Why not improving worst units? - ANSWERED
Why not improving worst units? - ANSWERED
Instead of adding more and more units everytime, why dont we improve the stats of the worst units?
I am listing what I consider the worst units and what to do to improve them. Feel free to comment.
Spartan Hoplite was OP in the beginning of the game, but no one is using this unit now ==> 6 turns to build
Templar ==> 5 turns to build
War elephant ==> 6 turns, and maybe increasing the movement to 3
Shielder ==> movements increased to 3
Hussar ==> 5 turns to build, piece armor increased to 4
Assassin ==> 3 turns to build
Catapult ==> 6 turns to build
Healer ==> Heal range increased to 4
Swordman ==> No idea how to improve this one...
I am listing what I consider the worst units and what to do to improve them. Feel free to comment.
Spartan Hoplite was OP in the beginning of the game, but no one is using this unit now ==> 6 turns to build
Templar ==> 5 turns to build
War elephant ==> 6 turns, and maybe increasing the movement to 3
Shielder ==> movements increased to 3
Hussar ==> 5 turns to build, piece armor increased to 4
Assassin ==> 3 turns to build
Catapult ==> 6 turns to build
Healer ==> Heal range increased to 4
Swordman ==> No idea how to improve this one...
Re: Why not improving worst units?
no. I don't think it is a good idea.
this would unbalance the game. because the changes you mentioned (except the healer) would change the whole gameplay.
this would unbalance the game. because the changes you mentioned (except the healer) would change the whole gameplay.
This is Hungary and winter is coming.
Re: Why not improving worst units?
I think balint is right.
As far as the Hoplite, he had one weakness: cavalry. I still used him though, and now he is already cheaper.
As far as the Hoplite, he had one weakness: cavalry. I still used him though, and now he is already cheaper.
Thanks!
Josh
Josh
Re: Why not improving worst units?
Well, a debate is always good!
I have never seen an online player using the Hoplite, templar, war elephant... They're quite, quite, quite weak and I will never use them unless their statistics change.
Really, think for a second. Would you ever use the Hussar in a match? And now, would you use the Hussar if it costs 5 turns and piece armor increases up to 4? More likely. In the beginning of this game, catapults were OP and now I guess you won't use a catapult. It's easier to build a castle and then the trebuchet.
These changes would make the game more balance.
I have never seen an online player using the Hoplite, templar, war elephant... They're quite, quite, quite weak and I will never use them unless their statistics change.
Really, think for a second. Would you ever use the Hussar in a match? And now, would you use the Hussar if it costs 5 turns and piece armor increases up to 4? More likely. In the beginning of this game, catapults were OP and now I guess you won't use a catapult. It's easier to build a castle and then the trebuchet.
These changes would make the game more balance.
Re: Why not improving worst units?
Ok so debate:
Yes I regularly use Hussars: when the need applies. The new way may be OP.
Catapults I also use. Trebuchets are nice, but they are anti-structure siege primarily. Catapults are adapted to anti-personnel esp. with A-D. Trebuchets can only be built in a castle too - catapults can be built by three things.
There are just different styles of playing; all the new units help to accommodate multiplicity of strategies.
I could complain that I never use scouts or missionaries (and rarely ornithopters). These units simply do not often match my purpose.
Yes I regularly use Hussars: when the need applies. The new way may be OP.
Catapults I also use. Trebuchets are nice, but they are anti-structure siege primarily. Catapults are adapted to anti-personnel esp. with A-D. Trebuchets can only be built in a castle too - catapults can be built by three things.
There are just different styles of playing; all the new units help to accommodate multiplicity of strategies.
I could complain that I never use scouts or missionaries (and rarely ornithopters). These units simply do not often match my purpose.
Thanks!
Josh
Josh
Re: Why not improving worst units?
I agree COOlguy. I don't use a lot of units because they don't fit into my style.
I prefer using mainly longbowmen, heavy knight/hussar, and workers.
this is my playing style. everyone else makes their style too and use that. that is why you won't see me using catapults
I prefer using mainly longbowmen, heavy knight/hussar, and workers.
this is my playing style. everyone else makes their style too and use that. that is why you won't see me using catapults
This is Hungary and winter is coming.
