xfs Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 (edited) Have you considered balancing sword cavalry units?In my testing with Alpha 17, 20 sword cavalry units (with no micro) decisively defeat 30 of any combination of spearmen, skirmishers, and swordsmen (with ideal micro). They also defeat 20 spear cavalry with significant margin. They also defeat 20 of any combination of pikemen, archers, and slingers. They do not defeat 20 pikemen and 10 slingers, but they still have great map maneuverability. They do not properly engage ranged cavalry because of auto-micro but if that's disabled the result would be similar to infantry skirmishers.Sword cavalry units are very cheap: 80 food, 35 wood, and 20 metal. They overwhelmingly defeat swordsmen of similar cost. They have the highest DPS (24.6 hack/second) among non-champion cavalry and infantry units after Babylonian Scythed Chariots (31 pierce/second). It seems nothing in the entire infantry and cavalry roster can properly counter sword cavalry spam.Also a question: my machine doesn't seem capable of building the entire game. Is it possible to test it with only public.zip patched with the updated templates? Edited January 3, 2015 by xfs 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion.Kanzen Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 Why Athenian skirmisher costs metal? It's better than other cuv skirmisherrs ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jurgenjuggernaut Posted January 7, 2015 Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 Hi everyone i would suggest a cost decrease on sacred band units or making them stronger, also why merchant caravans cost metal? Id suggest food cost maybe wood donno Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordGood Posted January 8, 2015 Report Share Posted January 8, 2015 Why Athenian skirmisher costs metal? It's better than other cuv skirmisherrs ?I'm pretty sure the Athenian skirmisher is a mercenary troop.Hi everyone i would suggest a cost decrease on sacred band units or making them stronger, also why merchant caravans cost metal? Id suggest food cost maybe wood donno The Sacred band's high cost and lower effectiveness has some ground in history, being a phalanx of extravagantly-outfitted Punic nobility.Merchant's metal cost prevents spam, and makes opening a trade route a legitimate investment. (metal representing the goods they're trading) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zzippy Posted January 8, 2015 Report Share Posted January 8, 2015 (edited) There is no difference between roman and athenian skirmisher besides the metal costs instead of wood. Both citizen soldiers. Edited January 8, 2015 by zzippy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorfinn the Shallow Minded Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 (edited) I have a few suggestions myself. First, it would be good to have walls be cheaper since they are rarely effective at the moment. If players would like their wall turrets firing arrows and potentially ballista shots later, that should be an upgrade. Having walls cost hundreds of stone is ridiculous balance-wise and Age of Kings recognised this problem. Next, archers generally should not be as effective as they are. Historically they were actually nothing that decisive in most battles and their role should most likely be limited to supporting infantry. Persia also is depicted having very good archers, but I see no historical basis for that. If there is any bonus they should have, it should be in rapid deployment. Third, blacksmith upgrades should not be generalised with melee infantry upgrades being with ranged as it makes little logical sense. For that matter, having them cost food seems obscure to say the least. With food there may as well be stone added. Edited January 9, 2015 by Thorfinn the Shallow Minded 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michty Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 I also agree that rams are OP, both their armor and attack against units should be nerfed. dont forget that it is still siege unit, not a tank! As of right now, it is possible to send puraly ram army to attack forts and enemy army. I believe that support of infantry or cavalry should be absolutely necessary for any successful siege operation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stan` Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 Someone reported this on tracHi,I want to suggest the idea, that the balance tech at the fortress (which costs 3000 of all ), is rebalanced. Maybe you could make it weaker, and cheaper. Maybe it could cost more food (and maybe metal) then else, since this keeps People happy e.g. 2000 food, 1000 wood, 0 stone and 1500 metal, for, lets say, 10% more damage to all units (also to elite soldiers, not to siege engines).This would kind of throwing a big party for the people who risk their game-life for you And, maybe it would be an idea to combine it with a defensive skill, in the "choose one of two" skill-tree? E.G. a skill which increased the armor of your units, or their health?Both Skills could increase cost slightly for each affected unit.With kind regards,NiAypa?I closed the ticket cause balancing is done here, feel free to reopen it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jurgenjuggernaut Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 Totally agree with Thorfinn, also balista should be more acuarated or have damage, rams are more effecitve at the moment both atacking buildings and units, ram vs caballery or almost any unit ram wins, also skirmishers and archers are to way to powerfull, u just mass them and win against any caballery or infantry unit, as thorfin said they were more suportive than main army thing 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wowgetoffyourcellphone Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 I don't see a good reason for rams to attack soldiers at all. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shieldwolf23 Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 Agree on wow. Nowhere in history are rams effective against infantry. They are not tanks. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stan` Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 I don't see a good reason for rams to attack soldiers at all.The only thing I could see is making it garisonnable, and therefore allowing units as turrets to attack melee/ranged. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jurgenjuggernaut Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 (edited) Also would like to ask why iberian towers cost is 300 stone when others is 100 stone 100 wood are they better?, also had problems with walls "pasive".Would suggest better to have an improvement on harvesting stone or more initial stone dont know, also towers city centre and fortress arent as powerfull as i think they should be, they should be a liltle more deadly. In my opinion like age of empires castle that killed units with one ore two rows of arrows, then u really need siege weapons, also the city centre is very vulnerable this one and the fortres just got tons of life.http://www.wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=19526 link to the topic off wall problem I speak offAn early defensive tower that u maybe can upgrade into stone tower, more resistance to infantry specially elite infantry, maybe more armor against ranged damege dont know. The mele caballery to have more health and damage in compensation for the price, I mean a skirmisher caballery cost is 100 food 40 wood against a Hetaroi or sacred band of asterte, when they are killed by horse skirmishers or skirmishers. The slingers price 50 food 50 stone, in my opinion too much stone and should have more range than skirmishers, would be nice to have more elite mounted units for iberians (mele) Edited January 10, 2015 by jurgenjuggernaut Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordIgorIIIofKiev Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 (edited) the reason why archers are powerful at the moment is because melee units don't have shields, skirms as well should have small shields, just the implementation of shield would make units more balanced Edited January 10, 2015 by LordIgorIIIofKiev Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrincepsRomanorum Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 I think roman scorpion is overpowered. It has too much attack and range. It looks a World War I machine gun. