28. Mär 2024, 18:12 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: Some questions on the balance  (Gelesen 2850 mal)

Dain@

  • Pförtner von Bree
  • *
  • Beiträge: 95
  • baruk khazad khazad? ai-menu. For the King ! ! !
Some questions on the balance
« am: 3. Nov 2017, 12:42 »
Some questions on the balance and probably start with the book of spells Isengard.

The new book of spells is just super. Now the development of the faction is clearly and clearly visible. But there are several questions to some abilities from the book of incantations, or rather to their balance. If in general, the picture is as follows: the book of spells Isengard is good for the rapid development of the faction, and while some of the abilities are much weaker than the similar abilities of other factions, but it costs the same. For example, the total cost of all the abilities Isengard = 53 points, Gondor = 55, Imladris = 55, Rohan = 53, Dwarfs = 54, Mordor = 55. But at the same time Isengard significantly loses effectiveness. But it should be noted that all the proposed abilities are very suitable for Isengard, and it is difficult to imagine more suitable ones, only they are slightly overvalued. Therefore, my proposal to reduce the cost of several abilities for Isengard, and then we get the following picture: Isengard due to cheaper (though weaker) abilities will be able to achieve its main features and advantages over the enemies, namely the speed of development. So this is probably the best compromise.
Now I will try to explain the reason for this proposal:
So: Icy rain - my proposal to lose leadership, add more and reduce the range of archers by 25 - 30%. (It's much harder to shoot in the rain). Secondly, it will give an opportunity for a better siege or attack (remember only the beginning of the siege of Helm's Deep! Is not it really very suitable) Or Change the mechanics of the action: namely, the player temporarily calls a large controlled cloud with rain over the specified territory. (This will also give it uniqueness, because Rohan and Mordor have weather capabilities, plus it will allow not to cancel the effect of other abilities, actually because ET and canceled weather abilities) Effect: in this area, enemies lose the leadership bonus and all enemy archers get - 25% of the range of fire.
The call of the sawmill: can you add to it any other active or passive effect (something like + 50% more resources), or is it already done ???
Minions of the White Hand - calls Grishnákh with two weak orc squads, two detachments of Dunlands, or two mounted detachments of traitors Rohan. Now compare with other similar abilities Gondor, Dwarves, or Rohan. For the gondor it is possible to call eagles or three groups of northerners with two heroes, for Gnomes it is Gandalf and Beorn. But the most interesting is that for 2 points Rohan can already call to the aid of two cavalry detachments, and Imladris hobbits with the effect of fearlessness. Therefore, it becomes obvious that the given ability for Isengard is very weak in comparison with others or it should not cost more than 3 to 4 points. Even the Gutter is much more efficient and cheaper.
Suggestion: reduce the cost to a maximum of 4 points.
Army Call: The same situation as the previous ability. Let's just compare it with "Help Rohan" for Gondor. Six equestrian troops + three heroes, and even with three abilities (the hour of glory is just super!). About the army of the dead and the call of the last alliance, I do not say anything at all. Plus, there are many more examples to show how cheaper and weaker abilities from other spell books are much more effective than this one. (Here is just an example, the call of Gandalf, Help from the north, the call of Beorn, the Call of the Eagles.) Thus, the book Isengard in the future patch 4.5 is more effective than others.
(True, if we revise the cost of certain abilities and reduce them, then Isengard will be able to get more deshovoy, and hence more rapid development of events - this is exactly the main advantage)