Re: Why not improving worst units?
I've also got to agree with cool and balint. I (personly) use Templars, elephants, hoplite's, hussar's, and catapults regularly. I find they can all be extremely useful if use in the right situation
The stats you suggested would make the game extremely unbalanced.
The stats you suggested would make the game extremely unbalanced.
"I don't care who I have to step on on my way down."
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 15741
- Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm
Re: Why not improving worst units?
however i feel that the catapult got a bit underpowered since we have cheap ornithopters to kill them easily... (and in cheap i mean you can build ornithopters in a TC far behind the frontline and they will fly there almost immediately from the back and kill every strong unit you face...)
so actually i feel ornithopters a bit op.
i thought about raising the ornithopter to 5 turns cost ...
ideas?
so actually i feel ornithopters a bit op.
i thought about raising the ornithopter to 5 turns cost ...
ideas?
Re: Why not improving worst units?
Well, I really hardly use ornithopters against humans. But that's my preference. Sometimes I hide them in towers as a last defense surprise. I don't really think they're OP, and generally my super units (catapults and destroyers) have enough arrowed escort or support (archers, warships, towers) and I try to place them so that they are not so vulnerable.
But it doesn't really matter to me if you change the cost to 5.
But it doesn't really matter to me if you change the cost to 5.
Thanks!
Josh
Josh
Re: Why not improving worst units?
I completely agree, at the moment they are very op, I often find myself over run with them in multiplayer games.
"I don't care who I have to step on on my way down."
-
- Posts: 548
- Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2015 1:04 am
- Location: right behind you...
Re: Why not improving worst units?
I agree with ejm and coolguy...a couple of you guys are now familiar with my style of playing in a MPM, and I'll think you'll agree that it works-for me...the orni's may be a little bit overpowered, but i rarely use them, anyway, and i easily take enemy orni's down with my legions of supercharged bowmen, so it doesn't matter much in the long run...and i love using siege engines-especially catapults...especially since i can crank out a catapult in 2 turns...
It's better to keep your mouth shut and let people wonder if you're a fool than to open it and remove all doubt...
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 15741
- Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm
Re: Why not improving worst units?
ok, ornithopter is 5 turns from now.
-
- Posts: 548
- Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2015 1:04 am
- Location: right behind you...
Re: Why not improving worst units?
That works for me...aircraft are extremely intricate, and AoS IS supposed to be in a medieval setting...
It's better to keep your mouth shut and let people wonder if you're a fool than to open it and remove all doubt...
Re: Why not improving worst units?
Pepes ideas are very unbalancing. Like catapult its extremely powerful againist almost all units. It is almost op and it should cost 6 that would make it surely op. And pepe said warelephant weak it is strongest unit in game. I cant agree.
-
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Sun May 17, 2015 3:01 pm
Re: Why not improving worst units?
Why not allow healers or even a church the ability to "spellcast" your unit into something different. Like regular archer into a fire archer or a crossbowman into q poison crossbowman, or any walking unit into a stronger or faster unit. You know build the army u need now into the army u want later by changing them as needed.
- DoomCarrot
- Posts: 3096
- Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2015 6:04 pm
- Location: Commanding General's quarters, a tall keep above the mighty city of Carrot's Point
Re: Why not improving worst units?
To the Original Post:
There will always be stronger and weaker units in this game. There will also always be more used and less used units in the game. Its like a scale. Riht now it is almost perfectly balanced. But if we make these changes, it will tip a bit, and then war elephants, spatans, etc will be super op and overused again, and other units will be underused.
TL;DR: Lets not do this, everything is fine the way it is
There will always be stronger and weaker units in this game. There will also always be more used and less used units in the game. Its like a scale. Riht now it is almost perfectly balanced. But if we make these changes, it will tip a bit, and then war elephants, spatans, etc will be super op and overused again, and other units will be underused.
TL;DR: Lets not do this, everything is fine the way it is
The day is coming when a single carrot, freshly observed, will set off a revolution.
Re: Why not improving worst units?
To our dearest Pepe,
Currently, we are on crusade to increase the value of other units thru any means.
