Modding Union

[en] Edain Mod => [Edain] Suggestions => [Edain] General Suggestions => Thema gestartet von: Lord of Mordor am 11. Jun 2015, 04:37

Titel: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Lord of Mordor am 11. Jun 2015, 04:37
Hey guys,

we'd like to talk to you about the power level of heroes in Edain. For version 4.0, we have greatly weakened heroes compared to previous versions. We did this because we received a lot of feedback that heroes were so powerful that they felt unfair and overbearing, which can't be our goal. We wanted heroes to shine when used in combination to normal troops, with the troops guarding the hero and the hero supporting the army. They should not be one-man armies, but they should still have a significant influence on the battlefield if you combine them with your soldiers and play them well.

At the same time, we're aware that we've a significant shift in hero power and it's very possible that we didn't get it quite right the first time. Heroes are still meant to be a core part of the game und shouldn't be so weak that they're not worth their high cost. That's why we wanted to ask you guys a couple of questions:

1) Which heroes are your favorites? Which do you find so useful and/or fun that you try to recruit them as often as possible?

2) Are there any heroes you almost never use because you find them too weak or simply not fun?

3) In general, are heroes fun to use and does it feel good to play with them? Or do you find them rather boring and not all that important?

4) How do you like the health of heroes? Our goal was that a hero couldn't simply walk into an army all on his own and survive, but on the other hand he shouldn't die in seconds either if you pay a bit of attention and support them with troops. Do you think this goal was achieved or are there heroes which are too healthy / not healthy enough?

5) How do you like the melee damage of heroes? Do you find heroes appropriately effective against most targets (including monsters and other heroes) or would you prefer a lower or higher melee damage in general?

6) Same question for ranged hero damage. If heroes can switch between melee and ranged like Faramir or Lurtz, do you find both modes useful?

7) Finally, we'd like to discuss hero abilities, using Gandalf as an example because he has a plethora of damage spells. First off, a general question: Do you think Gandalf is useful and powerful enough for his cost, or do you think his spells are now too weak?

8) Do you think Gandalf's wizard blast is too weak, too strong or just right at the moment? This ability has its own unique problem. In general, we feel that it could be allowed to deal pretty high damage because its radius is rather small. However, troops often clump together on one spot in this game, which is something we can't change. So if wizard blast is strong enough to kill one group of soldiers, it could also kill ten groups who are all standing on the same spot. Of course, one could say that it's now up to the enemy to position his troops in such a way that wizard blast can't hit all of them. This is difficult, however, because troops automatically clump. What do you think about this? If a Gondor soldier has 400 health, a Dol Amroth soldier has 1000 and a Citadel Guard has 3000, how much damage should wizard blast deal in your mind?

9) The same question has to be asked for Word of Power. Should it destroy armies entirely or weaken them without destroying them? In theory, a rank 10 ability from a hero for 3000 resources might be allowed to destroy an army of cheap infantry. After all, Gondor soldiers only cost 200 per group. In this case, they'd require heavy armor to survive. On the other hand, it's not very strategically challenging to simply destroy an army with the press of one button. The challenge would be bringing the hero to rank 10 in the first place. However, once that is reached you could frequently force a Mordor player to rebuild his entire army from scratch, which could be frustrating or even decide the match in a single click. Would that be an exciting possibility to turn the game around to you or unfairly punishing? How strong would you like the Word of Power to be, and do you find it useful at the moment?

Thanks in advance for your feedback :)
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Sir Palmdiggity888 am 11. Jun 2015, 07:03
Hello

I find my self playing with Gondor the most and I find their heroes to be a bit lacking in power , Beregond specifically if feel he dies far too quickly and can't hold his own. I understand he he is a low cost hero but I like the look of him and I think an elete tower guard should hold his own a bit better. Also in relation to that , I think it would be terrific if the grey company would remain for the duration of their lives.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: LordDainIronfoot am 11. Jun 2015, 10:07
Hello! :) Well as you have probably guessed my favourite Hero/es is/are Lord Dain Ironfoot of the Iron Hills and King Dain II Ironfoot of Erebor followed by Durin the Deathless and Thorin Oakenshield and Thorin III Stonehelm! :) And other are Arvedui,Aranarth and Thranduil! :)
As for changes well I think Durin is perfect and doesnt need any changes! While Lord Dain need a little bit more dmg and health while King Dain somewhat less health ,more def and the dmg is fine! :) Thorin is great I have nothing against him,while Thorin III needs may be better skills and somewhat stronger leadership thouigh I love his rune Powers in both versions :)
Now for the Heroes of te Demo, I too find Gondor and Rohan Heroes a little bit too weak , ithink they need may be a little higher deffence while the dmg is fine and Boromir some better powers,but in a matter of def,dmg and armor I think the Game modes do the work so basicly I see no big problem as they are now but may be some powers can be better! :)
Isengard and Mordor hmm I have played less with them and am not so familliar with their Heroes strenths and weaknesses but I must say Sauron is indeed awesome and have nothing against him,Witch King is fine too while Saruman may need some buust in melee dmg and health!Uruk Heroes I like Isengard heroes each helps with something and are not ovepowered but like and slightly stronger Urik as they should be so for now I think this is it from me :D
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: DropItLikeItsDogg am 11. Jun 2015, 10:53
Saruman is my fav hero he isn't useless but he should have more power & health atleast wizard blast and fireball should have more power, sometimes that makes not fun after you pay 3000 and kill by a cheap hero.. Gandalf & Saruman the same status, wizards are a little bit weak.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: dior23 am 11. Jun 2015, 12:52
hi,
i ithink heroses should have big powers as boromil kill many uruks before he fall and as the book said his body has more than ten arrows.legolas perfect and talaented arrows to are deadly.aragorn's anduril and perfect fighting perception.and more that are really heroes they are powerfull when it needs and they encourage their army.also this fact contains and more powerfull beings as gandalf,galadriel and more,this older and powerfull with knowlege beings should be more powerfull but not as much as to win every army alone accept from the ring heroes.also power beings together with their armies should be the best combination,also hobbits must have something special  to their powers and help armies i think.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: NicolajLarsen am 11. Jun 2015, 12:56
1) My favorite heroes must be Saruman, Lurts, Éowyn, With-king and Boromir (Even though I think that Boromir, Lurts with bow and Witch-king is too weak) That would be my favorite heroes for now. But if we include the factions not included heroes, then I would say Thranduil, Galadriel, Arwen, Tauriel, Goblin King and The defiler.

2) Well, I do find Beregond boring, I think it's beacuse of the way he attacks with his spear and his abilities is not uninteresting but not interesting either. I don't find the Nazguls as interesting as I think they should be - but I do use them. I also think that Gothmog's attack damge is to low and that Mollock has to low health considered that he is a troll - But they're fun.

3) I think you did a good job making all heroes have some sort of "role" Some is meant for tanking and some is meant to deal damage. But yeah most of the heroes are fun to play.

4) In the beginnig when I started playing the game I needed to adjust to the fact that heroes aren't that strong anymore - with that said, after I tried it a lot, I think that it was a good idea that you did what you did, but some heroes have to low health I think (Gandalf, Witch-King, Gothmog, Mollock, the Nazguls, and maybe Boromir) Roahn heroes are nearly "perfect" I think.

5) Lurtz with bow is seriously too weak. Boromir has a very low damage also (I know he is tank, but then again) Gothmog has a low damage too.  Nazguls and Mouth of Sauron do not damge enough in my opinion. Again Rohan heroes is nearly "perfect" in both health and damage I think.

6) Again, Lurtz with bow is not sufficient enough. Bregond with bow could also get a little stronger, but only a little I think. Faramir is good both ranged and melee if you ask me.

7) As of now I think that Gandalf is far too weak (considered his cost - for now I would say he should cost 2000-2500) I think that both Wizard Blast and Word Of Power should damage units to the "red bar" - Wizard Blast now do only half the health of units (which I don't think is enough) I agree that these abilities should not kill all units in the area, especially when units are clumping) That would be to overpowered in my opinion. I think that damaging to the "red bar" would be a reasonable solution. I would like to say that I think that Saruman is good though (he is as he should be, perfect) Although I would wish that his fireball were much stronger, against everything, especially heroes (like in the vanilla game, he used to have a significant damage on heroes.) Éomer's spear is also kinda useless to me (Do not damage enough) Théoden's favor was also better before - just normally experience. Nazgul's curse blade is also kinda useless to me ( I never use it) Mouth Of Sauron's beam does not damage enough, but all his other abilities are great and usefull. I would also like to say that you did an excellent job with Sharku, he has really improved since vanilla were he was extremely vulnerable.

8) I think I already answered that question above.

9) I think Word Of Power and Wizard Blast should damage to the "red bar" not the yellow as it is now - that is too low.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: helloa2134 am 11. Jun 2015, 13:27
I will reply to each of your questions in turn Lord of Mordor
First I will say I am a huge supporter of the weakening heroes from 3.8.1.  Currently I think the general status of heroes is pretty much perfect, with only a few select heroes needing a tweak.  I agree with you that ALL heroes are essentially support for armies, and not armies in their own right.

1)My absolute favorite hero is currently Beregond. He's an early game hero, very cheap, great at killing creeps, and has a host of very unique abilities.  He is especially good at supporting outlying farms.  His ability to strengthen nearby buildings is immensely useful.  His level 10 ability, the one which enables him to spawn soldiers of the white company, is both very cool and very useful.  He is definitely not a fighter, but he has his strengths in other fields. Also, he evokes some heavy Oblivion nostalgia with his voice, so thats fun.
Mordor's heroes, especially Sauron, are all awesome. However,  I almost never use Mollok , so I cant really speak for him.
Rohan's heroes are all good, especially Gamling, who is especially useful for his early game ability to summon infantry squads, as well as for his late game ability to reinforce all squads and speed up infantry production. Theoden, both corrupted and not, has a host of useful abilities. Glorious Charge especially is both useful and simply badass. Denethor is just a thoroughly unique hero, and he has really cool abilities. You also did a very good job of showing Denethor's descent into madness through the use of the palantir, so kudos for that.

2)I have only minor gripes about a few heroes.  Aragorn's King Elessar faction-wide ability needs some refinement, but that is a separate topic. Other than that Aragorn is fine. Theodred is really only useful once he has been leveled up a bit. I wouldn't go so far as to say he is bad though. I also don't feel Mel Gibson's voice is really fitting but that isn't really a major complaint.  :D  Imrahil is a thoroughly average hero. He isn't particularly useful aside from being a prerequisite for the production of Dol Amroth heroes. I usually produce him for that, but I don't ever feel excited about using him.
Boromir currently isn't as useful because his horn has been marginalized because of the widespread fear resistance, but that issue is being solved. Lurtz and Ugluk are thematically good, as the leaders of the Uruk-hai, but their abilities are not that impressive. Ugluk's heal and leadership are useful, but his late game abilities are meh. Lurtz as well is ok, but not great. I use them when they are required, but don't look forward to using them. N.B. If I don't mention a hero, I think he/she is great currently.

3/4/5)Yes, I think heroes are currently fun to play and useful as well. I think, generally, they are well balanced health-wise and damage-wise and thematically appropriate as well.

6)Heroes with both melee and range (like Beregond) are useful, though I do tend to stick with one. It's useful when my hero gets wounded, I can pull my hero out of harm's way but still have him do damage to the enemy. Lurtz and Faramir, who have ranged abilities as well as melee, encourage me to use both ranged and melee, though I do tend to stick to one over the other.

7)Gandalf/Saruman are useful, but expensive. At the same time, I do not think their powers could be strengthened significantly without unbalancing the game, nor do I think their cost should be lowered much.

8/9) Word of Power should weaken an upgraded army or drastically wound non-upgraded infantry , but not kill them outright. Naturally a ring-empowered Gandalf should do even more damage to the extent that it heavily damages even an upgraded army. But to kill an army with one click is too powerful and not at all strategic. It's fun when playing against the AI, but just annoying when playing multiplayer. The same can be said for Saruman's lightening strike.  Wizard's blast should do approximately 300 damage (going by your figures listed above.) Normal soldiers should be brought to low health and elite infantry should be harmed significantly. However, hero-infantry (like Citadel Guards) should barely be affected. I mean, hero-infantry should be able to kill heroes.
If Wizard's Blast does more damage as the hero levels up, then it should kill basic non-upgraded infantry outright at higher levels.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: numan1111 am 11. Jun 2015, 13:35
Zitat von: NicolajLarsen am 11. Jun 2015, 12:56
1) My favorite heroes must be Saruman, Lurts, Éowyn, With-king and Boromir (Even though I think that Boromir, Lurts with bow and Witch-king is too weak) That would be my favorite heroes for now. But if we include the factions not included heroes, then I would say Thranduil, Galadriel, Arwen, Tauriel, Goblin King and The defiler.

2) Well, I do find Beregond boring, I think it's beacuse of the way he attacks with his spear and his abilities is not uninteresting but not interesting either. I don't find the Nazguls as interesting as I think they should be - but I do use them. I also think that Gothmog's attack damge is to low and that Mollock has to low health considered that he is a troll - But they're fun.

3) I think you did a good job making all heroes have some sort of "role" Some is meant for tanking and some is meant to deal damage. But yeah most of the heroes are fun to play.

4) In the beginnig when I started playing the game I needed to adjust to the fact that heroes aren't that strong anymore - with that said, after I tried it a lot, I think that it was a good idea that you did what you did, but some heroes have to low health I think (Gandalf, Witch-King, Gothmog, Mollock, the Nazguls, and maybe Boromir) Roahn heroes are nearly "perfect" I think.

5) Lurtz with bow is seriously too weak. Boromir has a very low damage also (I know he is tank, but then again) Gothmog has a low damage too.  Nazguls and Mouth of Sauron do not damge enough in my opinion. Again Rohan heroes is nearly "perfect" in both health and damage I think.

6) Again, Lurtz with bow is not sufficient enough. Bregond with bow could also get a little stronger, but only a little I think. Faramir is good both ranged and melee if you ask me.