And one more problem: Since Isengard does not have fire arrows, it is catastrophically difficult to resist the ent. And one more thing: it always seemed to me that the steel arrows of Isengard cause less damage to heroes, monsters and flying units. Maybe it's worth a little more damage, or is it just me?
The second problem: In the late game Isengard loses grip. He just does not have enough power to complete the attack. Part of this is due to the fact that in Isengard only one topovian hero is Saruman, while others have two or even three. (lothlorien - Galadriel, Celeborn + Tranduil and Legolas, Gondor - Gandalf and Aragorn, Rohan - Theoden and Three Hunters, Mordor - Necromancer, King Witch, Khamul). Since it is the strong heroes that give very significant bonuses to their troops, and some even can solve the battle almost alone. Therefore, the result is obvious. Isengard for all his power simply can not win, for example, lothlorien, Gondor, Rohan or Imladris. Simply, not enough strength. Also partly due to the fact that almost all factions have elite detachments with passive and active abilities (Veterans of the last alliance, Veterans khazad dum, Castellans, King Riders, and so on).
Also, Saruman is also lagging behind other top-end heroes. For example, his 10 level lightning has an insanely small radius, (just compare with Gandalf and you will become sad). In general, Saruman performs several roles, but there is not enough of a more precise direction. I perfectly understand that Saruman knows and knows a lot, and it is extremely difficult to fit everything into five abilities. Therefore, the solution to this problem can be the separation of his abilities when Saruman is outside of Isengard (as in the siege of Dol Guldur with the White Council) and he will have one role, and when he is in the orthank, then maybe he will have other abilities and another role ??? . Or maybe ET already prepared us some surprises ???
If it seems to you that my arguments are weak, I offer you six situational cases:
The first: Isengard against Gondor. Condition: both factions reached the peak of their power. So Isengard besieges the fortress of Gondor. Gondor can repulse the entire attack of Isengard only due to the ability to repair buildings, Beregond and reinforce the army of the dead,
The second: Isengard against the Dwarves. (let there be Erebor). Condition: both factions reached the peak of their power. In the army, both factions have parity, and both have well-armored troops, heroes also parity, but here's the book of spells especially help the dwarves: Central spell and help Gandalf will clearly give odds to the dwarwes.
Third: Isengard against Mordor. Condition: both factions reached the peak of their power. Necromancer and Witch King are practically capable of destroying and weakening the whole army of Isengard, and the result is obvious.
Fourth: Isengard vs. lothlorien. Condition: both factions reached the peak of their power. Isengard has a more armored army, but lothlorien wins through heroes.
Fifth: Isengard vs. Imladris. Condition: both factions reached the peak of their power. Izengard can not resist the extremely strong troops of Imladris. (A new Speelbook  off Imladris has two abilities of Song of Lúthien Tinúviel and Tom Bombadil which coolly weaken the army of Isengard)
Sixth: so simply an academic question. How Isengard can withstand the Goblins. After Smog (the ET team believes that he should be a stationary hero,) alone can incinerate and burn the whole army Isengard?!?!? + It's unforgettable that Balrog is also capable of almost completely destroying the whole army of Isengard.
I understand that someone can answer that everything depends on the strategy and tactics of the player. Yes ! But it is clearly evident that Isengard requires a certain impulse (Or maybe the ET team has already done this and is silent and preparing a surprise ???)
In the end, we get the following result: to the late game
Isengard has a lot of money, but there is not enough of that decisive factor (cherry on the cake, if you want) to crush your enemies with a sword, fire and an iron fist.
I'm very interested in your opinion! Feel free to express your opinion! Maybe it's not as bad as I wrote, or yes!

