Civ balance

[Oimat]

I just played against alpha123 with athenians, and one thing shocked me.

They have slingers age 1, whose costs 50 rock instead of wood.

Because it costs rock instead of wood, you can do a very big army of slingers in age 1, what isn't normal.

Why rock is faster than wood ?

Put your women on food, cav on food, your 4 first infantry on wood.

Then first barch of slingers on rock (you start with 300 rock so it's fine).

Then, do a batch of women, and then only slingers on rock.

For wood, the 4 infantry is enough to house.

So i propose to remove slingers of athenians age 1.

[Pedro Falcão]

Slingers are the most basic units. Not being able to train them from the start feels too wrong. Perhaps another solution?

[Lion.Kanzen]

Slingers are the most basic units. Not being able to train them from the start feels too wrong. Perhaps another solution?

i agree with you, the Athenians Have Skirmishers may be changing both, let skirmisher available for I and Slingers for II,

or Inexpert/Basic Slingers let less accuracy to attack, and when reach last level to normal accuracy.

Edited February 21, 2013 by Lion.Kanzen

[Oimat]

Pedro : can you seriously say that a x2 against all infantry is the most basic unit ?

Let's put battering ram in age 2 too

[Pedro Falcão]

I mean historically. Come on, slingers only get a sling and some stones from the ground, which aren't even hard to aim at the enemy's head. What we must do here is to make them vulnerable as they are in real life (due to having no armor), so that they don't become that good of a choice. Gameplay-wise I agree with you, I won some couple of matches against a Persian Aegis Bot using only slingers and rams. So my suggestion is to nerf slingers badly, instead of postponing them.

[Thorfinn the Shallow Minded]

I agree with the above post. Another technology could be made to enhance them in the later game.

[Burzum]

I can't really speak about this as I havn't played this game that long. Due to hard drive issues etc.

But here:

Romans :

As i said before, i don't understand romans. They really have EVERYTHING. Strong infantry, like the better siege engines...

The army camp and the Siege Walls. The only civ that can build on other territory !

Army camp should be nerfed a lot. They are quite cheap now, so why have them as much hp as forts ? Instead of 3000 hp, they should have 2000. Plus, guarissoning 40 people inside is an inside thing.

Even forts can't guarrison so much people x') So guarrison 20 people inside, no more. Or perhaps no more than 15, because you still can train units from army camp inside enemies territory...

The Romans are the best in my opinion, I mean history tells us. And from what I have seen, they been well represented in this RTS more than others I have seen to this day. And because the creators have taken it upon themselves to spend the time with great artistic hands we now have a beautiful RTS to enjoy.

Regards to the forts, I have designed a tactic in game where this is concerned. I tend to agree with the number of 20 with in a fort, although, it's not really that necessary.

I will post screenshots of my tactics once I have sorted my drives out.

The other thing I will comment on is the Gauls... I do feel that they need a little bit of an upgrade as far as weak troops are concerned.

I think it's a somewhat of a misconception that because Caesar destroyed them at Alesia many of the desingers here have put there HP all the way down. This is not exactly true here...

The fortifications Caesar errected greatly impeded the Gauls lethaly. But the average Gallic warrior was a strong and tough oponent. Same applies true with the likes of Icini chariots of the Britons. They if anything need to be very strong, but not totally strong.

Balancing here has an important and significant logic to it, but from what I can tell the building are things that need to be more powerful. A couple of swordsmen that batter a tower or a great big wooden building sort of defies the laws of physics here lol and it's one thing I couldn't really understand in AoE games and any othe like.

So for me... Building need to be powerful and units need a little more downgrading in attack strength etc.

Regards to a tech tree, go for it. This better presents to the player a layout of whats cooking.

[alpha123]

+1 to removing slingers from the Athenians until Town Phase. At least until slingers are properly balanced, which needs to happen ASAP anyway, it's a huge problem. It's no fun playing against an Athenian player who knows what he's doing (i.e. spam slingers and attack around 3:00-4:00).

[Mythos_Ruler]

+1 to removing slingers from the Athenians until Town Phase. At least until slingers are properly balanced, which needs to happen ASAP anyway, it's a huge problem. It's no fun playing against an Athenian player who knows what he's doing (i.e. spam slingers and attack around 3:00-4:00).