7) As of now I think that Gandalf is far too weak (considered his cost - for now I would say he should cost 2000-2500) I think that both Wizard Blast and Word Of Power should damage units to the "red bar" - Wizard Blast now do only half the health of units (which I don't think is enough) I agree that these abilities should not kill all units in the area, especially when units are clumping) That would be to overpowered in my opinion. I think that damaging to the "red bar" would be a reasonable solution. I would like to say that I think that Saruman is good though (he is as he should be, perfect) Although I would wish that his fireball were much stronger, against everything, especially heroes (like in the vanilla game, he used to have a significant damage on heroes.) Éomer's spear is also kinda useless to me (Do not damage enough) Théoden's favor was also better before - just normally experience. Nazgul's curse blade is also kinda useless to me ( I never use it) Mouth Of Sauron's beam does not damage enough, but all his other abilities are great and usefull. I would also like to say that you did an excellent job with Sharku, he has really improved since vanilla were he was extremely vulnerable.

8) I think I already answered that question above.

9) I think Word Of Power and Wizard Blast should damage to the "red bar" not the yellow as it is now - that is too low.
I agree with you man with all points.Especially about wizard heroes.Blast and wop is really weak.Also fireball ability is so weak.Cant kill even gondor knights(without armor).
Also Sauron with ring should be stronger.(he has a little damage even though his attack speed is slow).Also Witchking is weak, too wrt his cost.And Aragorn is useless I think.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Adrigabbro am 11. Jun 2015, 15:41
Zitat von: Lord of Mordor am 11. Jun 2015, 04:37
We wanted heroes to shine when used in combination to normal troops, with the troops guarding the hero and the hero supporting the army. They should not be one-man armies, but they should still have a significant influence on the battlefield if you combine them with your soldiers and play them well.

First, I'd like to say that I completely agree with you on that point and that you globally managed particularly well.


1) I like Sauron, all Nazguls, Lurtz, Ugluk, Saruman, Faramir, Aragorn, pretty much all Rohan heroes and especially Rohan captains.
On the other hand I dislike Mollok (I think Mordor doesn't need such a hero and removing him wouldn't harm the faction; plus he is not lore frendly). I think Gandalf's Istari Light should be removed in favor of a leadership because his supporting aspect is totally forgotten. Finally I'd nerf Grima again on his base damage and survivability while reducing his price so that his non fighter but vicious threat aspect is clearly shown.

2) Mollok is the only one.

3) Heores are both very fun and important.

4) They have the very right amount of health.

5) Melee damage are fine but there's one thing that is not fine at all in my opinion: it is the damage of flying units/heroes on catapults; although it was too high in 3.8.1, it is now far too low.

6) I don't really know on that one. It feels like ranged damag eare low but in the same time it would be OP if ranged heroes got more damage, right?

7) 8) 9) I think Gandalf is worth recruiting only if you have a lot of resources to spend (unlike Sarum who is I think much stronger). His wizard blast damage is quite ok but word of powers' is not: for a level 10 ability of such a powerful hero, I do think it should kill all non elite units in a large radius.


EDIT: Special mntion to Theoden and his glorious charge: it is so fraking awesome.
I also forgot to state that I've found one thing very frustrating: it's the fact that Sauron (in all forms) has to come near the building he wants to influence, that's against fun. Same thing for Denethor and his upgrade to a banner carrier. It would be so much better, I think, if there was no range restriction on those powers.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: ziqing am 11. Jun 2015, 15:45
Gondor: Useful
Boromir is definitely the core hero here, he has the most powerful leadership and very useful skills.
Faramir is also good, unfortunately he could only be recruited through ranger camps, or he will definitely be the most common hero
Beregond is good, he only costs 1000 after all and could give some defense bonus for building

Not useful

Aragorn is too expensive for a pure hero killer, I mean for his cost he should definitely be the main hero for late stage. My suggestion is as always, make Aragron change his role from hero killer to unit supporter with hero killer aspect as he follows his destiny. As ranger he is a pure hero killer, with ranger cloak he is like an assassin. From the second form he should gradually have stronger leadership and maybe lose part of his hero-killer aspects, we should think a way to avoid the leadership from becoming too strong together with Boromir and Faramir 's. I think there is more than one threads here for the discussion of this topic.

Imrahil: He is a good supplement for Gondor. But I hardly ever get him in a real game. Because I really don't build fortress that much. Maybe we should make him more accessible in the future.

Gandalf: As a 3000 hero with a power only to support him, he is really not worth it. My suggestion is to cancel that white wizard power, gandalf could transform from grey to white at level 5 when he get shadowfax, and maybe also give him some fear resistance leadership. To make his fire ring counts, maybe we should Gandalf more of a supporter instead of massive killer. Actually, looking at all his current abilities, lighting sword and white light are effective towards enemy heroes, which makes him more like a hero killer.

Rohan has the most reasonable hero design, all heroes have clear roles and are of reasonable price. Theoden is the most important one, he is very cheap and could provide a leadership and other support  in very early game. He could transform to his battle form for free with a 3-points power. The next important one is Gamling， his summon ability of lv 2 farmer is ridiculously strong in the early game, not to mention his ability to regenerate units of all maps. The third one is Eomer, his looting leadership is a very important supplement for Rohan's economy in the middle and late stage of game,they need a lot of money to train rohan riders and purchase upgrades after all, since we cann't change from farmer-based army to rider-based army naturally. Other heroes are also useful in their own way.

Isengard doesn't rely on hero too much. Uglak is the most useful hero in my opinion, for his dark medicine and march ability and his late game leadership. Lutrz is a hero killer, but that's all about it. Saruman is not very useful, but thanks to Isengard's powerful economy it is not a big deal to recruit him in the middle game. Shakru is only useful when you decide to use warg riders, but since warg riders are not powerful enough to be used as main force of Isengard, he is not that useful, but again I would definitely recruit him if I choose to use warg riders. I never use Grimma or lutz in the game, and to be honest I do not think Grimma deserve to be a hero candidate, a summon from Saruman is enough. My suggestion has been posted before, that makes Saruman a early stage hero, which is basically a unit and building supporter and will transform to his battle form via an upgrade. Since no one pays attention, I would rather keep it that way.

Mordor: I always thought Mordor has more than enough unit diversity but not very satisfying recruitment mechanism, as for heroes, witchking and khamul are too expensive(considering they need fortress and upgrades), while mordor doesn't have extra economy supports(the orcs are free, but they cann't be transformed into economic advantages). The other two Nazguls are also easy to kill, black rider horde is much more powerful and sustainable but they are too expensive. Two orcs heroes are the most common and important hero for mordor, although Gothmog is also very weak in the battle field. Mouth of Sauron seems useful, but again, he is too expensive and highly relies on the level of Necromancer. Mollock is very uncommon for me, and based on my limited experience he is too easy to be killed consider his cost(he recovers too slow)
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Walküre am 11. Jun 2015, 19:26
I think that the heroes are arguably the most interesting and significant elements of every faction, along obviously with the other elements and parts of the game  :)
This topic is crucial and essential  8-)

1) Without any secret, my favourite hero is obviously Galadriel  :)
She is the leader of her faction and the guardian of the enchanted Golden Wood, made enchanted and sacred by Galadriel herself.

But, since she is not part of the Edain Mod 4.0 yet (I obviously have some very interesting and valuable proposals about her, but I will wait the right time and won't reveal my cards yet  :P), I have to talk about my current favourite hero.

Currently, I really like and appreciate Khamûl :)
I think you perfectly managed to give him a proper status and proper powers for his role as a Building Destroyer; with the passive power 'Khamûl's Presence' his Magic can gradually corrode all the structures he is next to.
Really REMARKABLE!
A true representation of Tolkien's idea of Magic, the presence of a powerful magical being (good or evil) have effects on the Weather of the World and on the sorrounding things  :)

2) I generally use all the heroes of Mordor and Isengard, but I tend not to use or recruit later heroes like Pippin, Boromir when I play Gondor, and Théodred when I play Rohan; I personally don't find those heroes really particular both in their presence and powers.

3) It's generally really fun and exciting playing with them.
But, sometimes, I feel annoyed if they are killed too soon or have not significant effects on the battlefield; for example when Gandalf or Saruman encounter Gríma or other Hero Killers, it seems that their doom is already decided, like they had no chance.
I know that the Hero Killers are so effective for their own role, but, at least, Gandalf or Saruman should have a possibility to repulse them and have thus a chance to flee.

4) The goal has been mostly achieved, but I think that powerful heroes (especially the leaders of the factions) should definitely be more resistant.

5) The heroes are generally effective against troops and structures, but they should totally be more effective against monsters and other heroes.

6) Yes, I do find them useful.

7) His spells should be stronger, and also very dangerous also for the other heroes.

8) The blast should annihilate completely all the basic troops and soldiers, like Orcs and Gondor's basic soldiers (obviously if they were not enhanced by armours or other upgrades); and I would prefer a less damage but a wider radius.

Given these numbers, I would say 700-800.

9) The 'Word of Power' is indeed powerful already by its nature of an iconic destructive power from BFME1  :)

As I wrote for the wizard's blast, it should annihilate completely all the basic units without upgrades and 'moderately' harm all the other ones.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: The Dark Lord am 11. Jun 2015, 19:59
1 i ilke the nazgul khamul witchking lurtz uluk gorthaur saruman gothmog
2 i dont use molluk alot because of the price its to high
3 heroes are real fun makes it more like the movies
4 nazgul are too low on healt the cant take one battalion of spearon on on there own the witcking to weak khamul healt is good i like how he is now and nazgul on there fell beast are weak too
5 well i think spearmon are too steong againt heroes the die quiqly
6 range attacks are fine
7 i think gorthaur should get a attack abilty on lvl 4  maby 5 to make him more useful on the battlefield
That what i think about it :)
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: AndulusOptimus am 11. Jun 2015, 21:14
Dear Edain-Team,
great architects and creators of beautiful games

First of all: I always loved that you develop this GAME (not mod) together hand in hand with the community. Something all big studios should copy and at the end the most rewarding and effective way, even though you have to endure some hard discussion times. ;)

Before answering your questions let me say, that I mostly play the "Legendary heroes"-mode. But more on this during my feedback:

1) Aragon is for example one of the heroes, who is big fun to play, because he is changing in abilities and design over time with his experience. I LOVE this! This is one great example for a very interesting character, though I have to admit his stats are not the best (espacially health). Also I love all Mordor heroes, especially the system between sauron and his ringheroes, as well as Ugluk from Isengart. Rohan heroes are ok, but I only very rarely play Rohan, so this may be the reason why.

2) When I think about it, the only one I have never used is Shakur. But I rarely use wargs with isengart which is my personal style when I play isengart as faction. But I have to admit he is one of the least interesting characters - for me!

3) YES!! Heroes are the key to the uniqueness of the factions, the fun, the versatility, the identification with the world!! And you created GREAT heroes and villains already, with unique abilities, great animations and and and! NEVER relinquish this great piece of work!!

4) Good question! I mostly play "Legendary heroes" because in my opinion heroes in the other game modes die far too fast, level up too slow in comparison to the speed of the game and thus cost far too much. Especially some faction leaders like Gandalf.

5) Mostly heroes die too fast, damage is in my opinion mostly very good balanced. Maybe some issues here and there but well I could not tell you specificly what.

6) Haven´t seen elven ranged heroes yet, hope they have some more distance. But I got no complaints about the ranged heroes which are established yet.

Switching weapon is in my opinion a very unique and useful skill, but sometimes none of both skills is mastered strong enough. For example Farodin and Lurtz both do no great damage in aiming with a bow or slaying with the sword. I would think its great if theres still a specialisation. For example Lurtz is stronger with his sword and Farodin is stronger with his bow (as in the movies). You could give them additional skills when having another weapon (like lurtz already has).

7) Gandalf is far too weak for one of the strongest characters. So are his abilities.

8) something about 400-600. Shouldn´t be too strong but strong enough to kill middle class units like gondor soldiers without males (at least when gandalf the white!).

9) FIRST: Gandalfs health should be immensive higher; SECOND: Levelling him should become harder, due to the reason that when you use his abilities well, he levels up quite fast, especially against armies. THIRD: yes, Word of Power should damage intensively. Mordor, for example, has other advantages that hold against Gandalfss word of Power. Perhaps you can prolong the cooldown-time, because it surely is a very strong power and should not be used frequently.

At last let me say, that especially to the mages Saruman and Gandalf you could add more powers, like you did with Saruman in Edain mod 3.8.1. I have to admit I really dislike Saruman in this version. Hes boring and week and no faction leader at all.

But as always, these are minor balance issues and very high-level critics, you know, we all love this game and cant wait for MORE! ;)

All the best, stay sharp, cheers

your companion,
AndulusOptimus
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Morgul Orc am 11. Jun 2015, 23:08
1) I like Khamul, The Witch-King, Gandalf, Saruman, Aragorn,Theoden, Lurtz, Ugluk and Gothmog. I like to use all Heroes of Isengard and Mordor except Molluk because he's a little expensive. I also like to use all Heroes of Rohan and Gondor but not big fan of the Hobbit Heroes.

2) Some Heroes like Gorbag are weak and cheap that can be useful at start but they don't matter in later game.

3) Yes, I think every Hero is fun to play because they are unique in the Hero system that the Edain Team made.

4) To be fair I think Heroes like Khamul needs to have more health, less than The Witch-King but more than the regular Nazguls. When I use the Nazguls they are usually on foot because they die very quick if they were on horse from pike and if they are on fellbeast from arrows, even 1 archer battalion without fire arrows can inflict good damage and also they die quickly if they are attacking a base from buildings that shoot arrows. I think the rest can be solved with the Hero game mode.

5) I think monsters are weaker now against Heroes, you can fairly kill a Cave troll easily, I remember in BFME1 Cave trolls knock down Heroes when they hit them that's why you need archers and pike to help kill the Cave Troll.

6) Range is good since the Hero will attack from a far but when melee for example Lurtz has a better power than when in range.

7) Not generally weak but I think he needs a little adjustments

8) I think Wizard blast should be a single target attack that can take down one battalion since it's a level 1 power even if the battalion is armed, it should take the battalion down this way, it can be used wisely on Hero units and elite units or units with armor. Or It can take down HP to red as someone here suggested. I however disagree with the idea that it should knock down basic units and units without armor  because all of Mordor's basic orcs cannot receive heavy armor.

9) Word of Power should either knock down enemies and make their defence really weak and vulnerable to damage or take their HP to red.

And I suggest that the Lights of the Ishtari ability should be changed into causing the Enemy Hero to flee in fear instead of light damage like in the films.