Elendils Cousin 3. Grades

  • Administrator
  • Ringträger
  • *****
  • Beiträge: 5.677
  • German, Motherfucker! Do you speak it?
Re: Some questions on the balance
« Antwort #1 am: 3. Nov 2017, 14:31 »
First of all, the cost of the spells aren't final yet. They could change until release, not only for Isengard, but the other factions as well.

You're severely underestimating the Minions of the White Hand - those are three summons at once, not three summons where you can only have one of them (like Radagast). They are not as good as e.g. the Eagles individually, but together they have a really big impact, especially since they can fill so many different roles. Just wait until you can try them out ingame, you won't be disappointed ;)

I strongly disagree with your opinion on Isengard is unleashed. The fact that these units now stay on the field forever (well, until they get killed at least^^) is massive. Going into a lategame fight usually means losing a lot of your army (could just be an Army of the Dead, as you mentioned), but Isengard can instantly recover from this. It is probably the strongest comeback spell in the entire game.

Concerning the faction balance I'll just say this: Every faction in Edain is supposed to play differently, with their own little tricks and gimmicks. Just a few examples: Dwarves are slow, but headbutting their army to death in a huge all-in fight usually doesn't work. Abusing their lack of mobility is the way to go. Similar things can be said about Lorien's lategame deathball: The army of upgraded archers supported by heroes is nearly unbeatable in the hands of a capable player, but that blob of death loses a lot of effectiveness when it is forced to split up. Spread out over the map, distract your enemy at several points at the same time and sneak some rams into his base. RTS games are all about abusing the weaknesses of your opponent while maximising your own strength. Speculations about the Misty Mountains at this point are just that, speculations, so I'll leave it at that ;)

Remember that Isengard has access to fire damage in the form of wildmen axethrowers, although I agree that it is still quite difficult to deal with Ents as Isengard. I'll have a look at the crossbows and their damage when upgraded - there are a few reasons as to why they should be relatively weak against heroes (namely Lurtz being able to cripple), but certainly not against monsters or flying units.



Oh, and when you're writing such a long proposal, dividing your posts into several paragraphs would really help. Just a suggestion for the future, because it's really cool to see you putting in so much effort :)

Dain@

  • Pförtner von Bree
  • *
  • Beiträge: 95
  • baruk khazad khazad? ai-menu. For the King ! ! !
Re: Some questions on the balance
« Antwort #2 am: 6. Nov 2017, 10:35 »
Thank you Elendils Cousin 3. Grades for your opinion. I'm very much that you shared your opinion. :) You are right, each faction has its advantages and disadvantages, but when it comes to Isengard, then he has a lot of nuances, and frankly speaking it requires a player of extremely high and fine planning and action. However, there are still many ambiguities, and especially for the future 4.5. In the coming days, I try to publish another article with more specific arguments and domes. You are right Elendils Cousin 3. Grades,  4.5 has not yet come out, but I'm trying to extrapolate having the data for the gameplay xD.

Dain@

  • Pförtner von Bree
  • *
  • Beiträge: 95
  • baruk khazad khazad? ai-menu. For the King ! ! !
Re: Some questions on the balance
« Antwort #3 am: 7. Nov 2017, 10:32 »
Sawmill - the idea of ​​creating an open and offensive economic building for Isengard is good, but not particularly effective. For example: At the early stage of the game, the player is already building sawmills, and at least two (already depends on the card / number of players and so on.), But let's say that this is a 1x1 or 2x2 card. It is likely that by the time the player has access to the ability of the sawmill, all the slots of the settlements will already be occupied, and he will choose the convenient and necessary place for him. But by the middle of the game and further on, the map may end up with wood, and the call of the sawmill will simply be useless, or almost useless. For example, the same problem was with the past ability that was passive, at first the player received +100% of resources and after the middle of the game when just the trees ended the player did not receive any bonus. So maybe you should reconsider this ability?

Dain@

  • Pförtner von Bree
  • *
  • Beiträge: 95
  • baruk khazad khazad? ai-menu. For the King ! ! !
Re: Some questions on the balance
« Antwort #4 am: 12. Feb 2018, 13:03 »
Hello ! I have a comment about the "Fuel the Fires" from the spellbook. As far as I know, half the maps have very few trees. Since Isengard is obliged from the very beginning to build sawmills, why does one more sawmill near the middle of the game ?, and if there are no trees already (since the sawmills built by the player have already exhausted almost everything), and even if there are still a few trees in the controlled parts of the enemy's map, you will probably be able to use it only once. Secondly, it does not help the player to control the site, as it is very easily destroyed, for example, the call of the tower is much more useful for more daring and effective game if the task is to control and hold the site. And plus to this if the enemy is also playing for Isengard, then probably there are no trees anymore (except for the de-maps, there really is an excess of trees). For five points this is very expensive, if the sawmill was lower level and cost 3 points then it is completely justified. And if you compare the strategic abilities of the third level for 5-7 points, then the other factions have much more useful and effective abilities (Just an example: Dwarves get + 15% additional damage and armor from their updates forever - and this is really useful.) Rohan gets the advantage from Highborn Warhorses, Imladris gets a smart defense ability for the building). So maybe it's worth reconsidering the meaning of this ability?