For which we require less improvements but more changes, since we add more in development but also make the "least used units" more useful. In such way there is no gap between their development and counterparts.
Currently, we are on crusade to increase the value of other units thru any means.
For which we require less improvements but more changes, since we add more in development but also make the "least used units" more useful. In such way there is no gap between their development and counterparts.
Strategy...Strategy.. I want your strategy! Wait, did you just only used tactics!?
- TheBluePhoenix
- Posts: 1498
- Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2015 5:09 pm
Useless units
I have observed that the money lender,slinger ,axe thrower are becoming useless . I suggest the following changes:
Money lender: i prefer to reduce its turn cost to 1 but if that is to much it may be produced in 3 turns and effectively reduces 2 turns being produced in a tc
slinger,etc: i suggest a tech 'accuracy' to improve their accuracy ( by 30% i suppose) and increase their effectiveness
Any suggestions?
Money lender: i prefer to reduce its turn cost to 1 but if that is to much it may be produced in 3 turns and effectively reduces 2 turns being produced in a tc
slinger,etc: i suggest a tech 'accuracy' to improve their accuracy ( by 30% i suppose) and increase their effectiveness
Any suggestions?
BEWARE!!!!The long lost empire of phoenicia is rising- The world is but just near the golden age,wherein men played and frolicked,without any worries at all
Re: Useless units
I see the slinger being used quite a bit still, but I agree that the lender and axe thrower are extremely unused. I don't think the money lender will every be very popular. (unless we make is super OP) but I think the axe thrower has a chance if the bonus against certain units are increased, or is it is given increased attack.
"I don't care who I have to step on on my way down."
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 15741
- Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm
Re: Useless units
Bluephoenix this a duplicate of an existing thread. Please do not open a topic on the same. Please link here the other so i can merge them.
- TheBluePhoenix
- Posts: 1498
- Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2015 5:09 pm
Re: Useless units
I suggest increasing their accuracy rather than their power. Money lenders can be extremely useful if their cost is decreased as i have specified above
BEWARE!!!!The long lost empire of phoenicia is rising- The world is but just near the golden age,wherein men played and frolicked,without any worries at all
- TheBluePhoenix
- Posts: 1498
- Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2015 5:09 pm
Re: Useless units
BEWARE!!!!The long lost empire of phoenicia is rising- The world is but just near the golden age,wherein men played and frolicked,without any worries at all
Re: Useless units
Here: viewtopic.php?f=10&t=1324
This is Pepe's rant about changing the stats of every other unit in the game... imho
The link BluePhoenix posted was to the answered money lender topic
This viewtopic.php?f=81&t=1548&p=10033&hilit ... ade#p10033 is the slinger upgrade topic
This is Pepe's rant about changing the stats of every other unit in the game... imho
The link BluePhoenix posted was to the answered money lender topic
This viewtopic.php?f=81&t=1548&p=10033&hilit ... ade#p10033 is the slinger upgrade topic
Thanks!
Josh
Josh
- TheBluePhoenix
- Posts: 1498
- Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2015 5:09 pm
Re: Useless units
I intend to use a tech rather than an upgrade to increase thei accuracy
BEWARE!!!!The long lost empire of phoenicia is rising- The world is but just near the golden age,wherein men played and frolicked,without any worries at all
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 15741
- Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm
Re: Why not improving worst units?
i ment this topic: "Why not improving worst units?"
merged.
merged.
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 15741
- Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm
Re: Why not improving worst units?
my opinion: if a unit not worth building than no one will. so this is ok to tune them a little but we need to be careful in keeping the balance:
eg. on spartan: i think they are still too costy plus not so hard to kill with knights or catapults.
on elephants: they are again too costy, i dont think anyone train them (only the AI)
(true for all other suggestions)
eg. on spartan: i think they are still too costy plus not so hard to kill with knights or catapults.
on elephants: they are again too costy, i dont think anyone train them (only the AI)
(true for all other suggestions)
- TheBluePhoenix
- Posts: 1498
- Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2015 5:09 pm
Re: Why not improving worst units?
I have opened a topic for the spartan dev . Comment there
BEWARE!!!!The long lost empire of phoenicia is rising- The world is but just near the golden age,wherein men played and frolicked,without any worries at all