I also really think Gandalf should have a powerful leadership, since most of the times he is giving people hope in the films, maybe resistance to fear as well.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: kreso am 14. Jun 2015, 03:59
Hi Edain team :)

Enjoy in reading :D
I please You Edain team(Admin). I would like to see Your answer and critics to this suggestions. I make some corrections and amendments. Sorry for my English.

1.,2.,3.,4.) I give some suggestion for each faction heros:

Rohan
Eyown, she is only1 who can challange many enemy heros in Rohan hero pool. REALLY GOOD JOB .
Theoden, corupted or not, early game potentional in my opinon that is the best hero u made, later Theoden's skill Glory Hour should give instant XP).
Theodred is bad for late game, dont have leadership, maybe he could have some leadership for Royal Guards(on horses, and foot if u make Hama's Guards permanet), he is King's son, so Royal Gurads are more motivated to fight.
Eomer spear should have more dmg (he killed Mumakil with it :P) And his lvl10 skill, should call, spawn "Loyal Rohirrim" or "Eored" (maybe some sort of Royal Guard) because now his lvl10 is hard to use in good situation, and it is useless a lot of time, because when he is lvl 10 i do not use that skill, coz i already have Rohirrim to do same effect as that skill did. I think "Loyal Rohirrim"or "Eored" should be fearless, and bit faster than other Rohirrim. They could look like normal Rohirrim with just some detail, who makes them a bit diffrent.
Royal Guards most be more connected with Hama, for example Royal Gurads(required Hama spawned, coz i woudnt spend lot of resuources to upgrade foged blades and shields, to unlock Royal Guards).
 Three Hunters are too low duration. Maybe they should be permanent after 3rd cast, or 1 by 1 called for every cast. but this is litle bit useless. If u get them, than Rohan should have too many heros,if u see problem in that, so longer duration of them. But count how many heroes have Mordor, so it would be equal. They was all time in Rohan and defend Rohan. They deserve thier place in ther hero pool. I know Aragon most be uniqe same as Gimli and Legolas, but thier main part was in Rohan. Maybe Gimli and Legolas could be summoned by spell and Aragon just periodically same as now.

 In Gondor (I love Aragon as figure of all story of the WotR. He is best of all men, and he most be more usefull, he is like hero killer, masskiller and unit supporter. Yeah that would be 2OP, but lets balance thing, u make him really fun coz of his transformance on 4,7,10lvls, but he is not so playable and that transformance will be always used. U dont let player to decide will he used that now or later, every next upgrade/transformace is better and better, so normaly u pick it fastest as u can. Advice: lvl1-3 he gets heal (Athelas), Cloak of Ranger(Invisibility for some seconds while he can move), and Blade Master(bonus attack dmg)  in lvl4, from Strider he goes into Aragon(gets Elven Scabbard(range one high dmg hit)), Passive: gets low splash radius(He can dmg 2-3 targets in front) and hero supporter (Heros near Aragon gain attack dmg and defence/moral defence(armor/health)) Lvl7 he transform his blade to Andruril, He gets passive: bonus attack dmg and bonus attack dmg and armor to Blade Master. In lvl 10 transfor in King Elessar,Passive: leadership bonus for all unit(fearless and bonus defence and faster gain xp).So delete mini-Army of the Dead that he call as lvl 10 because we have that in 10pp. Or maybe u can use that skill only if Aragon is lvl 7 so if he have Anduril.  Cost should be 2500, but for every transform more 400 gold, so he cost at last 3700(U cant get king for just 2500) :). Boromir should get some hp, splash radius, a bit lower dmg, and bonus leadership is only for units from Gondor baracks. Faramir higer bow dmg, lower blade dmg, bonus leadership only for Rangers and some hp for him, cost 1400.That leaderships stacks with Aragon's leadership. Denethor should cost 800 gold. Just compare him with Theoden, and u will see why should he cost 800. Gandalf in 8-9. Bergond is balanced and very fine and playable. :)
Gondor have a lot of diffrent units, but hero... :/ So they need some buffs(op things) for heros, same as Isengard.

 Isengard
 I like Lurtz blade and 3lvl skill when he gets splash dmg. Grima, cost 1300. he is really nice hero killer, Isengard needs him, they dont have so many heros. Honestly all heros are hero killers, so. 2 no-hero killers could kill 1 hero killer. So dont nerf him coz he is strong right now. :) 
Saruman, he is leader Isengard with full dominance, he most be good in every aspect, and economy and army, suporting both.He most be so connected with every thing about Isengard. I cant speak about that coz then i most speak about Isengard playstyle, but U are much better in that thing than me. U make Isengard playstyle good, just intergate Saruman more. He is a bit low hp, just need more resistance, coz he is easy target, if u want land good wizard blast u most be close units, than enemys assassns kill him easly.

Mordor, Nazguls are balanced well, high dmg/low hp, as they should be, but I have nice advice for all Nazguls(including Khamul, Witch-King, and Black Riders) they should be same as Sauron, imortal. So my suggestion is: Nazguls, when they die, turns into ghost like sauron, but look like ghost(white):
 1.) they most back to the Citadel to be respawned (required Sauron pawned) but lower cost after 1. time spawning.
 2.) they have timer like sauron for respawning, then u can balance them.
Because they spam orcwarriors and nazguls so fast and just that combination always wins. So if u put longer cooldown on that timer, they will switch game strategy to other thing that u put in Mordor faction and game with or against Mordor wil be more interesting.
Mollok is a bit expensive, he should be 2000, but lower dmg.
Mouth of Sauron, verry well because he is difficult to play, and u just let ur orc warriors, nazguls and orc archers to fight and u control Mouth of Sauron best as u can.


So i love to play with: Theoden, Eyown, Gamling Lurtz, Sauron(coz of Influence), Nazglus, Bergond, Denethor. Both hobbit :D


I dont even spawn: Saruman, Mollok, Gandalf, Aragon, Faramir, Theodred, Grima.



5)Bow of Faramir should kill Mountain Troll in 3-6 hits depends on lvl. Because spears and Bows should kill trols easly, so same Faramir should.



6)Ratio from Bow and Sword should be  1:0,75=sword:bow. Elves will bring more that thing i think. :)




7., 8. and 9.) 

Gandalf: His basic attacks most be more massive or u most reduce Cooldown of wizard blast. His cost is 3000, too expensive. So buff for Gandalf.Should have 300dmg(lvl1)-700dmg(lvl 10)(and 2pp,Gandalf The White +100% attack bonus)1400 at last(when he reach lvl 10, all units shuld be armored so that woudnt be so OP.), but lower cooldown for Wizard Blast.(if that is possible).
World of Power should declining with larger area of effect. So high dmg in center, low dmg on the edge of effect. :)

Thanks if U read to the end.
I love U I appreciate your work :) I please You Edain team(Admin). I would like to see ur answer and critics to this suggestions.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: vados202 am 15. Jun 2015, 17:54
Hello, team Edain! Hello to you from Russia!
1) My favorite characters is Sauron, the nazgûl, Galadriel, Gandalf.
2) No, I try to use all heroes available to me.
3) I really like the characters in your mod, this is one of the most important components of each faction!
4) overall health heroes all right, only who is too strong - Gríma.
5) And here I have many complaints about the characters. First of all flying units have transformed from a formidable force in an unwanted creatures, not even able to destroy the catapult. Given that at the moment Khamul and Witch-King are the most expensive heroes, this fact is especially painful perceived. Also, it is necessary to strengthen Gortaur and Sauron with the ring - the latter is now generally miserable. But according to the book, Sauron was really powerful and without the ring, and even with him it was just a beast! Also, I would add abilities to Sauron as the Necromancer, many interesting proposals have on this forum.
6) Yes, both modes are useful.
7) Now Gandalf is too expensive. I think that should be strengthened.
8) somewhere 500 hp to remove.
9) I Think that Gandalf's ring without this ability must kill all unimproved nebitnih units units. And here at Gandalf with the ring analogue of this ability could kill everyone except the elite troops in the armor.
Also, I have noticed a bug, if Sauron uses influence to the slaughter, then the trolls get to wear armor, though just have to pump level.

Best wishes!
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Tienety am 19. Jun 2015, 14:20
1) My favorite heroes:
Rohan: all heroes
Gondor: Pippin, Beregond, Boromir and Gandalf
Isengard: Ugluk, Lurtz and Saruman
Mordor: Gorbag/Shagrath, Gothmog, all Nazgul, Mouth of Sauron and Nekromancer

2)
Bill Ferry: I don't like this character in Edain mod, he has bad voice and abilities.
I have a feeling that Bill does not fit into Isengard. Maybe Mauhur would be better as scout.

Mollock: He's too expensive and he not very interesting character.

Faramir: He's a little unattractive in Rangers camp. I think that should be in the fortress. Also, his horse should be available earlier on level 3.

Aragorn: He's too expensive and he has not strong leadership on level 10, Maybe he should have leadership for heroes. Lurtz costs only half the price and he is more useful.

3) Most of the heores are very fun and important.

4) Heroes health is fine

5) melee attacks are fine

6) Maybe ranged attack should be stronger against the monster.

7,8,9) I think that Gandalf and others mass slayer with abilities like Word of Power or Wizard Blast should be able to kill basic units like Gondor soldiers without heavy armor or Mordor orcs without strong leadership.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Morgul Orc am 19. Jun 2015, 22:01
Zitat
Bill Ferry: I don't like this character in Edain mod, he has bad voice and abilities.
I have a feeling that Bill does not fit into Isengard. Maybe Mauhur would be better as scout.
I agree with you 100% on this. Mauhur would be a better and a fitting replacement.

Zitat
Mollock: He's too expensive and he not very interesting character.
I agree as well.






Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: jcaramhir am 20. Jun 2015, 15:08
MABUHAY Edain Team

1-2) as of now 4.02 version my favorite Heroes are: Gondor=Aragorn for his unique support & hero killer combination type skills, & the level evolution. Beregond but too weak, i want him to be a tanker type for a building support in melee mode but less defence in range mode. Rohan=All Heroes. Isengard=All Heroes except Bill. Mordor=All Heroes but Mollock i want him to be the tanker against melee & riders & have a strong passive troll support skill & Witch-King i can't sense his fear factor, i want his last skill to be more powerful & effective "No man can kill the Witch-King" I think the condition of his strength & existence is that the only being that can destroy him is a woman not a man, even the white wizard Gandalf is no much for him.
my idea & suggestion is this, when the Witch-King is being attacked by a man and turns his HP bar to 0% he will become a ghost and regain his HP bar again, but if a woman do that! he will be totaly killed. but if possible for a modder to do that!

and the Ring Heroes are my favorite for final assault.

3) Heroes are unique & fun to play with them but some are useless and boring.

4-5) Health & melee/range dmge of the Heroes should be according to each uniqueness and endurance, type and size and onething, I suggest to add another HP bar when a Hero is on a mount or on a flight mode for ex: Nazgul on a Drake they must have each individual HP bar & strengthen their dmge when they aimed a ground target unit/s.

6) toggle mode is unique & very useful.

7-8-9) the cost is not ok with me, since at first we buy Gandalf as a Grey form. I suggest that he has weak skills compare to White form but has a self mana shield & a Heroes/units support passive skill at level 1~2, "to avoid complication make Wizard Blast at level 3-5", level 6~8 he got the powerful lightning sword, level 9 he got the mount Shadow Fox and became the White Wizard, and finally level 10 he got the Word of Power.

Pls.Destructive skills must have expanded cooldowntime but more powerful & effectiveness.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Aulendil am 20. Jun 2015, 21:27
1) of the characters in the game, most of all I like Gandalf, Aragorn, eowyn, Saruman, Lurtz, Sauron, Witch-King and the other Nazgul.
2) unfortunately, some heroes are now a waste of money. And so, I like almost all of the characters.
3) Characters are very important to me, I like to see characters in books and movies in the game!
4) legendary heroes they are too thick, and in other modes, in contrast, is weak. And Yes, heroes-scouts need to loosen. Sauron with the ring with only 5 shots kills Pippin!
5) I am not pleased with the damage of heroes, some would probably cost a lot to reinforce. The necromancer is a storehouse of potential interesting abilities! Eagles and Nazgul on the Wyverns should be seriously strengthened! And Yes, IMHO it is necessary to reconsider the approach to the ring heroes. If the players want to "honestly" game, they can disable heroes of the ring, but if they play for fun, most powerful heroes with a ring to give a lot of fun.
6) Lurtz ought to give you some more damage, like Faramir.
7) Spells Gandalf would be worth strengthen.
8)This spell is too weak, should be strengthened.
9) the Word of the authorities would do well to strengthen. Gandalf the Dark could kill any troops, in addition to heroic, such as riders of the Morgul or the castellans
P. S. Please increase the points of command in mode Legendary heroes
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Gandalf The Gray am 15. Jul 2015, 17:02
i think some heroes should have some weaknesses lets say sauron should be a lil bit more op but he should be weak against aragorn because of the sword so both players can be satisfied but both players can counter one another with the right heroes bufs ect
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Eldalf am 17. Jul 2015, 12:18
I think wizards over all need a rethink. I would like to see Wizards gain more powerful defenses, but lose the army killer function entirely. Add a powerful army buff to Gandalf, and massively bump up the power of Istari light, but remove entirely word of power. Let him be the guy who kills a Dragon, or slays a Balrog, but that horde of enemies, well you better make sure you brought an army... We need to return to Tolkien with our wizards, not be stuck in Harry Potter.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Gandalf The Gray am 17. Jul 2015, 17:59
Zitat von: Eldalf am 17. Jul 2015, 12:18
I think wizards over all need a rethink. I would like to see Wizards gain more powerful defenses, but lose the army killer function entirely. Add a powerful army buff to Gandalf, and massively bump up the power of Istari light, but remove entirely word of power. Let him be the guy who kills a Dragon, or slays a Balrog, but that horde of enemies, well you better make sure you brought an army... We need to return to Tolkien with our wizards, not be stuck in Harry Potter.

you have a point but they need to keep the balance
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: TiberiusOgden am 17. Jul 2015, 18:33
Zitat von: Eldalf am 17. Jul 2015, 12:18
Let him be the guy who kills a Dragon
Gandalf is dragon-slayer? 8-| ... Poor Bard. :(

Zitat von: Eldalf am 17. Jul 2015, 12:18
remove entirely word of power
:o ... This simply isn't possible. Word of power is his iconic ability from BFME1. In the Hobbit movies, Lotr movies and even in the books we can see that he casts powerful light attacks.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Eldalf am 17. Jul 2015, 19:13
Yes the istari light power, but word of power is a direct slap in the face of Gandalf the wizard. The books describe a shaft of white light, the movies even show this. Yes word of power is iconic to the bfme game series, but it strikes me as problematic for army killer heroes to even exist. Bfme as a game series suffers from a problem of being, Hero Wars. By instead shifting it to a powerful army wide buff for instance, you can reinforce the role of the Wizard as the passive inspiration behind actions which they were intended to be. Keep word of power as a ring hero power, but it does strike me as odd to say the least to see Gandalf the Grey walking into an army and blasting it away with a raw use of power as being in keeping with being strictly forbidden from seeking to contest Sauron might for might.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Darthxxxx15 am 24. Jul 2015, 18:01
I unfortunately don't have the time to explain everything for the moment but all i can say is that the complete hero scale has to be reworked, and for once, i prefered the scale  made by professionnals in the original game.