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alekusu Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 I think roman scorpion is overpowered. It has too much attack and range. It looks a World War I machine gun.agreed, imo their is 4 things really too strong:- Ptolemes- Roman scorpions- Perisnas chariots- Sword cav against buildings Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingAJ Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 (edited) Is there an overall idea for the balance in a18?I really liked the idea of certain types of units countering others. Like:sword infantry >> spear infantry >> cavarly >> ranged infantryThings are little mosh pit like right now in a17. Players just spam whatever unit looks cool. 100 archers here. 100 sword cav here. 100 hoplites there. There’s a big blob of a battle in the middle, and whoever has the most units wins.I really liked how in a16, spear infantry could kill cav at like a 4-1 rate, sword infantry could cut through a wall of pikes at like a 2-1 rate, and a small group of lance cav could chase off larger groups of skirms and archers. You really had to pay attention to battles, and make sure you had the right units at the right time. It was always satisfying see horses get knocked down against a dense formation of pikes, and frustrating to then watch said pikemen get cut down by swordsmen. The battles were more challenging, and there were rewards for players who managed their armies well.I don’t think this process of tweaking HP, attacks, armor, and rate of fire to make everything "balanced" is working. Things seem to be changing, but not really getting more fun. The lack of a clear counter system makes battling powerful units difficult. I love the idea of powerful units. But what are you supposed to do against fully upgraded sword cav or chariots? The sword cav can cut right though pikes and forts. The only way to counter them right now is with more of the same. Even elite sword cav should have to run away from a dense formation of pikes or forts.On another note, the game is a little more frenetic and stressful than it used to be. Pops are too high, and its difficult to move and mange such large armies. With just 10 carrying capacity to start, gathering sites are a hot mess of collisions. There are guys hitting 330 pop at like 15 minutes. I know the focus is on unit balance right now, so ill type more on that later if your interested in player feedback on that.Thanks for all the work you guys do to keep the game running. I'm just trying to offer a bit of feedback that goes a bit deeper than just "x unit is too powerful" type stuff. I know you guys have your philosophy on what makes the game fun, so I thought I would offer mine. Edited January 13, 2015 by KingAJ 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion.Kanzen Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 On another note, the game is a little more frenetic and stressful than it used to be. Pops are too high, and its difficult to move and mange such large armies. With just 10 carrying capacity to start, gathering sites are a hot mess of collisions. There are guys hitting 330 pop at like 15 minutes. I know the focus is on unit balance right now, so ill type more on that later if your interested in player feedback on that.Thanks for all the work you guys do to keep the game running. I'm just trying to offer a bit of feedback that goes a bit deeper than just "x unit is too powerful" type stuff. I know you guys have your philosophy on what makes the game fun, so I thought I would offer mine.I play with 150-200 units in map, its more balanced,With counter can be nice have soft counters and hard counter in some cases like Pikeman vs Cavalry.I feel the actual tactics is spam a huge bunch of soldiers and destroy all without micro or maneuvers 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jurgenjuggernaut Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 (edited) Sword cav>everything.chariots are not that overpowered, though why not putting some iron cost like selucid ones a liltle bit cheaper 20 mineral.Just played with athens and felt a litle bit in disvantage, when ptolemies are too easy, maybe for ptolemies low wood cost and fast building with low hp could work instead of free houses, athens need a cheap basic ranged unit, also athenians where more known by their strong city defenses and ship strenght.My athenian hoplites were beated by sword cav when they were 2 for every 1 sword cav, also sword cav both for gaul and british werent that strong nor that used, iberian civ had better use of horses, also Macedon in times of Alexander was one of the best cavIn the other way gauls were more known by their infrantry, and british were known more for being skirmishers not great front to front combatients, while that cav gives them too much more power. Edited January 13, 2015 by jurgenjuggernaut 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Razendsnel Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 agreed, imo their is 4 things really too strong:- Ptolemes- Roman scorpions- Perisnas chariots- Sword cav against buildingsI agree with what all that is said here,Roman units feel to slow in the early game. While the scorpions take all fun out of the lategame. I also like the idea of adding some iron to chariots that was mentioned elsewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordIgorIIIofKiev Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 I agree with what all that is said here,Roman units feel to slow in the early game. While the scorpions take all fun out of the lategame. I also like the idea of adding some iron to chariots that was mentioned elsewhere.ur just still angry how me mario and molusco murdered you that pizza game Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jurgenjuggernaut Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 I ll drop this by maybe will illuminate about roman history also suggest to see other ones funny and insteresting Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alekusu Posted January 15, 2015 Report Share Posted January 15, 2015 ur just still angry how me mario and molusco murdered you that pizza game I think the reason is that Mario is OP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gussebb Posted January 15, 2015 Report Share Posted January 15, 2015 I think the ram's are a bit too strong. a single ram can kill 38 infantry archers a alone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordIgorIIIofKiev Posted January 15, 2015 Report Share Posted January 15, 2015 I think the reason is that Mario is OP it was a 3 v 4 and in pizza that is a big difference^^ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.