Buffers Rework

[b2198]

Here we go again XD

Seeing as now all buffers will be out of TC roster, I think it might be time for me to suggest this.


The general idea: The game right now is a bit too reliant on having "super units", like this one, for example


In such a situation, that is common in maps bigger than 30x30, units feel more like projectiles than proper armies, because everything is basically instakilled for both sides. This imo lessens the strategic factor of large-scale battles, and they become more of a stats-check, "whoever has more super units being sent wins, often with a way lowered importance on which units are being sent".

On the flip-side, in smaller maps, having even a single herbalist/bard/druid while your opponent does not is a HUGE advantage, since you will be sending way stronger units than them, primarily because of how much stats the units get with the buffs (action buffs are basically an integer multiplier to damage on top of bonuses, druids basically can make flesh walls left and right with 2 turn units, and speed buffs from both bard and druid make it so that even your common infantry can outmanouver the enemy like cavalry, and cavalry becomes missiles of mass destruction that can capture TCs from 7 or 8 tiles away without even needing a wagon to do so)

So, for both of these, the general idea of this topic is to reduce the amount of power buffers can give to an individual unit, but make it easier to apply the buffs to a bigger army with less buffers, opening more space to train other units in the specialized factories, while also making buff choice more of a strategic decision.


(Note: the numbers below are more of placeholders to show examples of how those ideas would work, and should not be considered balanced at all, because just few calculations were done with them)


Bard:

1. Increase cost from 3 to 5
2. Increase hp from 12 to 20
3. Decrease actions from 2 to 1
4. Abilities:
   1. Battle Song: reworked
      • cost: 1 action
      • chance: 100% (+ignores resist)
      • cast range: 0 (on self)
      • cooldown: 1
      • effect: affects all [flesh and blood][melee] or [flesh and blood][ranged] units in a 2 tile radius, giving them +1 armor for 5 turns. Removes other songs on cast. Also gives all [flesh and blood][melee] units in the same area +1 damage for 5 turns.
      • Alternatively, effect: affects all [flesh and blood][melee] units in a 3 tile radius, giving them +1 damage and +1 armor for 5 turns. Removes other songs on cast.
   2. Hero Song: reworked
      • cost: 1 action
      • chance: 100% (+ignores resist)
      • cast range: 3
      • cooldown: 3
      • effect: [flesh and blood][melee] target gets +1 action, +1 damage and +1/+1 armor for 2 turns. Removes other songs on cast.
      • Alternatively, effect: ([flesh and blood][melee] or [flesh and blood][ranged]) and not [elephant] target gets veteran effect for 2 turns. Removes other songs on cast.
      • Alternatively 2, effect: [flesh and blood][melee] target gets +1 action, +1 damage and +20% hp for 2 turns. Removes other songs on cast.
   3. Adventure Song: reworked
      • cost: 1 action
      • chance: 100% (+ignores resist)
      • cast range: 0 (on self)
      • cooldown: 1
      • effect: affects all [flesh and blood][melee] and [flesh and blood][ranged] units in a 2 tile radius, giving them +40% resistance and +1 speed for 5 turns. Removes other songs on cast.

Herbalist:

1. Increase hp from 15 to 21
2. Add U_HEAVY_CLOTHED to trnCategories, so that the tight fabric tech benefits her too. Or increase p.armor from 0 to 1
3. Increase actions from 2 to 3
4. Decrease attack from 3 to 2
5. Abilities:
   1. Heal: decrease amount from 10 to 6 (total healing slightly smaller before researches, but slightly bigger afterwards)
   2. Double Strike: changed
      • Increase cost from 1 to 3
      • Increase cooldown from 1 to 2
   3. Poison Weapon: reworked
      • rename to Strong Poison Weapon
      • now requires a 3 turn research to unlock
      • cost: 1 action
      • chance: 100% (+ignores resist)
      • cast range: 4
      • cooldown: 0
      • effect: [flesh and blood][melee] or [flesh and blood][ranged] target gets Strong Poison Weapon for 3 turns. Removes other poison weapons on cast.
      • Strong Poison Weapon: deals 5 damage (not affected by armor) to enemy every turn for 5 turns. Stackable.
   4. Herb Protection: same as current
   5. Slowing Poison Weapon: reworked
      • research cost reduced from 5 to 3 turns
      • cost: 1 action
      • chance: 100% (+ignores resist)
      • cast range: 4
      • cooldown: 0
      • effect: [flesh and blood][melee] or [flesh and blood][ranged] target gets Slowing Poison Weapon for 3 turns. Removes other poison weapons on cast.
      • Slowing Poison Weapon: deals 2 damage (not affected by armor) and reduce speed of enemy by 1 for 5 turns. Stackable.
   6. Weakening Poison Weapon: reworked
      • research cost reduced from 4 to 3 turns
      • cost: 1 action
      • chance: 100% (+ignores resist)
      • cast range: 4
      • cooldown: 0
      • effect: [flesh and blood][melee] or [flesh and blood][ranged] target gets Weakening Poison Weapon for 3 turns. Removes other poison weapons on cast.
      • Weakening Poison Weapon: deals 3 damage (not affected by armor) and reduce damage of enemy by 3 for 5 turns. Stackable.
   7. Dismiss Propaganda: removed
   Druid:
   1. Decrease cost from 5 to 4
   2. Decrease hp from 20 to 19
   3. Increase speed from 2 to 3
   4. Add U_HEAVY_CLOTHED to trnCategories, so that the tight fabric tech benefits him too. Or increase armor from 0/0 to 1/1
   5. Increase actions from 2 to 4
   6. Abilities:
      1. Heal: decrease amount from 7 to 3 (total healing slightly smaller before researches, but bigger afterwards)
      2. Geass: Attack: changed
         • Does not remove remainingMovement anymore
         • Damage buff decreased from +5 to +2
      3. Geass: Move: changed
         • Speed decreased from +2 to +1
         • Alternatively, keep speed at +2, but remove actions (so that it's not possible to perform an action after moving)
      4. Geass: Survive: changed
         • Armor decreased from +6 to +4
         • P. armor decreased from +10 to +5
           (some might argue that flailmen counter this, so it shouldn't be nerfed, but imho that's more of an issue with flailmen being too strong than this effect not being strong enough, and that is for another topic)
      5. Mistaken Geass: same as current
      6. Promote Loyalty: same as current
      7. Dismiss Propaganda: same as current
   Battlefield Blacksmith:
   1. Increase cost from 2 to 4
   2. Increase hp from 11 to 17
   3. Increase damage from 5 to 6
   4. Abilities:
      1. Upgrade Weapon: reworked
         • Rename to Reinforce Weapons
         • cost: 1 action
         • chance: 100% (+ignores resist)
         • cast range: 4
         • requirement: Sword mastery lv2
         • effect: affects all [flesh and blood][melee] units in a 2 tile radius around the target location, giving them +1 damage for 6 turns.
      2. Upgrade Armor: reworked
         • Rename to Reinforce Armors
         • cost: 1 action
         • chance: 100% (+ignores resist)
         • cast range: 4
         • requirement: Infantry armor lv2 or Cavalry armor lv2 or Archer armor lv2
         • effect: affects all [light armored] or [medium armored] or [heavy armored] units in a 2 tile radius around the target location, giving them +2/+1 armor for 6 turns.
      3. Reinforce Clothings: new
      4. cost: 1 action
      5. chance: 100% (+ignores resist)
      6. cast range: 4
      7. requirement: Tight fabric
      8. effect: affects all [heavy clothed] units in a 3 tile radius around the target location, giving them +1/+1 armor for 6 turns.
      9. Alternatively, effect: affects all [misc] units in a 2 tile radius around the target location, giving them +1/+1 armor for 6 turns.
      10. Upgrade Tools: reworked
          • Rename to Reinforce Tools
          • cost: 1 action
          • chance: 100% (+ignores resist)
          • cast range: 4
          • requirement: Ambidextria and Masonry
          • effect: affects all [worker] or [builder] or [repairer] units in a 2 tile radius around the target location, giving them +3 mend rate for 6 turns.
   