Such a drastic action (moving slingers to Town phase, which doesn't really make sense anyway, since you can't get anymore basic than slingers) is not required when tackling the root problem is just as easy as what you propose. Here is what I propose:

1. Attack Reduced

• From 15 pierce to 10 pierce.
  
• Make sure to adjust Advanced and Elite rank attack values downward accordingly.
  

2. Cost increased

• From 40 stone to 50 stone.
  

3. Playtest.

[Lion.Kanzen]

Such a drastic action (moving slingers to Town phase, which doesn't really make sense anyway, since you can't get anymore basic than slingers) is not required when tackling the root problem is just as easy as what you propose. Here is what I propose:

1. Attack Reduced

• From 15 pierce to 10 pierce.
  
• Make sure to adjust Advanced and Elite rank attack values downward accordingly.
  

2. Cost increased

• From 40 stone to 50 stone.
  

3. Playtest.

i agree with all a except the cost , you said, is basic unit, don't no up the cost, especially stone. maybe Food.

[Pedro Falcão]

If the stone cost is going to be raised, i suggest a tech to reduce it, so that later on slingers would still be an alternative, if you want to mass them.

[WhiteTreePaladin]

Note about balance:

The large Carthage siege weapons are very underpowered against structures compared to elephants. I had 35 of them and 10 of the weaker siege weapons also and 20 elephants were tearing down fortresses faster. The slow reload rate for siege means that the elephants actually do more damage in the same amount of time. Also, elephants move fast, don't waste time packing, can fight all types of units, and are not all that expensive. I don't know when we changed all cavalry to 1 pop point, but elephants should definitely cost 3 pop points like siege weapons.

[Lion.Kanzen]

If the stone cost is going to be raised, i suggest a tech to reduce it, so that later on slingers would still be an alternative, if you want to mass them.

yes, that great solution. and the tech is Avaible in Second Epoch/Phase.

Note about balance:

The large Carthage siege weapons are very underpowered against structures compared to elephants. I had 35 of them and 10 of the weaker siege weapons also and 20 elephants were tearing down fortresses faster. The slow reload rate for siege means that the elephants actually do more damage in the same amount of time. Also, elephants move fast, don't waste time packing, can fight all types of units, and are not all that expensive. I don't know when we changed all cavalry to 1 pop point, but elephants should definitely cost 3 pop points like siege weapons.

the Elephant are weak against a Tower Attacks, Castle, a Ram are most strong. I Prefer use Range Siege.

and i remember one thing now. Is anyone use Bolt Siege Weapons Efficiently? because i cant use that Weapon in the best way, i dont understand how take a advantage with Bolt Shooters

Edited February 24, 2013 by Lion.Kanzen

[Mythos_Ruler]

If the stone cost is going to be raised, i suggest a tech to reduce it, so that later on slingers would still be an alternative, if you want to mass them.

I don't see how +10 stone would prevent one from massing slingers in the late game once you have a rocking economy. It might make you have to choose between that 3rd Fortress and massing slingers, which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

I don't know when we changed all cavalry to 1 pop point, but elephants should definitely cost 3 pop points like siege weapons.

Agreed about elephant population, since they are siege weapons.

[Lion.Kanzen]

I don't see how +10 stone would prevent one from massing slingers in the late game once you have a rocking economy. It might make you have to choose between that 3rd Fortress and massing slingers, which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Agreed about elephant population, since they are siege weapons.

slingers in First Epoch, that's means, the Player Raid, but don't Have a great Defence in Second Epoch even delayed a 3rd Phase Upgrade.

Food in First Epoch is more valuable than a Rock stockpile.

[alpha123]

Such a drastic action (moving slingers to Town phase, which doesn't really make sense anyway, since you can't get anymore basic than slingers)

Skirmishers are as basic as slingers. Athens has skirmishers in town phase (albeit mercenaries, which would probably have to change).

is not required when tackling the root problem is just as easy as what you propose.

No, it's not. Tackling the root problem requires some thinking about balance, which no one except TheMista seems willing to do, and some playtesting. Swapping the phases of Athenian slingers and skirmishers doesn't require either of those.