Evidently, ET tries to make it best, that's why they take into account our suggestions, but it is anormal that all rohan heroes are that strong, Eowyn is just unkillable for what she is,

About Ganddalf, he is, to me, both too weak in his spells and in his strength, he should easiloy beat all heroes exepting enemies like the witchking who could defeat him quite easily or sauron of course but today, i had a simple nazgul, alone, who killed my gandalf extremely rapdily

IMO, the hero scale is one of the rare thing to completely rework in the mod because as i often say for the rest, what a talent!
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Shadowlord am 13. Aug 2015, 00:56
1) My favorite heroes are Sauron, Shagrat & Gorbag, Theoden, Bilbo, Witch King, Boromir, and Saruman. My reasons being that all of these heroes are pretty useful, though some are harder to use than others like Saruman and Theoden. But I also love heroes that have a unique incorporation with their factions such as Sauron and his influence of Sauron ability that makes your army stronger, or Theoden's ability to empower your armies. The best part is the ring heroes, I can't tell you how satisfying it is to control the battlefield with ring hero Boromir despite how I was outnumbered by the enemy. Or the crazy variety of abilities that Ring Hero Sauron possesses.

2) In terms of heroes I don't like or rarely use, I can think of a few. For example, though I do like the concept of trolls, Mollok is a bit too expensive and difficult to use because of how weak he can be in combat when fighting archers and spearman, despite how he's suppose to be a tank. He is decent in the late game but he isn't that useful in the early game especially compared to the Nazgul, I would like to be able to use him more if he had more utility with Mordor. I always found the scout heroes to be very boring with the exception of Shagrat and Bilbo, the Spy from Bree is ok, the big reason is that the other two scout heroes Merry and Pippin  are used mostly to scout the enemy and provide visuals on their progress, which I feel has no significance in the meta game itself. The better scout heroes provide good economic benefits or cheap combat aid. Such as Bilbo's gold from the mountain ability or Shagrat's versatility. I admit the spy from bree has his uses in terms of his ultimate ability granting you resources, but beyond that all of his other abilities and pretty boring and not too useful. Merry and Pippin feel flat out useless in the end game. As for non scout heroes, I feel that Isengard's heroes aren't too useful, Saruman's tower mechanic is pretty cool despite the small range of Saruman's abilities while he is in the tower but other than him, the other Isengard heroes don't seem too useful to me, especially since when I play as Isengard I try to devote my economy to upgrading my units, and I feel that the heroes don't compliment that tactic as well as they should, especially Grima who seems too situational. The Rohan heroes though useful, they don't seem that fun when they are simply meant to compliment your army, rather than being useful on their own. But maybe that's the point of the Rohan heroes. Not sure

3) In my opinion the heroes are a mixed bag, on one hand with game changer heroes like Sauron, Theoden, and max level Boromir, you feel accomplished for the work you did in leveling them up. And showing off their powerful abilities to destroy the enemy or empower your army makes you feel all the more accomplished. Some heroes though don't provide enough utility for their cost like Gandalf, Saruman, and Mollok but have the potential to be pretty fun to play but their lack of utility or combat strength makes them less fun and more repetitive to use.

4) I feel that some heroes should be tankier like Mollok, Gandalf, and Gothmog. My idea is that heroes, especially the more renowned heroes from the lore should be able to hold their ground, not against large armies but small groups, and get taken down should they get overwhelmed by very large numbers or small groups of upgraded troops. This shouldn't apply to every hero but tankier heroes should be able to take a lot more abuse than they currently are in the game, especially damage from archers. Considering how insanely useful archers are in the game I think they shouldn't be able to deal as much damage to heroes as they currently do in the game. More specifically, heroes shouldn't be as vulnerable to infantry but rather more vulnerable against enemy heroes. In a nut shell, the health of heroes is not as healthy, I am not saying that for all heroes in the game, I am just saying it for most heroes.

5) I do like the melee damage of most heroes in the game, but it would be nice if heroes could do more damage against Calvary to discouraged spamming those units. I guess I just find it annoying when a hero is being chased down by calvary and can barely defend himself even at higher levels, I feel that it should be discouraged to use calavry against heroes and instead use upgraded soldiers, pikeman, and elite units instead. Other than that, melee damage is fine.

6) In terms of ranged hero damage, I feel that range heroes are simply meant to deal damage from a distance so they are less likely to get killed. I rarely use faramir but as for Lurtz, I don't switch him to melee mode except as a last resort to prevent him from getting overwhelmed. I would call the melee/range switch function an ok concept. Not great, but ok, I would leave it.

7) Gandalf's spells are definitely too weak for his cost, I feel that he would be a lot more useful and fun if his spells were more powerful like in the older versions of BFME, on top of the fact that Gandalf is pretty weak health wise.

8) In my mind the Wizard blast should be used as a crowd control ability to force the enemy player to manuever his armies carefully, but in the game the ability is pretty weak against non-basic infantry units, like if I hit a troll it would only damage like 1/3 of its health rather than push it back or increase the radius of the ability. The ability should make Gandalf less vulnerable against crowds of enemies to make up for his low armor. As for the damage question, I would say 1500-2000, since only the elite units should be able to withstand such a powerful ability, as I stated earlier, upgraded or elite units would be the preferred non-hero counter to heroes. If his wizard's blast cooldown needs to be increase with this buff than I am all for it.


9) As for the Word of Power. I feel that giving a 3000 cost hero a game changer ability is the key to securing his role as a game changer hero. Increasing the damage seems very necessary to making the hero useful, of course there are ways to prevent this ability from being too op such as making the cast time longer so your opponent can react to it more easily or having the ultimate destroy non-upgraded units but heavily damage upgraded units. This also applies to archers, siege weapons, calavry units, and monsters. But not being too effective against enemy heroes.  So overall I would prefer if the ability was more powerful but with a higher cooldown, casting time, and damaging specific non-upgraded units. Making it the perfect game changer ability for Gondor's game changer hero Gandalf.

Sorry if my suggestions came off as confusing or unclear but I hope these suggestions on hero improvements help improve the game overall.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Adrigabbro am 13. Aug 2015, 13:03

I respectfully disagree with you concerning resistance and health of heroes. I feel it wouldn't be fair if a single hero, no matter how strong he is, could defeat a whole army by himself. Also you want to reduce damage taken by heroes from archers, but they already take baely no damage from arrows. If anything, I would rather increase arrow damae to heroes.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Shadowlord am 20. Aug 2015, 05:36
"I respectfully disagree with you concerning resistance and health of heroes. I feel it wouldn't be fair if a single hero, no matter how strong he is, could defeat a whole army by himself. Also you want to reduce damage taken by heroes from archers, but they already take barely no damage from arrows. If anything, I would rather increase arrow damae to heroes."

I respect your opinion but when I meant a single hero being able to stand up to an army. I meant game changer heroes, like Sauron, Gandalf, Saruman. Those heroes who are powerful in their own right as the lore established. I feel that it would capture of the spirit of the characters more accurately to their book counterparts. As well as encouraging other players to try a different approach to killing said heroes. Like instead of spamming archers which is just an unfair and unbalanced strategy, trust me I have seen games where a player spamming rangers can destroy entire armies easily. And instead have the player try a more cautious approach like say isolating the hero or maybe using elite or upgraded units that wouldn't be as vulnerable to the enemy hero's spells. That is what would make a 3000 gold hero investment truly worth while.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Bogdan Hmel am 11. Okt 2015, 22:04
I want to restore the discussion in this thread. I hasten to say that I love this mod, and I write only because I want to help make it even better.
P.S.Next, I express only my opinion and I don't want to offend anyone.
P.P.S.English is not my native language, so I apologize in advance for any errors in the text.
  I believe that the need to increase the strength of the more powerful heroes. I also believe that it is necessary to slightly increase the armor of most heroes.
I think that the heroes should have a greater gap in power.I propose to be divided into three categories of heroes.
Heroes of the third rank (cost from 1000 to 1800-2000) These are the main characters, though, and have useful skills, but not outstanding personalities of Middle-earth             
The heroes of the second rank (cost from 1800-2000 to 2600) This outstanding heroes, one of the leaders of their factions.
They should have an advantage in the confrontation with the heroes of the third rank.
Finally, the heroes of the first rank (cost 3000) This is the most powerful heroes of the Third Age of Middle-earth. They need to be much stronger than the other heroes.
 I want you to understand me correctly, I'm not asking to abandon the specialized heroes.But I do not want to get a situation where Eowyn  alone kills Saruman without any problems.
(Saruman can defeat her only having ten levels).
I propose to significantly increase the power of the heroes of the first rank. Not to harm the balance, you need to increase the cost of these heroes.I know about the AI problems  with  heroes cost more 3000.
Therefore I propose to increase the cost of the heroes with building additional extensions, such as the tower  sorcerer in Isengard.That is, to hire Saruman, you must first build a tower sorcerer.
Witch King for example, already has such a system, because you first need to build a fortress of Minas Ithil, and then another, and buy armor to the Witch-king.
In any case, heroes who cost 3000 did not have the strength to match this price.
  Now I speak about some  heroes.
 Boromir: I do not like what you've done the same characteristics for the heroes one specialization.Example Boromir most indicative.
He is tank.Hama and Ugluk also tanks. They all have the same characteristics, health 5500,  damage 260.This is despite the fact that Boromir is more expensive.
I understand that you can say that he has more useful skills.But the problem is even  no in its cost.Boromir more significant figure in the world of Tolkien than Hama and Ugluk.
Boromir killed the Uruk-hai scout with three strikes. It's too little damage.There is also a problem with Boromir- When he fights, it is sometimes too long before striking again. It happens too often and annoying.
So I think it is necessary to increase his damage despite the fact that he was a tank.If you use my method  classification  of heroes, then Hama and Ugluk the heroes of the third rank, and Boromir - the hero of the second rank.
 Aragorn:I really like the system that you have come up  for him.I only see the problem with his last skill.When Aragorn becomes king, he should get more useful leadership or active buff.
Also, you can still change his  ability to call the Dead,that they bring more benefits.
 Gandalf:I understand your reluctance to add a large number of skills using the palantir.I myself do not support add  many abilities for all the heroes. But I think that  for Istari can make an exception.
Gandalf has is only active magical abilities, but as we know  from the book, his main strength was the ability to ignite the hearts of those who are struggling with Sauron. Therefore, I propose to add to it three more abilities to make more useful Gandalf.
I have such ideas. You can add an  active buff, or passive leadership associated with the ring Narya. You can use the idea of the film "The Hobbit" when Gandalf blinds Azog  and other orcs.( in Dol-Guldur).You can also use a spherical shield Gandalf as the active ability
(While the current implementation is also excellent).In any case, Gandalf to be amplified.Or by enhancing current capabilities or through the addition of new capabilities through the Palantir(It seems to me the second option will make the game much more interesting with Gandalf)
 Mouth of Sauron:I propose to remove the ability of a lightning strike.At first, is the  copying ability to Gandalf(But we know that Edain team strives for uniqueness).Secondly, it's too powerful ability for a man, even if it is a black numenorean.And Ambassador of Sauron - a good example of wise use of Palantir.
 Saruman: Saruman, as a Gandalf ,should be strengthened. He has to get the Palantir to increase the number of abilities(As it was in 3.8.1).Saruman - the personification of Isengard.He must be a really strong opponent for any enemy.
Some of the ideas for new skills:Teleport to the castle(From the book we know that Saruman could very quickly move, if necessary(So you can save Saruman in the battle, but  cooldown  to be very large);It's not the best idea, but maybe you will like it). disarm the enemy(This idea is taken from the  film, when Saruman  disarmed Gandalf.)There is a problem, that Grima has a similar ability .
Saruman must have leadership(His soldiers obey him unquestioningly, and very strange that Saruman has no leadership). You can also add the ability  like have Theoden (corrupt) - conclusion of peace(From the book we know the power of voice Saruman, and the fact that after the destruction of Isengard he tried to make peace with Rohan).
Also, I have an idea what to replace the ability of Saruman (placed on the tower) which gave experience for the buildings(Because in the current system, this ability is useless).
Saruman may reinforce Allied troops at a great distance, and on the contrary to weaken the enemy.(As it was with a group of orcs who had captured Merry and Pippin, Saruman increased their strength, and, on the contrary, weakened three hunters who pursued the Orcs.).
 Galadriel:I understand we are not able to play with her.But I watched the video of the beta version 4.2.I noticed that on the eighth level  Galadriel has damage 264 (or 246).I understand that she deals damage over a wide area.But then it turns out that it is helpless against a single strong enemy units and heroes.
I understand that she is not a hero killer, but she must have a way to fight against such powerful units.You can add the ability to switch attacks(Following the example of Sauron (dark and fire)) 1) over a wide area; 2) against single targets.
I also support the idea to restore the ability  "gifts Lorien"  back to the book of spells.It takes valuable slot, but is used only a few times.Remove from spell books can be the ability to "shelling", because it is useless and uninteresting.I know that you like the current system, but my suggestion seems more logical, and free another slot.
  Sorry for such a long post, but I could not hide it under spoiler ((
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: The_Necromancer0 am 12. Okt 2015, 10:54
I play mordor I really like the heroes. I find them well balanced between the hero slayers, the unit supporters, the mass slayers. However Mordor doesn't have a good sout hero (or is that gorbag/shagart ?) I'm just sad that so many of the heroes have mostly single units or supporting powers. But I guess that's compensated with Sauron
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Odysseus am 12. Okt 2015, 12:58
Gorbag/Shagrat is/are yes. The cheapest recruitable heroes are always the scout heroes. That said, the term scouting can always be taken out of context and done by heavier and quicker units. Generally speaking, Scout heroes are quite useful and I personally enjoy using them. Once they level, and they do so quite quickly, they have some great abilities.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Walküre am 13. Okt 2015, 00:23

Thank you for your exhaustive feedback and explanations  :)
I will just 'briefly' reply about a couple of things concerning the specific heroes mentioned in your post (always opinions of mine).