   Aztec Priest: I have no idea, I've never really used it outside of testing what it does and how good that is (which I found pretty bad, but I think it's more of a problem with the primitive faction in its entirety. I have an idea to make them more viable and unique even before Age Techs are implemented, but that is for another topic.).
   
   
   Onmiyoji:
   1. Increase cost from 3 to 4
   2. Increase actions from 1 to 2
   3. Increase hp from 10 to 16
   4. Add U_HEAVY_CLOTHED to trnCategories, so that the tight fabric tech benefits him too. Or increase p.armor from 0 to 1
   5. Abilities:
      1. Tell fortune: changed
         • Increase range from 3 to 4
      2. Heal: decrease amount from 10 to 4 (total healing slightly smaller before researches, but slightly bigger afterwards)
      3. Promote Loyalty: same as current
      4. Declare Oni Possessed: changed
         • Decrease research cost from 5 to 4
         • Increase range from 4 to 5
         • Make it affected by Dismiss Propaganda
         • Increase resistance reduction from -20% to -40%
      5. Mask of Oni: same as... future?
   
   Roman Senator: same as current, I guess. He's not really a buffer, but more of a debuffer, so I don't think this topic applies.
   Same thing for Inquisitor.
   
   Edit: reduced bard and blacksmith's abilities effect range.

[phoenixffyrnig]

Hmm, big changes. (b and myself talk frequently elsewhere, his mind can juggle more balls more delicately than mine can, so as usual I am going to stay away from his scary numbers and provide more general feedback instead).

Firstly, I support this idea. As he mentions, just one buffer unit can make a huge difference, so the way things currently stand, we end up in an arms race with buffers. Oh, my enemy has bards/herbalists, I must get them too or be beaten by them. It is very hard to work around their effects without also using their effects yourself. Again, as he mentions, multiple buffers on the field can and do lead to OP situations irrespective of the turns invested. And I agree that the game should be more about the cohesive use of an army than creating just a few "hero" units.

I mention specifically bards and herbalists there because they are the strongest by virtue of being able to bestow a second (or in conjunction, a third) action, along with other benefits. These two really are the "nuclear proliferation" buffers - bard in particular is frequently spammed in MP.

Specifics

Bard's one song only approach I like, it means buffing for certain scenarios rather than creating a temporary God of War

Utilising Heavy Cloth - Nice idea.

Could herbalist apply poison to a poison archer / amazon blow dart?

Time out of double strike? 2 turns as is currently?

Druid - heavy nerf for what is in some ways the most limited buffer (more on this later).

Blacksmith - how many actions? Interesting idea to require techs to use abilities. However makes the unit fairly useless until mid game really. This utility gap would need bridging somehow - possibly have two blacksmith units, one that works 1 at a timing (like current but somehow limited), and a more expensive one like you suggest (non stackable with eachother).

General

All round increase in hp, pierce armour and range and duration of buffs would make buffers very hard to deal with. Would have to fight through entire armies loaded with benefits to reach them. Would they need some boni against them for certain units, eg skirmishers ?

Radius 3 is quite a lot - in theory (although unlikely) 24 units. Would this now make buffers the super units themselves rather than overly buffed units?

Previous point re limitations of druid.
This is the only buffer that is limited to it's own race. Everything else is universal. This is also the only buffer who can have his effects totally nullified, Remove Geass. Perhaps that is an avenue to explore, having some buffs restricted to own race? And more ways of de-buffing to cope with the sheer amount of buffed units, which might, by accumulation, be more dangerous than super units.

[b2198]

Bard's one song only approach I like, it means buffing for certain scenarios rather than creating a temporary God of War

Exactly, same for herbalist poisons, by having to choose which one you'll use to attack instead of being able to choose all of them at once, they end up being more strategic decisions instead of simply spamming all of them in as many units as possible.

Could herbalist apply poison to a poison archer / amazon blow dart?

She already can, and I think poison archer specifically needs a slight nerf, since they are a bit too strong early game, but that is offtopic. Also blow dart is... let's be honest, useless right now, but that is also for another topic.

Time out of double strike? 2 turns as is currently?

I thought for a good while about that one, but settled on 2 turns because they now would have a cooldown of 2 turns, that is, you'd only be able to use on each other turn at best, and would cost all 3 actions, so you wouldn't be able to give poison weapons or heal any units in that same turn. But again, these numbers are more like placeholders, they probably aren't balanced, so this could be changed maybe.