Here is what I propose:

1. Attack Reduced

• From 15 pierce to 10 pierce.
  
• Make sure to adjust Advanced and Elite rank attack values downward accordingly.
  

2. Cost increased

• From 40 stone to 50 stone.
  

3. Playtest.

I agree with both of those suggestions, however their bonus should also be reduced. 2x vs all infantry is a bit high, especially combined with their very fast fire rate.

[Lion.Kanzen]

Skirmishers are as basic as slingers. Athens has skirmishers in town phase (albeit mercenaries, which would probably have to change).

No, it's not. Tackling the root problem requires some thinking about balance, which no one except TheMista seems willing to do, and some playtesting. Swapping the phases of Athenian slingers and skirmishers doesn't require either of those.

I agree with both of those suggestions, however their bonus should also be reduced. 2x vs all infantry is a bit high, especially combined with their very fast fire rate.

That its good point, very high time rate, that is all that can fixed, they are too fast to fire/reload. its the Antithesis of Bolt shooters, they are bit slow to fire.

[Mythos_Ruler]

Skirmishers are as basic as slingers. Athens has skirmishers in town phase (albeit mercenaries, which would probably have to change).

Well, now you're talking about swapping the skirmisher and slinger. That's fine. Felt silly to me to just move the slinger to Town and then not replace it with anything in Village. Though, historically, slingers in Athens would have been low-born poor citizens, while skirmishers were hired mercenaries from Thrace, making it more realistic to have the slingers at village phase. But that's not really a huge consideration, just a minor one.

No, it's not. Tackling the root problem requires some thinking about balance, which no one except TheMista seems willing to do, and some playtesting. Swapping the phases of Athenian slingers and skirmishers doesn't require either of those.

Well, okay. The game is in alpha, btw. Balancing happens in beta. No harm in thinking about balance at this stage, but don't get too upset if no one else is jumping all over your suggestions.

Anyway, "tackling the root problem" regarding the slinger would entail changing its stats to make it balanced rather than just moving it to a later phase, which is what we are now discussing since I chose to tackle it head on here.

The problem with the team at this stage is that there is no one willing to make the changes in a consistent manner. It would be good if someone (quantumstate, pureon?) took up that mantle.

I agree with both of those suggestions, however their bonus should also be reduced. 2x vs all infantry is a bit high, especially combined with their very fast fire rate.

I'd keep the bonus as-is and playtest with the suggested stats changes first. If those changes are insufficient, then perhaps 2x vs. just ranged infantry and 1.5x vs. melee infantry or something like that. If still OP, then maybe 1.5x vs. infantry.

[Pedro Falcão]

Skirmishers are as basic as slingers. Athens has skirmishers in town phase (albeit mercenaries, which would probably have to change).

Disagree, not everybody has access to a pelta. But whatever, that isn't the point. Slingers are basic, that's why they're in the first age. Since they're on the first age, they can't be too strong and neither too fast (talking about moving speed), else they become OP, for they're ranged. They must also have low armor, so that the buildings themselves are a good counter against them. But later on, they become useless, unless they can be massed. And they can't be massed when their cost of stone, a resource needed for your defenses, is so high, their defense so low and their attack being nerfed. It's not that they can't be massed, it's that those who mass them would be dumb if they did so, a fort would do better with no food cost. That's what i think.

[Mythos_Ruler]

But later on, they become useless, unless they can be massed. And they can't be massed when their cost of stone, a resource needed for your defenses, is so high, their defense so low and their attack being nerfed. It's not that they can't be massed, it's that those who mass them would be dumb if they did so, a fort would do better with no food cost. That's what i think.

Depends what you have to do or want to do in the late game. Are you hard-pressed and want to defend? Build Fortresses and walls and stuff. Are you in attack mode? Mass slingers if you want to (no sense in using the stone to build fortresses in your territory if you're knee-deep in enemy territory and have them on their heels).

I'll make the point that you probably wouldn't be making your argument if this whole time the slinger stone cost was 50 stone instead of 40 stone.

Anyway, since I'm no longer on the team someone else will have to make the stats adjustments. Have fun.