1. Boromir is indeed a Tank, and arguably has, as you rightly wrote, very useful abilities; not to mention that he is also a Ring Hero.

2. The Oathbreakers that Aragorn temporarily summons are exactly meant to trap an enemy hero inside this deadly circle, and ease, thus, Aragorn's duty as a Hero Killer.
If you meant that you want the previous/vanilla Oathbreakers summoning to be implemented again, you should consider that it wouldn't be suitable and very fair for him, as he is definitely not a Mass Slayer in the Edain Mod 4.0.

3. As I and others already stated before in other posts of other topics, Gandalf's abilities are an iconic Memory and testament of the past BFME games, where he was arguably the most recognisable and unique hero; it's very unlikely, thus, that they will be changed.
Also, the Keeper of Narya, in the Eadin Mod 4.0, is Círdan  :)

4. The Mouth of Sauron, as you wrote, is not a common Human.
He might easily be a powerful and dreadful Sorcerer, who, as any Servant of Sauron during the War of the Ring, sees his powers generally enhanced by the growing and stronger Influence of the Dark Lord.
Furthermore, I read that the Mouth of Sauron was probably endowed by his Master with one of the lost Seven Rings of the Dwarves (but, it might be just pure speculation).

5. This is what I had previously written in a Saruman-centred topic here on MU; I explained why, in my opinion, the Nature of the Magic of Saruman is necessarily different from Gandalf's, and why he thus can't be as 'direct' and 'dynamic' as the Grey Wizard.
Saruman (again you already wrote it) is the personification of Isengard, and has permeated it with his powers.
Gandalf has no stable dwelling or shelter, and his 'dynamic' Nature often leads him to confront different and more 'direct' challenges  :)


6. Galadriel is not a Tank nor a Mass Slayer or Hero Killer.
And, her powers are rightly and smartly focused on her new and more suitable role as a Hero Supporter and Building Destroyer (something that was not so clear in the Edain Mod 3.8.1).
If she really needs any new tool to defend herself better from direct attacks, I think that other solutions can be found, that don't radically change her role, powers or concept itself.
I thought about something, but, this is not the appropriate place to reveal my secret plans for her...  :P

Also, I have to say that I'm really glad that Galadriel will now personally hand her Gifts to the heroes (as she truly does in the lore), since it clearly marks her importance in her faction and superior status among the other heroes, and rightly defines her role as a Hero Supporter (not to mention that this is probably one of the most lore accurate powers in the whole game)  8-)
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Gandalf The Gray am 13. Okt 2015, 10:28
i know gandalf the gray faces more direct challenges but still saruman wins over him

and also i know i said it for too maaaany times and im probably annoying by now sorry for this but i think gandalf the gray and gandalf the white should not have the same powers like the light of istari. the word of power can have other visual effects and he can say "YOU SHALL NOT PASS"    i think that will be awesome 
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Walküre am 13. Okt 2015, 12:16
Zitat von: Gandalf The Gray am 13. Okt 2015, 10:28
i know gandalf the gray faces more direct challenges but still saruman wins over him

and also i know i said it for too maaaany times and im probably annoying by now sorry for this but i think gandalf the gray and gandalf the white should not have the same powers like the light of istari. the word of power can have other visual effects and he can say "YOU SHALL NOT PASS"    i think that will be awesome


No, you are not annoying at all, but, I definitely answered you exhaustively many times, and, most importantly, there has already been before other clear statements of other users or of the Edain Team itself  :)

http://en.modding-union.com/index.php/topic,31723.msg410151.html#msg410151

http://en.modding-union.com/index.php/topic,31723.msg410504.html#msg410504
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Gandalf The Gray am 13. Okt 2015, 12:44
well i changed my thoughts i dont want to change the word of power but maybe the team could change the blast you know a cosmetic change same skill different visuals only when he is gray
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Walküre am 14. Okt 2015, 00:14
Zitat von: Gandalf The Gray am 13. Okt 2015, 12:44
well i changed my thoughts i dont want to change the word of power but maybe the team could change the blast you know a cosmetic change same skill different visuals only when he is gray


I think that any possible and radical change of Gandalf (Gondor/War of the Ring concept) is out of discussion (for now, at least), as you could certainly notice from numerous statements from the Edain Team about this matter.
That's why I also decided to close a topic involving Gandalf in this same General Suggestions Section.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Elite KryPtik am 14. Okt 2015, 03:20
I haven't read any of the earlier posts, because there are just too freaking many of them [uglybunti] so if any of these points have already been mentioned I apologize. Grab a drink and some popcorn, this is going to be a long post :D

In general: In my view, all heroes are too weak in late game. Even if you have them in the middle of your army, their weak health and armor values mean that they end up dead much faster than your main army of troops. I think a balance should be found, between their health values originally and in the recent update that heavily nerfed them. I also don't understand why all heroes that can switch weapons, regardless of faction, deal half damage at range than they do in melee. Especially for Lothlorien, literally the archer faction, yet their weapon switch heroes are better in melee than at range.

Additionally in regards to their cost, why does a level 1 hero cost the same to revive as a level 10 hero? In the vanilla game, you pay a base cost to recruit a hero. Now, if that hero dies immediately at level 1, he is very cheap to revive, much cheaper then the initial recruitment cost. However, once a hero reaches level 10, it actually costs more to revive them than it did to recruit them. I really like this system, and I don't understand why, or agree with, how it was changed to a single cost system.

Gondor: I think Beregonds weapon switch is utterly useless, due to his extremely low bow damage, same goes for Faramir. I don't really have a problem with any hero abilities, although I would say that Word of Power should definitely be made stronger. It is EXTREMELY difficult to get Gandalf to level 10, for multiple reasons: He takes a lot of experience to level up, dies very easily to enemy heroes, and finally against human opponents they almost always target him first. He's extremely easy to target because he sticks out like a sore thumb in the midst of your grey units, once he has Gandalf the White.

I would say that a middle ground should be found, where Word of Power can kill all starter units(gondor soldiers, peasants, basic orcs, etc) while dealing heavy damage to any late game units(tower guards, rohirrim of the eastfold, orcs from minas morgul, etc) In terms of Ring Heros, Boromirs level 10 summon never works anymore, even if you have no command points at all he cannot summon the Guards of the White City. For Gandalf the Challenge Master, I think he dies incredibly easily, although he does pack a serious punch to make up for the lack of health. Still, I would definitely like to see his armor and health boosted as little bit, and also his Light Words of Power should be at least twice as strong as a normal Word of Power. No input on Gandalf the Corrupted, I never use him, he sucks in my view.

Rohan: Théoden is my favorite hero in the mod, Glorious Charge is the best ability ever. I do have a problem though, any ability that freezes units essentially negates this ability. So for Mordor, you can summon Shelob and freeze half the army of Rohirrim mid-charge, neutralizing most of the potency. I would like to see cavalry made immune to the effects of paralyzation while under the effect of Glorious Charge.
The only hero I have a serious problem with is Eomer. He is pathetically, terribly weak for a mass slayer hero. His Memorial ability is awful for a level 7 ability, a fixed 20% damage leadership? Seriously? His level 10 is also very awful, it doesn't deal enough damage to kill anything by the time he gets it, because all units will have Heavy Armor by that time. Finally, his Spear Throw is basically useless, all it can kill are orcs. My suggestions for him would be to have his spear throw level up with him, becoming stronger incrementally every 3 levels or so, replace his Memorial ability completely, it really sucks, and finally his level 10 should be made much stronger than it currently is. 1 quick suggestion for Eowyn as well, it would be great to give her knockback resistance while she's under the effect of Shield Maiden.

For Ring Heroes, I really don't see any point in giving the Ring to Corrupted Théoden, all his abilities are basically the same, just a little bit stronger. I think that Grima with the Ring needs an overhaul, that changes Rohan to a corrupted version of its former self, with permanent Traitors, Traitor Archers, Traitor Cavalry, the whole deal. This would make a unique concept, making Rohans early game incredibly powerful if you gave Grima the Ring, but because Traitors cannot level up or receive upgrades, it would mean that late game they would be terrible. I also think that Glorious Theodens current tradeoffs for Ring abilities idea is really unfair. Look at all the other Ring heroes, they get those abilities for free with no penalties, so why can't Théoden have a new roster of abilities in addition to the tradeoff options? That would make him a lot better and fairer, because right now there is no question that Rohan has the weakest Ring Heroes, weakest heroes overall, and finally are the weakest faction in late game.

Mordor: I can't really think of any problems in terms of being weak, besides the general issue of hero weakness in late game. I think I would say that all the Nazgul getting all of their different Morgul Blades is a little bit overpowered. I would recommend changing it so that a unit under the effect of Morgul Blade cannot be hit by another Morgul Blade. If all the Nazgul use their blades, they can kill any enemy hero in the game, except units immune to it like Sauron and Mollok. Also, Mollok always seems to die extremely easily, probably because of how easy it is to focus him down, due to his size. Nothing needs to be said about Ring Hero, Sauron is just as OP as he should be.

Isengard: Oh My God, these heroes are terrible. Sharku is utterly useless, and Warg Riders are very weak too, but that's a separate issue. Lurtz and Ugluk are the only decent heroes you can recruit, and are usually the last to die. Grima has some great abilities, but he dies so easy its laughable. Saruman dies incredibly easy, sticks out like a sore thumb for easy targeting, and his level 10 ability is garbage. Wulfgar is currently bad, but he'll be fixed when the beta comes out. Finally, Bill Ferny is OP in early game, and garbage in late game. All the other factions can get something to make their scout heroes remain relevant late game(Merry/Pippin get an upgrade, Bilbo gets a Mithril Shirt, Shagrat/Gorbag get a strong summon at level 10, Rumil/Orophin get an armor upgrade), but Isengard does not get anything of the sort, making Bill the weakest scout hero in the game overall.

Conversely, either of Sarumans Ring Hero forms are incredibly overpowered. The ability to permanently convert enemy armies combined with the clumping issues you mentioned means that you can completely prevent any kind of counterattack to regain the Ring. Additionally, for the Cursed specifically, if you put him in a Wizards Tower and then use his level 10 that shoots Fireballs, it will not stop firing until every enemy you initially targeted has died. It doesn't matter how many shots it takes, or how far away the enemy army runs. One time, I was fighting a friend, as Gondor, and he used this ability. So I retreated to my base, all the way on the other side of the map, getting shot the whole way. He killed an entire 1800 CP army of Tower Guards, Citadel Guards, Rangers and all Gondor heroes with a single ability. And you thought Word of Power was bad :P

Iron Hills: Love the hero roster here. Drar seems to be really weak, I think he could use a fire rate and damage buff. Dains Vendetta ability is OP in my view, because it can be combined with his level 1 Baruk Khazad, making your dwarves deal blasphemous levels of damage.

Erebor: I don't play very often as this faction, but I really like the heroes overall. Gimli's ability to have enemies focus only on him doesn't seem to work, Gloins Oil Spill is incredibly deadly against Mordor and Rohan if used correctly, perhaps too deadly, and finally I can never get Dains level 10 invincibility near structures to work. I think the ability needs some tweaking. The Inherited Black Arrow is too complex an ability, and is actually quite bad for a level 10. Having to wait 3 minutes to use an ability that does mediocre damage is just stupid. It should be hugely buffed, so that if you wait for a full 3 minutes you can pretty much 1 shot any hero in the game, excluding Ring Heroes.

Ered Luin: Ah, Ered Luin. The definition of OP heroes :) All of their abilities are great, all of their health values and damage are great, especially once you have Mithril. With Fili and Kili, their level 10 abilities are still buggy, I've never been able to get them to work, please take a second look at them. Balins Expedition is extremely OP, teleporting to a precise point anywhere on the map instantaneously is too strong. It should have a limited effective distance, or be changed entirely to something different. His Runes also take too long to cool down in my opinion, at best you can maybe give 2 runes to each hero per game, if its an extremely long game.
Bard seems to be very weak, and his level 10 ability, while cool, is very buggy. Its extremely hard to see the arrow when it lands, and it doesn't do a whole lot of damage to heroes, and lets face it, that's what people are going to use it on.

I don't like Bofur's Hurl Pickaxe, for the same reason, its really hard to see and annoying to pick back up. I liked it much better when he just hit enemies away, like Gloins old Slam ability from vanilla. I have yet to see Chain Quake actually work as its described and spread to other structures, all I've seen it do is continuous damage to the targeted structure. Also, the heal rate of Bombur is really strong, you can heal all of your heroes from near death to full health in about 15 seconds, while in the middle of combat. For Dwalin, Earth Hammer is really terrible compared to his level 10 rage ability, it deals practically no damage at all. Same goes for switching between his hammer and 2 axes, the axes are just better, and deal more damage faster. Finally, Durin the Deathless. I think Word of Silence is overpowered, because of the level-up. I would also really like to see the ability to give him a Mithril vest added, its ridiculous that the forefather of the Dwarves cannot be equipped with their best armor. He would have the best of the best of the best, the Dwarves revere him as a God and would all fight to the death to protect him.

Well, that's my speal. My fingers hurt :(
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Gandalf The Gray am 14. Okt 2015, 13:00
agree to all mate
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Gnomi am 14. Okt 2015, 13:29
Just a few small things about some of the things which were named:
(not concerning the overall power-level of all heroes, but some of our designs)

Zitat
I also don't understand why all heroes that can switch weapons, regardless of faction, deal half damage at range than they do in melee.