Blacksmith - how many actions?

still 1 action

Interesting idea to require techs to use abilities. However makes the unit fairly useless until mid game really.

Yeah, that was the idea, to move it to mid game. Maybe would need some requirements to unlock the unit itself so that it can only be trained when it can use at least one of his abilities?

This utility gap would need bridging somehow - possibly have two blacksmith units, one that works 1 at a timing (like current but somehow limited), and a more expensive one like you suggest (non stackable with eachother).

I'm not sure about this part, maybe it could work if the weaker one's buffs lasted for only 1 or 2 turns, and/or had cooldowns?

(Also might need a replacement for making machines and ships more resistant, but I'm not sure how the state of siege and naval units will be by then, so I'll leave that for the future)

All round increase in hp, pierce armour and range and duration of buffs would make buffers very hard to deal with. Would have to fight through entire armies loaded with benefits to reach them. Would they need some boni against them for certain units, eg skirmishers ?

Yeah, giving some ranged units bonuses against them would be good, since we already have a lot of melee ones with most light cavalry units (and could make Lasiq Assassins become a viable option if tweaked the right way... and maybe ninjas too?), and would indeed be harder to reach them with these changes.

Radius 3 is quite a lot - in theory (although unlikely) 24 units. Would this now make buffers the super units themselves rather than overly buffed units?

Uh... I meant radius 2 (theoretically up to 13 units), for both bard and blacksmith, my bad. Yeah, 3 would be too much. I'll edit it up there.

Druid - heavy nerf for what is in some ways the most limited buffer (more on this later).

(...)

Previous point re limitations of druid.
This is the only buffer that is limited to it's own race. Everything else is universal. This is also the only buffer who can have his effects totally nullified, Remove Geass. Perhaps that is an avenue to explore, having some buffs restricted to own race? And more ways of de-buffing to cope with the sheer amount of buffed units, which might, by accumulation, be more dangerous than super units.

I don't see it really as that big of a nerf, if at all. Keep in mind they would have 4 actions instead of 2, so in theory you could give a Geass: Survive to 4 units with a single druid in a single turn, and the total armor they would get is higher (except for p. armor, which would be equal) than current, or use 4 Geass: Attack with 4 units, giving a total of +8 damage to them when attacking, which is just a little less than current's +10.

They would also be cheaper, and just as, if not more resistant than current (with the armor increase), and would move faster, making it easier to keep up with the units that are being buffed.

[phoenixffyrnig]

I don't see it really as that big of a nerf, if at all.

I dunno, everyone else gets weaker buffs that last longer and can have many targets - druid's buffs would be twice as weak as current but still one turn only. And that's on top of the limitations I mentioned above which are actually pretty severe weaknesses. Tbh, with so many Celtic units already being factory specific, just kicking druid out of TC is a hefty nerf in its own right, much more so than to any other buffer with universal targeting.

[b2198]

I dunno, everyone else gets weaker buffs that last longer and can have many targets - druid's buffs would be twice as weak as current but still one turn only. And that's on top of the limitations I mentioned above which are actually pretty severe weaknesses. Tbh, with so many Celtic units already being factory specific, just kicking druid out of TC is a hefty nerf in its own right, much more so than to any other buffer with universal targeting.

(about) twice as weak, but twice as many. Also I feel like increasing their duration would make no sense for what they do.

And herbalist was also kicked out of TCs. And celtic chieftain is going to TCs, so still the same amount of celts in TCs.

Those, along with the survivability, speed and cost buffs really make me think this is not a nerf at all...

[phoenixffyrnig]

Also I feel like increasing their duration would make no sense for what they do.

Completely agree - I mentioned that to show that other buffers receive a wider net effect in return for weaker buffs, (more than double) - the already limited druids don't.

To be specific, Celts only anti cav unit requires a factory, as does their only archer, as does their calling card the Celtic Chariot. Therefore to field a viable Celtic army, more basic factories are needed. As a result, fewer advanced factories are available. This is the Celt's weakness - by definition they will be a less advanced playthrough. Their strength, to compensate for this, is raw power on the field of battle. Druid is a large part of that raw power, so with him also factory specific that really dilutes their abilities.