[alpha123]

Well, now you're talking about swapping the skirmisher and slinger. That's fine. Felt silly to me to just move the slinger to Town and then not replace it with anything in Village. Though, historically, slingers in Athens would have been low-born poor citizens, while skirmishers were hired mercenaries from Thrace, making it more realistic to have the slingers at village phase. But that's not really a huge consideration, just a minor one.

For that reason it couldn't be a permanent change, just a temporary one until enough playtesting is done to figure out what to do about slingers (which unfortunately could take a while).

Well, okay. The game is in alpha, btw. Balancing happens in beta. No harm in thinking about balance at this stage, but don't get too upset if no one else is jumping all over your suggestions.

I know that, but since the team is trying to push to 1.0 as fast as possible, someone's going to have to make balance changes at some point, the sooner the better. In fact, at this stage, I'd say balance is the second most important thing next to performance. I do realize that's only my opinion which probably few other people share however.

Anyway, "tackling the root problem" regarding the slinger would entail changing its stats to make it balanced rather than just moving it to a later phase, which is what we are now discussing since I chose to tackle it head on here.

Moving slingers around is more of just a temporary fix, once slingers are balanced, it would probably be reverted.

I'd keep the bonus as-is and playtest with the suggested stats changes first. If those changes are insufficient, then perhaps 2x vs. just ranged infantry and 1.5x vs. melee infantry or something like that. If still OP, then maybe 1.5x vs. infantry.

I was thinking 1.75x max vs all infantry (more likely 1.5x), but I rather like the idea of splitting it up between melee and ranged. Maybe 1.75x vs ranged infantry (who would be lightly armored and vulnerable to rocks) and 1.25x vs melee infantry (who would be much better armored).

[Mythos_Ruler]

I was thinking 1.75x max vs all infantry (more likely 1.5x), but I rather like the idea of splitting it up between melee and ranged. Maybe 1.75x vs ranged infantry (who would be lightly armored and vulnerable to rocks) and 1.25x vs melee infantry (who would be much better armored).

I was thinking 2x and 1.5x just to keep with the "primary counter & secondary counter" convention. If the attack is reduced the right amount, then they're just viable against their counters and slaughtered by anything else, which is probably what we want. I really don't think it'll take that much playtesting.

I know that, but since the team is trying to push to 1.0 as fast as possible, someone's going to have to make balance changes at some point, the sooner the better. In fact, at this stage, I'd say balance is the second most important thing next to performance. I do realize that's only my opinion which probably few other people share however.

Balance is important, even at this stage, but there are still many other things the team members want to add to the game, so they are very busy on those things, plus their own personal lives*.

*This is really the biggest issue at the moment. Many of the chief developers have other distractions to contend with as far as I can tell, which is a big problem for a non-paid voluntary team like WFG.

[Mythos_Ruler]

Though I am no longer officially part of the team, I'll go ahead and commit these balance changes since I was thinking about them/working on them since before I left. Someone else will have to tweak from here, but at least it gets the ball rolling based on our discussion here.

http://trac.wildfire...changeset/13196

I have:

Slinger

• Reduced attack from 15 pierce to 10 pierce.
  
• Increased cost from 40 stone to 50 stone.
  
• Implemented 2x vs. ranged infantry and 1.5x vs. melee infantry.
  
• Fixed the range bug for all the Celtic advanced and elite slinger units. (the bug had the advanced and elites actually lose range, lol)
  

Elephants

• Reduced their walk and run speeds to 5 walk (from 7) and 10 run (from 14).
  
• Fixed the Ptolemaic elephant description and gave proper attribution.
  

Feel free to playtest and to take everything from here.

[Oimat]

Hum, sorry for not being able to take part of discussion before.

Nevertheless, that's a very big improvement for slingers

But for elef... what have you done that ? The got killed in 2 shots against archers, in comparison of battering rams.

[Mythos_Ruler]

But for elef... what have you done that ? The got killed in 2 shots against archers, in comparison of battering rams.

How many archers? Nothing much should stand in the way of 30+ archers firing at you, not even a war elephant. Rams are a different story though, since they are mechanical.

But elephants are more multi-functional than rams. Elephants tear down buildings, yes, but they also can kill most other units rather easily, so it made sense to make them a little more vulnerable by slowing them down a bit.

Battering Rams themselves need their own balancing though.