That's quite easy - why should they deal more damage with a bow? Why would you ever use the melee mode, when you can deal the same damage from range?
The melee damage is always higher, because it would be useless otherwise.
If you use your bow, the hero deals less damage, but therefore is better protected (and can level up more easy, as you don't have to retreat with him so soon). If you use your melee attacks, you deal more damage with your hero, but you also have to get in melee range therefore it's more risky. So you have to decide:

 - hero is safe, but deals less damage
 - hero is in danger, but deals more damage

If the heroes wouldn't have this boost in power in melee-mode then it would be:
 - hero is safe, but deals full damage
 - hero is in danger and deals full damage

Now let's think about it... why should you use the sword? :P


Zitat
Additionally in regards to their cost, why does a level 1 hero cost the same to revive as a level 10 hero?
Mostly technical reasons. We discussed that and sadly it isn't so easy to implement that.^^
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Gandalf The Gray am 14. Okt 2015, 13:47
well the bow needs a boost i think because you need 4 shots to kill an orc ???? an orc rly
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Skeeverboy am 14. Okt 2015, 14:06
A Hero with bow can kill a orc with one shot, not with 4.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Gandalf The Gray am 14. Okt 2015, 14:12
beregond cant just played with him
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Skeeverboy am 14. Okt 2015, 14:21
His bow has a special effect. It lowers the armour of the Unit/Hero for 5 sek. 33%.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Elite KryPtik am 14. Okt 2015, 16:19
Zitat von: Gnomi am 14. Okt 2015, 13:29
I can understand your reasoning here, but it really does not make any sense that some heroes can gain better damage in melee. Examples include Faramir, Legolas, Haldir. For certain heroes who are iconic for using the bow, you should change it so that they are stronger damage at range, but higher armor in melee combat, so that way it remains balanced. Also I can assure you, units that remain on their bow don't level up, the only way to level up a hero reasonably fast is to put them in the middle of your main army in melee mode, sitting back doesn't work. This is especially true for Lurtz in Isengard.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Lord of Mordor am 14. Okt 2015, 17:13
If a hero has both melee and ranged modes, both have to be useful. If the ranged mode is better in all situations, we might as well kick the switch entirely, and I don't think people would want that. More armor in melee isn't really an advantage - it just helps counteract the fact that you're in way more danger in melee. But why choose that in the first place if you can just stay back, deal the same or even more damage with the bow and not get attacked in the first place? What's your incentive to go into melee?

Zitat
In general: In my view, all heroes are too weak in late game. Even if you have them in the middle of your army, their weak health and armor values mean that they end up dead much faster than your main army of troops. I think a balance should be found, between their health values originally and in the recent update that heavily nerfed them.
That heavy nerf was 500 health for every hero, so between less than 10% and 15% depending on the hero. We could easily increase it by 250 or so again, I'm just surprised this makes such a massive difference.

It might also be that heroes are too vulnerable against certain types of damage? Would you say they die too fast against any kind of enemy (including swordsmen, cavalry etc.) or is it mainly focus fire by archers and attacks by other heroes? We need to be careful when buffing heroes and determine whether they really need to stronger against everything or against certain enemies only.

I've noted your points about individual heroes and will look into them, thanks for sharing :) I agree, for example, that Eomer is a bit lackluster at the moment.

Zitat
Théoden is my favorite hero in the mod, Glorious Charge is the best ability ever. I do have a problem though, any ability that freezes units essentially negates this ability. So for Mordor, you can summon Shelob and freeze half the army of Rohirrim mid-charge, neutralizing most of the potency. I would like to see cavalry made immune to the effects of paralyzation while under the effect of Glorious Charge.
I have to say I think it's actually pretty cool when abilities have some counterplay instead of being just "press this button to win the battle". Why shouldn't you be able to stop a cavalry charge with a stun? In general, it's not possible to make units immune against stuns in any case, you can only make them immune against fear effects.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Skeeverboy am 14. Okt 2015, 17:28
Zitat
We could easily increase it by 250 or so again
I don't think that heroes need a buff, the game is very hero-heavy at the moment. In Lategame the player with the higher level hero wins, because they can kill heroes with lower level and can kill armys with their skills.
Next patch will all units 20-30% fewer live, I hope this will be so for heroes too.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Gandalf The Gray am 14. Okt 2015, 18:02
you cant spam heroes like units man and they die fast so whats the point in having a hero just spam units
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Elite KryPtik am 14. Okt 2015, 18:06
Zitat
Well, in late game when both players have big armies with upgrades, not in lopsided matches where 1 player is stronger, but where both players are more or less equal, heroes always just seem to die first.  I'm not sure what kind of damage it is, I think its just the general lack of health and armor means that they die faster then a battalion of upgraded elite units. This is especially true with Isengard and Gondor. By the way Skeever, obviously if your winning a very 1 sided game and your heroes are higher level, they are going to win the match for you. All my points here are if the players are more or less evenly matched. 1 thing is also certain, heroes are EXTREMELY vulnerable against fire arrows, they can shred through heroes in seconds. 3-4 Ranger battalions with fire arrows can kill most heroes, sometimes even if they are level 10.

Zitat
That's good to know, I've been wanting a buff for Eomer for some time, even made a thread about it, which got overrun by people wanting to make Erkenbrand a full hero  [uglybunti]

Zitat
Well, all Rohan really has against Mordor in the late game is Glorious Charge. So Shelob being able to freeze your entire army mid-charge, is, essentially, "press this button to win the battle". Late game Mordor's infantry is superior in every way to Rohan's peasants, and most players will have gotten the fire arrows on all of their sentry towers, making bases immune to Ent summon(which is the 2nd weakest 10 PP power in the game in my opinion, behind Gondor's Rohan Answers!). Shelobs web really does need a fix, being able to freeze the entire enemy army like that on top of Shelobs abilities is too much for a 3 point power. Its not so bad with Lothlorien because that's all their 3 point power does, and its a fairly short duration. Shelob's web lasts for a lot longer unless I'm crazy, and obviously you are still summoning Shelob, who can deal some good damage on her own. Its unfortunate that there's no way to make units immune to the effects of paralyzation.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Skeeverboy am 14. Okt 2015, 18:18
Zitat
All my points here are if the players are more or less evenly matched
I talking from this to.
Aragorn on Level 10 can kill 4 heroes, Aragorn on Level 1 just 2.
Gandalf on Level 1 can kill some Units, Gandalf on Level 10 can kill or damage a army very much.
Zitat
heroes always just seem to die first
Than don't run with your heroes in the big army, than they overlive and be very strong.
Zitat
Shelobs web really does need a fix, being able to freeze the entire enemy army like that on top of Shelobs abilities is too much for a 3 point power.
When Shelob's web were weaker nobody will use this spell. Don't clumb your army, when you don't want that Shelob freeze them.
Zitat
you cant spam heroes like units man and they die fast so whats the point in having a hero just spam units
Have I say something about herospamm? :o
My heroes overlive often the full game.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Odysseus am 14. Okt 2015, 18:19
I mostly agree with what Skeeverboy says. I think similarly to Dawn of War II, your hero should support your army, not your army supporting your hero. It's the Battle for Middle Earth, a strategy game, concentrating more on troops and large scale battles than heroes, which the LOTR games do instead. I think heroes as of right now are in a good spot and most have a specific role and some interesting or lore-accurate abilities. That said, it is not perfect, some heroes indeed are a bit lackluster, or if not the case, feel a bit lackluster, Eomer being one of them, atleast, compared to the other mass slayers. Some on the other hand feel a bit strong, but they are not uncounterable so at least that solves that problem for me.

Nonetheless, heroes in general, can still take a beating in my opinion, and 15% is noticable, but not very significant as Lord of Mordor said. A significant buff often starts from around 25% and up, speaking from my past and current modding experiences.

What I do think does add to the frailty of some heroes is the back stab and retreat mechanics. Saruman, for example, is often seen as too fragile, not only because of his role in the movies and the lore that create a too powerful for balance image of him, but also because I find him rather slow. He can take quite a few hits from most units, but if he needs to get out of there, it is not really hard to chase him down and kill him. This is what I think is often overlooked. Often, when I see Saruman, I try to bait out his abilities, inflict damage on him, then chase him with approximately two cavalry or fast units and finish the job. It seems that this is part of some of the LOTR mechanics, but if units or heroes get attacked from the back, they seem to slow down and get ''stuck'' on their pursuers in a sense and it seems more damage is inflicted on them and more fragile heroes die  much faster when this happens. I think this also influences the image of heroes being more fragile.

Just blend your heroes with your armies as much as possible and keep on the micro, to make it hard for fragile heroes to get singled out is really all I can say. The ranged and melee attack argument should really be self-explanatory.

Most of you know this better than I do, but it's not so much about heroes anymore in Edain mod. Heroes are not one-man armies any longer. I am not saying it is better or worse this way, I have my own reserved opinion on that, but it is just different and it requires adjustment from the players.

Saying this, that or everything is useless or OP is just disheartening language, I think. It shows to me that you, as a player (talking in general), are viewing the gameplay experience negatively and only looking at the game for faults, not recognising the fault(s) can also be coming from your side. Improve thyself, then, when you are confident that you are on a level beyond any player at the game or mod, can you in my point of view, say this or that is OP, UP or useless.

Anyway, back on topic. I feel it is much better this way, instead of vanilla Lurtz and Gandalf slaughtering armies and heroes alike. Heroes are fun to use, and you are actually able to get them alongside your army since they don't cost a battalion worth of CP anymore.

I am far from an amazing player on BFME so, by all means, take my arguments with a grain of salt, but I feel that when I lose or make a frustrating mistake, I blame myself and strive to improve myself first, before blaming the game.

Just my two cents.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Elendils Cousin 3. Grades am 14. Okt 2015, 18:31
Zitat von: Skeeverboy am 14. Okt 2015, 17:28
Zitat
We could easily increase it by 250 or so again
I don't think that heroes need a buff, the game is very hero-heavy at the moment. In Lategame the player with the higher level hero wins, because they can kill heroes with lower level and can kill armys with their skills.
Next patch will all units 20-30% fewer live, I hope this will be so for heroes too.
This.
Upgraded archers are the best weapon against heroes by design: unlike melee infantry all of them can attack at the same time, and focus firing has always been the way to go against a single entity. Rangers are the peak of this, if you want - on top of their already superior damage they get an ability that does great single target damage. They are supposed to be good at killing heroes, trolls and the like.


Zitat von: Skeeverboy am 14. Okt 2015, 18:18
Zitat
Shelobs web really does need a fix, being able to freeze the entire enemy army like that on top of Shelobs abilities is too much for a 3 point power.
When Shelob's web were weaker nobody will use this spell. Don't clumb your army, when you don't want that Shelob freeze them.
I agree with KryptiK on this one, the web needs to have a smaller aoe. Otherwise, if the aoe is to stay the same, the duration needs to be reduced. I do favor the first solution though.


Zitat von: Odysseus am 14. Okt 2015, 18:19
What I do think does add to the frailty of some heroes is the back stab and retreat mechanics. Saruman, for example, is often seen as too fragile, not only because of his role in the movies and the lore that create a too powerful for balance image of him, but also because I find him rather slow.
Saruman is as fast as every standard infantry unit. Apart from that, it's kind of your (not you personally, Odysseus) own fault when a hero gets isolated. Start retreating them a little bit earlier to keep them protected by the rest of your army and you should be good. Pretty much what you said later on: Micro is important.

Zitat von: Odysseus am 14. Okt 2015, 18:19
[...]I feel that when I lose or make a frustrating mistake, I blame myself and strive to improve myself first, before blaming the game.
Well said. :)
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Gandalf The Gray am 14. Okt 2015, 18:33
Erkenbrand  should a full hero
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Skeeverboy am 14. Okt 2015, 18:44
Zitat
I agree with KryptiK on this one, the web needs to have a smaller aoe. Otherwise, if the aoe is to stay the same, the duration needs to be reduced. I do favor the first solution though.
Than Mordor needs a other Hero Killer, because Shelob is the once Counter that Mordor has against Heroes how Aragorn and Gandalf.
Zitat von: Gandalf The Gray am 14. Okt 2015, 18:33
Erkenbrand  should a full hero
Than post your ideas in the Rohan Threat.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Gandalf The Gray am 14. Okt 2015, 18:53
gandalf is a mass slayer but he dies very fast this is not my fault he just dies very fast and im mixing him with my arimes and he dose not do enough dmg to stronger units
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: CynasFan am 14. Okt 2015, 19:00
He might die fast, yes, but he can do, especially on higher Levels, a very great damage to your enemys army. And if you see, that he has only a few Points of life: RETREAT!
His true mightiest ability is his horse!
With them he can flee if bowman have a Focus on him and he will not die. It needs a little bit Micromanagement, but even I, as mostly SP-Player, can do this easilly and Gandalf need this little Armor, because with higher armor he would get OP!
Greetings, CynasFan
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Elendils Cousin 3. Grades am 14. Okt 2015, 19:04
Reducing the aoe of Shelob's web doesn't affect her ability to kill heroes whatsoever. It just reduces its strength against infantry, which is a little bit too much right now.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Gandalf The Gray am 14. Okt 2015, 19:11
i think they should make a one unit counter gandalf or something or a hero countering gandalf or make him a lil bit cheaper 3000 gold is too much
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Skeeverboy am 14. Okt 2015, 19:13
Zitat
i think they should make a one unit counter gandalf or something or a hero countering gandalf or make him a lil bit cheaper 3000 gold is too much
Gandalf can kills units, armys and heroes with spells, has a horse to be fast and he has at level 1 herokillerdamage. This is very strong, he is one of the stronges heroes in the game.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Gandalf The Gray am 14. Okt 2015, 19:20
his lvl 1 skill do more dmg to units and do nothing to heroes
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Skeeverboy am 14. Okt 2015, 19:26
Zitat
his lvl 1 skill do more dmg to units and do nothing to heroes
Yes, because he is a masslayer and not a herokiller. But Gandalf makes more as 500 DMG (herokillerstrength) and his level 2 and 7 skill can kill heros easy.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Gandalf The Gray am 14. Okt 2015, 19:28
one hero as you said he is a mass slayer and he  dies fast
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Skeeverboy am 14. Okt 2015, 19:29
Zitat von: Gandalf The Gray am 14. Okt 2015, 19:28
one hero as you said he is a mass slayer and he  dies fast
What do you mean exactly?
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Elite KryPtik am 14. Okt 2015, 19:31
Gandalf's armor and health are fine, that's not the problem. The problem is how noticeable he is, even in the middle of an army. Once you have GTW, he shines like a beacon, or in the case of your enemy, like a target. That is why he dies, because people focus him down first.