By contrast, Herbalist being moved out of TC doesn't effect the number or utility of the units she can buff. Neither does Bard being Nordic Hall only because of universal ability. Of the Celtic units remaining in TC, there is no balance. Yes, Celtic Warriors, while seldom lasting a second turn in battle, are brilliant at their role, as are Gallowglass. But Gaelic Fighter has little utility (an anti archer unit that has neither the hp or pierce armour to get close to archers) , Highlanders are tall poppies - by the time they get strong with Veteran ability (which is a lot of time investment) any sensible person would target them as priority, relatively easy to do even for a boss Highlander, and then a 6 turn chief unit. A modest amount of missile and cavalry would cut that army to pieces.

Further, instead of using Attack Geass for +2, might as well use a bard to buff many units for +1 and armour for many turns. (The removal of movement after Attack Geass wasn't really intentional, it was just a solution to a slightly game breaking bug I found and made known to Endru). For movement, instead of a one use +1, or +2 minus attack, might as well use a drummer and/or bard again to effect more units for longer. Which would leave Druid really only throwing around Survival spells and healing, which kinda breaks his flavour, which was to aid the shock and awe tactics needed to be successful with the Celts.

What I really don't want to do however, is to hijack your well thought out and all-encompassing post by focusing in on one specific difference of opinion, so I'm happy to shelve this part of the chat for now (after giving you the chance to respond of course, I am a gentleman) and to remain looking at the bigger picture, because as originally stated, I am in favour of this overhaul.

One thing that has occurred to me is how to deal with a buffer unit in a mega (I believe you have a separate post about issues with this). But in this instance, I am thinking of how to get around the fact that some of your suggestions effect multiple units by cast on self, and some by cast on target. So for cast on self, what square of a mega would be considered the epicentre? And for cast on target with range of 4, obviously Schrödinger's Buffer (who for casting purposes occupies all 6 tiles of a castle at once) covers rather a lot of ground...

I don't know if it's possible, but a logical compromise imo would be to consider cast on self in a mega to effect any unit adjacent to the mega's perimeter, rather than radius 2 from bottom left, and for cast on target in a mega to have range reduced by 1 to compensate for the extra 5 tiles covered.

[b2198]

Further, instead of using Attack Geass for +2, might as well use a bard to buff many units for +1 and armour for many turns. (The removal of movement after Attack Geass wasn't really intentional, it was just a solution to a slightly game breaking bug I found and made known to Endru). For movement, instead of a one use +1, or +2 minus attack, might as well use a drummer and/or bard again to effect more units for longer. Which would leave Druid really only throwing around Survival spells and healing, which kinda breaks his flavour, which was to aid the shock and awe tactics needed to be successful with the Celts.

Except they could be combined, as there's nothing that prevents someone from using a drummer, a bard and a druid together on the same unit. Also bards would have to choose between movement or damage after this, while druids would be able to give both in the same turn to the same unit, and then heal and use Geass: Survive all in a single turn. But I can see that maybe the armor reduction could have been too much, not sure by how much it would need to be adjusted, so I'll wait for Endru's thoughts on this.

What I really don't want to do however, is to hijack your well thought out and all-encompassing post by focusing in on one specific difference of opinion, so I'm happy to shelve this part of the chat for now (after giving you the chance to respond of course, I am a gentleman) and to remain looking at the bigger picture, because as originally stated, I am in favour of this overhaul.

Well, there are a lot of points in the post, but all of them were posted with the intention of being discussed, so you're not hijacking anything. Discussions like these are important to improve the ideas being discussed, specially for changes of this scale.

One thing that has occurred to me is how to deal with a buffer unit in a mega (I believe you have a separate post about issues with this). But in this instance, I am thinking of how to get around the fact that some of your suggestions effect multiple units by cast on self, and some by cast on target. So for cast on self, what square of a mega would be considered the epicentre? And for cast on target with range of 4, obviously Schrödinger's Buffer (who for casting purposes occupies all 6 tiles of a castle at once) covers rather a lot of ground...

