiträge: 2.143
  • Ich hab da ein ganz mieses Gefühl bei der Sache...
Re: General Balance Discussion
« Antwort #40 am: 24. Mai 2016, 11:34 »
Buildings should not be able to counter siege.

This sums up my opinion on the matter. I also believe that rams are in a good place and do not need to be made weaker against buildings. A base that can defend itself against everything would not be balanced in my opinion. You should always require units for defense, not just towers.
RPG:

The_Necromancer0

  • Edain Team
  • Beschützer des verbotenen Weihers
  • *****
  • Beiträge: 1.528
  • There is evil there that does not sleep
Re: General Balance Discussion
« Antwort #41 am: 24. Mai 2016, 11:36 »
I haven't chipped in yet but I just wanted to put my opinion out there. So far I'm seeing two clear problems in the discussion. There one side which is saying that ram rush is to OP, which it is to some extent. Then there is the other side that's afraid that if rams are nerfed they'll be unable to take anything down because they can be easily countered. Both have legitimate concerns and both should be addressed.

The problem with decreasing their armor/health is that they would take too much damage from defenses and thus would be enable to do damage since they can be singled out even in the midst of a battle by the towers. This would cause major issues where ram just aren't efficient enough anymore because they get taken down too easily, they are already weak enough against melee. So this doesn't seem to be the right option.

Secondly, there is the strategic aspect and more specifically the ethics behind a ram rush. In my eyes it is a viable solution to send a small detachment of troops with a couple rams to the enemy base while your main force pulls their attention, that some basic Art of the War right there. But the thing that differentiate Art of the War and the Edain mod is that IRL the rams would be much slower and much less efficient. There lies a possible solution.

So what I think could balance the Rams would be an increased price and CP with possibly a speed and attack speed nerf. This would mean that the rams would now be a bigger opportunity cost as the player would be able to train less troops, along with that the other player would be given more time to react to a ram rush. But definitely not a armor/health nerf
Come chat Edain on Discord: https://discord.gg/CMhkeb8
Questions on the Mod? Visit the Official Wiki: http://edain.wikia.com/

Hamanathnath

  • Gefährte der Gemeinschaft
  • **
  • Beiträge: 414
Re: General Balance Discussion
« Antwort #42 am: 24. Mai 2016, 14:50 »
Well I don't think a Health nerf is needed.  I just think Ram's being pretty much immune to all Ranged Damage from towers besides Fire Arrows doesn't make much sense. 

It seems that a lot of people think that Towers shouldn't be able to counter Battering Rams.  There are 2 reasons why I don't agree with this.  First, because as I said before, Gondor and Mordor Towers with Fire Arrows can already counter them, which I haven't seen anyone ever complain about.  And Second, upgrading your Towers isn't cheap.  Almost every faction has to pay at least 1500 for the upgrade to Improve their Towers, plus the cost of the building and possibly improving that building.  And you also have to actually buy the towers, which is incredibly expensive for Factions like Gondor and Dwarves on Castle Maps. 

I really don't think it would make Battering Rams useless if Upgraded Towers Could Damage them like Gondor and Mordor Towers with Fire Arrows do now.  If everyone is okay with these Towers being able to deal with Battering Rams, then the way I see it, it doesn't make sense why other Upgraded Towers, which cost the around the same amount to obtain (and in fact cost more then Mordor's does), should deal so little damage to Rams.

Now concerning Towers that aren't upgraded, I can see why they should deal little Damage to Battering Rams.  I personally think that they should do slightly more just because right now the damage they do is incredibly low, and they should be able to eventually kill Battering Rams without taking forever to do so.  But I can see why making them too strong against Battering Rams would be problematic.

Odysseus

  • Galadhrim
  • **
  • Beiträge: 718
Re: General Balance Discussion
« Antwort #43 am: 24. Mai 2016, 14:54 »
Zitat
''Isengard can get the defensive Warg Pit though, which is good against Rams.''
This is not a valid argument at all in my opinion for the following reasons.  One, you're talking about a single faction.  Two the defence warg pit is a joke because it consumes a valuable build plot.  If it consumed a defensive plot, then this argument may hold a little more weight.  This building was more valuable in the free build plot system, but with a set number of plots it is not valuable enough and is the reason why no one ever builds it.
How is this not a valid argument? Yes, I was talking about a single faction because Haman referenced Isengard being one of the factions that suffers more from a ram rush than other factions, and this is largely due to their steel bolts being much worse against rams than fire arrows. A Warg Pit is much more effective at defending your base from a ram rush than an arrow tower. Of course it takes a build plot, but you are severely underestimating the value of a properly timed and placed warg pit or arrow tower. Especially when your opponents tries to rush you down, and you have resources to spare, one tower or warg pit does the work of multiple. It's not like Isengard is starving of resources anyway if you play properly, so sacrificing 1 build plot is not the end of the world.

That said, since this whole debate escalated quite quickly, I will stick to the conservatives, and say that if the rams their performance cannot be adjusted to their cost, then they should be fine as is. Even Elendil and Mogat bothered to pitch in, and their opinions hold more weight than ours. However, if the damage of some upgraded towers is so low to rams compared to the Gondorian fire arrows, it might be in good interest to bring their damage to the same or a more reasonable level.
« Letzte Änderung: 24. Mai 2016, 15:23 von Odysseus »
“For so sworn good or evil an oath may not be broken and it shall pursue oathkeeper and oathbreaker to the world's end.”

Hamanathnath

  • Gefährte der Gemeinschaft
  • **
  • Beiträge: 414
Re: General Balance Discussion
« Antwort #44 am: 24. Mai 2016, 15:07 »
The problem with the Defensive Warg Pit in this case is that, if I remember correctly, if the Pit is destroyed, Warg Defending the Pit dies.  So against a Ram Rush, it will most likely die before it makes much progress. 

The Defensive Warg Pit, in my opinion, is one of the Buildings that works better with the BFME2 style of gameplay, and doesn't really translate well to the BFME1 style.  But that's an entirely different topic.