Shelobs web is currently suffering from the exact same bug that Corrupted Théoden used to have on his traitors ability, even though the cursor makes it seem like it will affect a single unit, it actually affects many units. The fix is simple, just give it a small radius, the same way you did to Theodens traitors ability. It would not at all affect her ability to kill heroes, which is her role, it would just prevent her from freezing entire armies for the slaughter.

Finally, I don't think that we should look at heroes being too weak or too strong on a general, faction wide basis, but rather should address them individually. For example, Saruman and Gandalf both die extremely easily due to them being so noticeable in the midst of an army, so maybe they should have more armor against arrows. I think that when you just do general nerfs or buffs on all heroes in the game, you end up with less balanced heroes then if you look at them individually, based on cost, how noticeable they are in your army, and finally how good their abilities are.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Lord of Mordor am 14. Okt 2015, 19:37
@Gandalf The Gray: This is a topic about hero strength in general, if you want to discuss Gandalf in particular more in-depth, feel free to create a new thread for him.

As some have already said, we will try units with 20% less health in the next version to see how that feels and how people enjoy it. Do you think heroes should also get 20% less health alongside that? Or do you think they're already fragile enough?

We've also been thinking about increasing hero armor against archers, because archer focus fire seems to kill heroes too easily at the moment. Unlike melee, there's not much you can do against it, if you keep your hero surrounded by defenders the enemy can still focus him with the entirety of his archers. I think it's more interesting if you actually have to get close to heroes, then it becomes a question of how safe you can keep yours and how much risk you take with them.

Zitat
Shelobs web is currently suffering from the exact same bug that Corrupted Théoden used to have on his traitors ability, even though the cursor makes it seem like it will affect a single unit, it actually affects many units. The fix is simple, just give it a small radius, the same way you did to Theodens traitors ability. It would not at all affect her ability to kill heroes, which is her role, it would just prevent her from freezing entire armies for the slaughter.
That didn't actually solve the Theoden problem. If an ability affects more than one single unit, it will always hit every single unit in that spot - thanks to clumping that can be an entire army. That's why we had to give traitors a timer, there was literally no way to prevent you from stacking all your peasants on top of each other and turning them all into traitors. We can reduce the AoE of Shelob's web, but it will always hit all units in that area. There's no way to code it so it will always hit only one unit.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Elite KryPtik am 14. Okt 2015, 19:41
I have personally tested your fix on traitors, and unless you have your peasants perfectly stacked, it is MUCH harder to get more than 2 units of traitors at once. The original ability had a much bigger radius, and you could sloppily put your peasants somewhat close together and end up for 4-5 battalions fairly easily. This fix should work well for the web too, I'm certain of it, anyways it can't hurt to try can it?
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Gandalf The Gray am 14. Okt 2015, 19:49
well i think some heroes for they role need more work i dont speak just for gandalf you know eomer is a mass slayer and he is not that good at mass killing and also he dies fast too so how can he mass slay when they kill him so fast so give him more armor and leave the hp as it is
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Skeeverboy am 14. Okt 2015, 19:53
Zitat
As some have already said, we will try units with 20% less health in the next version to see how that feels and how people enjoy it. Do you think heroes should also get 20% less health alongside that? Or do you think they're already fragile enough?
When the damage be the same how in the moment, than it is ok when they have the same livepoints. But then their normal Attack must be weaker, because with the same Attack how now they will kill so heroic Units and trolls to easy.
Zitat
This fix should work well for the web too, I'm certain of it, anyways it can't hurt to try can it?
The radius isn't very big in the moment I think.
It is just this:
(http://abload.de/img/ah0jj7.jpg)
All Units in this area be frozen. When you don't clumb the most of your units won't freeze.

But I think the Shelob diskusion don't come in this threat. :D

Zitat
well i think some heroes for they role need more work i dont speak just for gandalf you know eomer is a mass slayer and he is not that good at mass killing and also he dies fast too so how can he mass slay when they kill him so fast so give him more armor and leave the hp as it is
Yes, Eomer need a litle buff, but when he has to much armour and livepoints he will be a tank, not a masslayer.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Adrigabbro am 14. Okt 2015, 19:57
Hi guys. Even though I haven't played for a while I'd like to react to a few things. If I'm saying outdated bullshit, don't go too hard on me. :P



Have you tried to put your heroes on defensive stance? It works quite well. Although it requires some micro because they are highly likely to stand still without attacking if you are not paying attention.
I can't deny I've had long games when epic battles happen one after another and my heroes keep dying. But it turned out almost eveytime I was the one to blame: it was not my opponent's move neither the game's blame.
Finally I have one major concern: I'm pretty sure if you want their late game buffs, heroes will also get early game buffs and I don't want that to happen: they are already quite strong ealry on when you don't have enough troops to take them down.


Ok for Grima, but I 100% disagree with you about Theoden. In what world is a global (and very strong by the way) leadership and 3 invincible heroes not strong enough? I believe he is as strong as other 'rgular' ring heroes (well, as you pointed out after, ring Saruman is off the topic because he is overpowered- I agree with you on that- ; and Sauron needs to be the strongest ring hero). He might be slow afterwards, what he gains remains incredibly powerful.

Concerning your other statements, I agree on almost everything (especially Drar, dwarven heroes' abilities that are bugged and the Black Arrow).
As for Bill Ferny, I'm unsettled. He is weak later on but I don't think he sohuld be better, at least I wouldn't like to see him. Don't really know what to do with him...
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Gandalf The Gray am 14. Okt 2015, 20:04
bil is good early cuz he dose good dmg.  saruman i think is ok he is not overpowered sauron as it should be is more powerful than saruman and saruman is a maiar as well so its make some sense he is not that easy to kill gandalf on the other hand is not that strong as a ring hero and i think he needs a buf
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Der Leviathan am 14. Okt 2015, 20:08
Zitat von: Skeeverboy am 14. Okt 2015, 19:29
Zitat von: Gandalf The Gray am 14. Okt 2015, 19:28
one hero as you said he is a mass slayer and he  dies fast
What do you mean exactly?
I think he means Gandalf is a mass slayer and he must fight at the front. And because he fights on the front, he gets damage. If he gets damage, he will be die.
And he will be die becaue he hasen't a high amor.
So a mass slayer needs a high armor^^
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Skeeverboy am 14. Okt 2015, 20:10
Zitat von: Der Leviathan am 14. Okt 2015, 20:08
Zitat von: Skeeverboy am 14. Okt 2015, 19:29
Zitat von: Gandalf The Gray am 14. Okt 2015, 19:28
one hero as you said he is a mass slayer and he  dies fast
What do you mean exactly?
I think he means Gandalf is a mass slayer and he must fight on the front. And because he fights on the front, he gets damage. If he gets damage, he will be die.
And he will be die becaue he hasen't a high amor.
So a mass slayer needs a high armor^^

But than it is a tank :D
And when a Masslayer is a tank, and massslayer+tank is to strong.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Gandalf The Gray am 14. Okt 2015, 20:11
yea thats kinda what i mean you know he should not hold alone but he should not die fast too
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Der Leviathan am 14. Okt 2015, 20:16
Zitat
And when a Masslayer is a tank, and massslayer+tank is to strong
No. All players focus the masssylayer, because he has AoE. If all focus him he will die in short time.
Edit: So I agree Gandalf the gray.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Elite KryPtik am 14. Okt 2015, 20:20
Zitat von: Adrigabbro am 14. Okt 2015, 19:57
I'm not saying that his abilities aren't good, but I don't understand why he has to sacrifice armor and speed to get them. The other Ring heroes all get a full roster of new abilities and don't receive any penalties, except maybe Gandalf the Corrupted, be he is terrible as compared to Gandalf the Challenge Master so I never use him anyways. As I said, I think he should absolutely keep the tradeoff abilities, but he should also get some new abilities in addition to the tradeoffs.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Gandalf The Gray am 14. Okt 2015, 20:22
Zitat von: Der Leviathan am 14. Okt 2015, 20:16
Zitat
And when a Masslayer is a tank, and massslayer+tank is to strong
No. All players focus the masssylayer, because he has AoE. If all focus him he will die in short time.
Edit: So I agree Gandalf the gray.
thanks thats my point
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Odysseus am 14. Okt 2015, 22:03
...Or you can reduce the health of troops as Lord of Mordor just told us, that's the other side of the coin :P. Also worth a  try, methinks. Just watched a pvp game on youtube where upgraded Uruk-hai were tanking Word of Power a couple of times. As an example. I could post the link to show you how little Word of Power seems to do against a fully upgraded Uruk-Hai army, for those that want to see?
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: ringbearer am 14. Okt 2015, 22:05
Zitat von: Odysseus am 14. Okt 2015, 22:03
...Or you can reduce the health of troops as Lord of Mordor just told us, that's the other side of the coin :P. Also worth a  try, methinks. Just watched a pvp game on youtube where upgraded Uruk-hai were tanking Word of Power a couple of times. As an example. I could post the link to show you how little Word of Power seems to do against a fully upgraded Uruk-Hai army, for those that want to see?

DO it! :D
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Odysseus am 15. Okt 2015, 00:06
Okay, here goes :P

It's Isilpro's account on Youtube, since he seems to be the only one to deliver above-average level pvp play.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=susvVFgxKo8

It's quite a long video. The first Word of Power can be seen around the 45:40 minute mark. Tell me your thoughts after seeing all the Words of Power.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Doctor Who am 15. Okt 2015, 03:37
Zitat von: Lord of Mordor am 14. Okt 2015, 19:37

As some have already said, we will try units with 20% less health in the next version to see how that feels and how people enjoy it. Do you think heroes should also get 20% less health alongside that? Or do you think they're already fragile enough?


Hello,
Yes, i find that heroes should get a lower heealth, too.  But maybe not -20%,  for the first try -10%.
One question : Will the hero abilities also be weaker ? Would be interesting to see units with lower life but same Spell  and hero abiliy- strength.

Zitat von: Lord of Mordor am 14. Okt 2015, 19:37
We've also been thinking about increasing hero armor against archers, because archer focus fire seems to kill heroes too easily at the moment. Unlike melee, there's not much you can do against it, if you keep your hero surrounded by defenders the enemy can still focus him with the entirety of his archers. I think it's more interesting if you actually have to get close to heroes, then it becomes a question of how safe you can keep yours and how much risk you take with them.

I dont find that the hero armor against archers should be increased, because how do you should counter a Word of power from Gandalf when he rides. If the archers focus a hero than take him back a little bit and maybe the opponent dont pay attention and the archers run forward, also if he focus my hero my army can fight without archers damage.   I am against that safely hero gaming, heroes should stand out with their abilities not their armor.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Elite KryPtik am 15. Okt 2015, 04:14
Well that was an entertaining video, if a long one. It proves how weak Gandalf's Word of Power is, and also how painfully long it takes to get him to level 10. It also proves something I have been saying since day 1, both Mordor and Isengard are extremely OP in late game, and cannot be beaten, even if the Rohan player in this match sucked, and Gondor could have played better too. Anyways that's a separate issue.

If you're going to do a global -20% HP on all units, don't nerf heroes again. I think that the reduction in health for units would be perfectly balanced with the current hero health. I would also support giving heroes a little more resistance against ranged attacks, maybe like 25%, not enough to be OP.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Gandalf The Gray am 15. Okt 2015, 07:19
i think the best thing to do here is to buff heroes skills
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Adrigabbro am 15. Okt 2015, 10:04
Buffing heroes armor against fire arrows is ok, but please don't increase their resistance against regular arrows. Standard archers barely do no damage to heroes.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Skeeverboy am 15. Okt 2015, 17:30
Zitat
i think the best thing to do here is to buff heroes skills
When you buffed skills more heroes are to op. In 3.8.1 was Word of Power not allowed, because it was a all killed klick to win skill.
And when you have strong spells you can make easy this:
Use Word of Power, let Gandalf die and buy him again. When skills buffed you must just do that and this is boring.
Zitat
Isengard are extremely OP in late game
Don't let Isengard come in the Late Game. Isengard is easy to defeat in 1v1.
Zitat
It's Isilpro's account on Youtube, since he seems to be the only one to deliver above-average level pvp play.
Nothing against Isil, but he isn't a very good player. His game wasn't very good, he let Isengard come in the Lategame and looses against a multiplayer beginner. (John Doe) And he has just spammed Towerguards.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Gandalf The Gray am 15. Okt 2015, 18:00
but he means that the word of power dont do shit
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Skeeverboy am 15. Okt 2015, 18:05
When the Word of Power can kill a 15000 Ressources Isengard army it is op. At the moment it kill all not upped Units and do heavy damage against upped units in big area.
But Isengard has in the Late Late Game (when you let it come to this) Units which are level 5 and have more as 1000 Livepoints and Armour, so that they will overlive.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Odysseus am 15. Okt 2015, 18:51
I know asymmetric balance is quite interesting and it makes the factions more unique, but I still think every faction should be able to win in whatever stage of the game, just that chances of doing so are different depending on the stages.

I mean to say that if Rohan's biggest chance of winning is in early-game, which is fine by me, it should however not mean that for some specific reason you would not be able to win in late-game because of Isengard and Mordor's in late-game superiority, nay, supremacy and dominance even.

I say not that it is impossible, but it is kind of the idea behind that I find rather strange and you seem to be okay with that. The only thing with Isengard that I am not too fond of is the Uruk-captain upgrade. Yes it is expensive, but instant level 5? Are you sure that's reasonable?

Overall, I also favour 1v1, since it has better pacing and more opportunities for build orders and micro, but 2v2 is also a decent way of playing. I say the well-balanced games have an excellent 1v1 and a good 2v2 experience. Above, it becomes a myriad of exponents and well, it becomes impossible to control.

That said, Word of Power is one of the few natural abilities that Gondor has that, when surrounded by a huge force in late-game, you can force your way out. Naturally, it should not instantly kill an upgraded army, but it should at least force your enemy to retreat and let him/her tend to the wounded, so to speak. It did not do that at all in the video, in fact, his scattered troops just attacked Gandalf anew, instead of retreating and regrouping. I think this should be corrected at the very least.

In my opinion, there are simple and hard ways to approach this issue with Word of Power, but the 3 most probable alternatives would be:
1. Increase power, but also increase cooldown.
2. Decrease power, but also decrease cooldown.
3. Decrease overall health of units, which is thus going to be tested.

I know Isil is not the best, but I gotta deal with what I got when it comes to watching material. I'd love to see you play (Skeeverboy) more, more replays or even youtube videos yourself, so I can see you rectify a similar situation.

That would be great, sir Skeeverboy, since I would learn that way :).
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Gandalf The Gray am 15. Okt 2015, 18:57
thats a good ide i think word of power should be powerful because its hard to get and have a longest CD for it to be balanced awesome idea
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Whale Sharku am 15. Okt 2015, 19:19
I agree with everything Odysseus wrote.
(How could you honestly not agree with someone of that name? xD)

The overall unit health may be lowered a little in the near future, and it may be extremely important. You see, asymmetric balance depends in a very basic way on the question in how many "layers" a game challenges the player:

In a one-dimensional game where ressources are the only thing that matters, Isengart will always be assured to win (assuming both players are similar in their skill) which was not entirely true in 3.8 for some very aggressive rushes could technically stop it, but there were little to no other possibilities to do anything against it so that's pretty one-dimensional after all. Even if you smoothen out the asymmetric balance until Isengart is just a little richer than all the others, it would still have dominated.

On the other hand, in a game that not only asks you to earn more money than your opponent but also do the right (and delicate!) things with it, chances to beat the enemy regardless of asymmetric balance will rise automatically and drastically. Why? Because now, being poor doesn't automatically imply that you can't win anymore, because there is more to it - it could be that you make better use out of your spellbook, for example.

And this second case will occur once all units have their life reduced again, because then all the other layers to the game (like the already mentioned spells) will be stronger in comparison to them and have a bigger impact.

So - while all this may sound much more complicated - it is also much more effective than all the balance tools in the world when it comes to making an asymmetrical match more interesting. ;)

Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Odysseus am 15. Okt 2015, 19:56
Come now, gentlemen. You flatter me xD. (Ps. Glad you like my name)

I am Dutch, so I can understand German to some degree. However, it seems it is mostly 3.8.1, which is rather unfortunate, since I prefer 4.0 for its distinct playstyle compared to the more traditional BFME II playstyle. Nevertheless, I will give it a try, thank you kindly!

Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Lord of Mordor am 15. Okt 2015, 20:19
Yeah, that channel is primarily by and for people who prefer 3.8.1, as 4.0 was probably our most divisive version yet. But to each his own :)

When we reduce unit health, the damage of heroes (and most other things) will stay the same for now. After all, the whole point is that stuff will die faster xD And from what I've gathered, giving hero powers some more impact wouldn't go amiss. We don't want them to be as powerful as they used to be (units that cost 1000 or more shouldn't get oneshot by a single spell), but there's still room in between. If particular aspects turn out to be too strong with less health, we'll adjust them accordingly. Archer spam is what I'm probably most concerned about here, but with the Lorien release we'll have plenty of opportunity to see archers at their strongest and gauge their power.

Hero health, however, is another matter, and that's still up in the air. At the moment, I'm more inclined to leave it as it is for now and see how it goes. If it's too high, we can adjust it afterward, but I got the impression that right now hero health is already considered rather low. If they always die first like EliteKryptik said, bringing down units a bit and leaving heroes the same should balance things a bit.

Zitat
Buffing heroes armor against fire arrows is ok, but please don't increase their resistance against regular arrows. Standard archers barely do no damage to heroes.
We'll start with just a buff against upgraded arrows then :) How much armor would you say is reasonable?

As for Isengard and Mordor, they are meant to become more powerful as the game goes on, but there should never be a point where you've basically won by default because you have survived long enough. If that's the case, we'll have to nerf the lategame of that faction. That's not really a discussion for this thread though.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Elite KryPtik am 15. Okt 2015, 20:34
The Lord hath spoken, his will be done  [uglybunti]

I would vote for a 25% armor increase for heroes against upgraded arrows, and I also strongly agree with leaving hero health the same. I think that will be the perfect balance if all units get a health nerf. Isengard and Mordor don't necessarily need to be nerfed,(well ok, maybe Isengard a little bit :P) what needs to be strengthened is the other factions late game capabilities ESPECIALLY Rohan.

Skeever, no offence, but all I've ever seen you do is disagree. Are you not willing to try out new things? After all, not all people who play this are as good as you or I, or many of the others I have played with when I played on Tunngle. I am well aware its easy to shut down and destroy Isengard early game in 1v1, I was just recently suggesting to improve their early game a bit, which you ALSO disagreed with. Whenever you get into a team game of more than 2v2, if the enemy has an Isen Mordor and you don't, chances are you are going to lose, because the enemy army simply outclasses you. We can't do all of our balancing based off of 1v1 matches, we have to look at it on a larger scale. Anyways I won't talk any more about this here, its not the proper thread.

Also, I agree with everything Odysseus recently posted. :)
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Odysseus am 15. Okt 2015, 20:41
I am looking forward to trying the changes you have already mentioned. Babysteps will probably do the trick. Little bits here, little bobs there.

Edit:

Kryptik, check this out:

Some of the matchups towards the latter part are something I'm sure you have something to say about :)
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Gandalf The Gray am 15. Okt 2015, 21:07
i say word of power needs a buff of dmg and nerf on cooldown make it a special skill that you will think i will use it at the right time or im fucked the cooldown should be long and the dmg grate
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Whale Sharku am 15. Okt 2015, 21:20
Zitat
Babysteps will probably do the trick

That sounds possible to me, however there should always be distinct categories in which each little step can be valued, e.g.

"Did the step affect the optimal number of heroes recruited in a typical match?"
"Did the step affect in how people behave against heroes in certain situations"
and so on, in order to get a grasp onto the hidden dynamics.

I really, really suggest making a list and evaluating questions like these separated from each other.
You don't want to just take what feels best if you could create a much better situation with a little more patience.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Gandalf The Gray am 15. Okt 2015, 21:44
rohan is cavalry  based faction and it has the weakest cavalry that what i saw on this vid
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Elite KryPtik am 15. Okt 2015, 21:47
Zitat von: Odysseus am 15. Okt 2015, 20:41
What is there to say? I already knew that Gondor cavalry was better than Rohan cavalry man for man. Rohan is still superior, for 4 reasons: all of their heroes can mount to provide support, they cost less money and cp, so you can get more of them for less than Gondor can, the Rohirrim of the Eastfold have a superior formation, and finally the cavalry of Rohan get many more leadership and support abilities to keep them alive longer. I don't really understand what people think doing a 1v1 matchup proves between only 2 battalions proves, every time an enemy Gondor has dared to try and out-cavalry me they've regretted it. Although if the team wanted to buff Royal Guard a bit I wouldn't be against it, I definitely think that Royal Guard are not worth their price tag right now.

Since this is related and we have Lord of Mordors attention, I will use this to segway to a bug that HAS to be fixed. The Military Camp 10 point power Rohirrim that are spawned for free are bugged, they cannot get horseman shields, and if you research the 3rd upgrade in the tent they do not spawn with either heavy armor or horseman shields. Also, I would recommend making them have a little bit more health and damage than the normal trainable Rohirrim, because after all tis a 10 point power late game ultimate spell.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Lord of Mordor am 15. Okt 2015, 21:50
The best way to lose my attention is to derail this thread :P If it's not about heroes, it has no place here. Bugs should go in the according bug thread and we'll do our best to fix them (we being Ealendril, because that's not even my area ^^).
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Elite KryPtik am 15. Okt 2015, 21:52
Zitat von: Lord of Mordor am 15. Okt 2015, 21:50
The best way to lose my attention is to derail this thread :P If it's not about heroes, it has no place here. Bugs should go in the according bug thread and we'll do our best to fix them (we being Ealendril, because that's not even my area ^^).

Sorry  :(
To be fair, Odysseus started it  :o
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Lord of Mordor am 15. Okt 2015, 21:53
True! For shame! :P
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Skeeverboy am 15. Okt 2015, 21:58
I think we can make compromise:
In 3.8.1 Gandalfs Word of Power was having his cooldown on the beginning, when he reach level 10 or when you have recruit him on Level 10. (yeah i know good english :D)

So we can make so:
Gandalfs Word of Power makes higher Damage, but it has his cooldown when he reach level 10 or you recruite him.
So it isn't possible to let him die with intention.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Gandalf The Gray am 15. Okt 2015, 22:27
well the team can make him spawn slower
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Odysseus am 15. Okt 2015, 23:20
It was mostly about the Royal Guard in the vid, but we are indeed talking about Heroes. I apologise. I was not thinking properly. I made the video a spoiler.

Overall health of heroes feels rather good to me, apart from perhaps some of the wizards, but their role as a mass slayer will become easier if troops have their overall health decreased so that might even it out a little.

From there, we can see if Word of Power still needs tweaks that have been mentioned. This sounds like a fair compromise to me, coming from both the team, the beta testers and the community.

Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Bogdan Hmel am 16. Okt 2015, 00:53
DieWalküre,
  I am absolutely not against the heroes specialization. But I do not want all focus only on one specific role of the hero.
About Boromir, I mean that as a fighter he should be stronger Hama and Ugluk. I do not like that the heroes has same health indicators and damage, depending on the role.
The tank has a 260 damage and 5500 health, supporter has an average 4000 health and 300 damage and so on. I want more differences between the heroes, depending on their role in the history of Middle-earth.
But my main idea is that the most powerful heroes are weaker than they should be and do not correspond to its price.
  About Naryan ring: This game is about the war of the ring, and at the time the ring was already a long time ago at Gandalf.
I have nothing against the ability of Cirdan, but here we are talking about the new capabilities of Gandalf, that he need.(This is just my opinion and I understand that a team  pleased the current implementation).
But I think that more abilities at Saruman and Gandalf increase their usefulness.In addition, it will add even more fun to play with them.Add Narya ring was just a small idea.
But I want to say again: Gandalf has is only active magical abilities, but as we know  from the book, his main strength was the ability to ignite the hearts of those who are struggling with Sauron.
 Lord of Mordor, could you answer that think of my ideas, which I posted at the end of the second page of this topic.I really like your mod and I dial the text a few hours with the help of an interpreter, so I would like to know your opinion))
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Gandalf The Gray am 16. Okt 2015, 08:59
i like your idea mate
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Whale Sharku am 16. Okt 2015, 12:36
You could state that a hero design has two "directions", directed outside into the context of their faction and how they enrich it, they can fill the same role; and directed inside "how they play out" they might be completely different. There is no need whatsoever for different tanks that should fill the same role to have the same amount of health and so on.
However, this view is somewhat dangerous as it suggests aiming towards exactly the same roles on the outside would be a good thing.^^
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Elite KryPtik am 16. Okt 2015, 17:02
The problem with making each individual hero have different health values based on their lore in Middle Earth is balance. The Edain team is only 4 people guys, and the community is relatively small. We don't have thousands of people and an automatic feedback/data gathering service, all we have are what people say on this forum. If we made Boromir's health higher then all the other tanks, then all his other stats would have to change as well, armor, damage, and cost. Each of these would have to be balanced. Now look at all the different heroes the Edain mod adds over vanilla. Just think of the amount of work it would take to balance out all of these heroes individually. Its just too much, at least for now. Once all the factions are out maybe then the team could look at them individually, but for right now the tradeoff is more heroes with standardized stats.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Walküre am 16. Okt 2015, 18:03
Zitat von: Bogdan Hmel am 16. Okt 2015, 00:53
DieWalküre,
  About Naryan ring: This game is about the war of the ring, and at the time the ring was already a long time ago at Gandalf.
I have nothing against the ability of Cirdan, but here we are talking about the new capabilities of Gandalf, that he need.(This is just my opinion and I understand that a team  pleased the current implementation).
But I think that more abilities at Saruman and Gandalf increase their usefulness.In addition, it will add even more fun to play with them.Add Narya ring was just a small idea.
But I want to say again: Gandalf has is only active magical abilities, but as we know  from the book, his main strength was the ability to ignite the hearts of those who are struggling with Sauron.


It is logically true that heroes with extended powers sets would definitely be more enjoyable to play with.
But, if it really were like this, would it be 'fair', suitable and perfectly integrated into the Edain Mod 4.0's structures and mechanics?

I honestly think that it wouldn't, otherwise we would more likely be playing a Submod, instead of the basic Mod.
It would be very balance-disruptive and redundant, in a game that is recognisable and appreciated for its own 'simple' yet solid soul, if with 'solid' we mean an easy gameplay in a very rich, multifaceted and lore accurate environment (personally, what I like the most of the Edain Mod).
That's why the abilities (effective, evocative, but always limited) of every single hero are rightly conveyed and targeted to a suitable role (which is not, though, absolutely binding).
Not to mention that, if we talk about 'important' heroes, not only Gandalf could claim to have additional powers sets, but also half of the heroes of the other factions.

Narya, in the current version of the game, is held by Círdan only.
One of the very few lore inaccuracies of the game, but really defining of the fact that the Three Rings will be kept by Elven Lords only, as it was originally.
Also, supporting powers for Gandalf would primarily contrast with his precise role and be unnecessary in arguably the most iconic powers set ever in the heroes' History of the BFME serie.

In the end, to summarise a bit, I think that a reasoning of the kind of yours is certainly legitimate, but not really 'Edain Mod-ish'  :)
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Bogdan Hmel am 16. Okt 2015, 21:08
  DieWalküre.
 I'm just like you, against to adding a lot of abilities for all heroes. I just suggest to make an exception for Istari, thus emphasizing their power.
 They are not strong enough for their cost. Therefore, there are two ways to make them stronger. Make more stronger  their current abilities or add new abilities.
 I like the second option. Because so these heroes will become more useful  and  can often engage in battle. Also play with Istari would be interesting.
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: Legolas Greenleaf am 16. Okt 2015, 23:24
Titel: Re: Heroes - how powerful should they be?
Beitrag von: FG15 am 16. Okt 2015, 23:28
Legolas Greenleaf, wie dir bereits mitgeteilt wurde, ist dies der Englische Bereich, bitte poste deutsche Beiträge nur im deutschen Bereich. Alle weiteren Beiträge im falschen Bereich werden kommentarlos gelöscht.

This is the English board, German posts belong in the German board.