I don't know if it's possible, but a logical compromise imo would be to consider cast on self in a mega to effect any unit adjacent to the mega's perimeter, rather than radius 2 from bottom left, and for cast on target in a mega to have range reduced by 1 to compensate for the extra 5 tiles covered.

I don't, and I have no idea how it works in those cases. I'm not sure it matters all that much, since it would just be increasing the theoretical limit from 12 tiles to 20 tiles around the mega, which can't move, so it would only really benefit the player in a more defensive situation, which if they are in, they most likely have less units than the enemy, so this increase in limit wouldn't really be an advantage, or in an extremely risky offensive building situation that was successful, and so it becomes a reward for taking that risk and succeeding.

There's also a possibility it works with only the bottom-left tile of the mega as center, which would make it worse to cast from inside a mega than outside it.

[phoenixffyrnig]

it would only really benefit the player in a more defensive situation, which if they are in, they most likely have less units than the enemy

Yeah, fair point, taking that into consideration it shouldn't be an issue.

Except they could be combined, as there's nothing that prevents someone from using a drummer, a bard and a druid together on the same unit.

I wonder if that was part of the problem, too many spells could be cast at a time, like your original example. Perhaps there should be generic buffers (mainly passive, such as drummer, banner bearer etc) and faction specific buffers, focused mainly on their own race, somewhat like onmyoji, where it's Oni spells are obviously Samurai specific, but something like Tell Fortune is a bit more of a universal idea, therefore universal effect.

Bards/minstrels were pretty widespread really, so no need to be tied to just the vikings, especially when they could easily have a skald as their own buffer.

[Endru1241]

First - what I don't like:
Bard:
- area affecting abilities are very hard to introduce, because they need new graphics to make sense, namely - new animated explosion
Herbalist:
- I see absolutely no reason for dismiss propaganda removal, as it's important defensive tool vs conversions
- proposition of Strong Poison is very interesting, considering mentioning poison archer being too strong in the same topic. Since 4 additional damage is too strong on early game, how does 5 damage on each of e.g. slinger attacks works in middle game (8 turn + Veche Izba build)
Druid:
- Geass Attack removes movement to avoid bug, like mentioned
- 4 actions of even weaker Geass Survive would create greater wall on mid game
Battlefield Blacksmith:
- was always supposed to be cheap buffing unit, so whole proposition seems more like completely different unit.
- ranged physical upgrade seems weird to me and I wouldn't know how to present it's explosion
Onmyoji:
- Declare Oni would be nerfed to oblivion if dismiss propaganda removed it. This effect already is resisted, so it's really a little worse version of conversion.
- no real reason to increase cost, just to increase actions

And general summing up:
It's true, that accumulating too many buffs may make game weirder and shift balance to need of buffers - I even had an idea of removing some similar buffs based on groups, but dropped it for some time (thinking about all group names and assignments became too tedious).
It could be reintroduced in some more general way - e.g. Only one mental attack buff (or only one mental at all, apart of auras), one physical, one chemical weapon covering, etc.
General way has some big advantages in being useful for future additions.
Supportive buffing units could also have abilities more exclusive to culture, just like druid to avoid too many overlapping buffs.
Another way would be to provide some more dispelling capabilities on units, but that wouldn't change 1st turn over-buff.

[b2198]

Bard:
- area affecting abilities are very hard to introduce, because they need new graphics to make sense, namely - new animated explosion

Hm, fair point. How are animated explosions made, in terms of images? Just a single image that expands?

Herbalist:
- I see absolutely no reason for dismiss propaganda removal, as it's important defensive tool vs conversions

That one was because I think herbalist is already filling too many roles for her cost. She's a buffer, some of her buffs apply debuffs, she heals, and has dismiss propaganda, so I thought about removing the one that (at least in my mind) made the least sense for her to have.

- proposition of Strong Poison is very interesting, considering mentioning poison archer being too strong in the same topic. Since 4 additional damage is too strong on early game, how does 5 damage on each of e.g. slinger attacks works in middle game (8 turn + Veche Izba build)

Yeah, would probably need a little more research cost, 4 or 5 turns probably (technically, it's already possible to do that by turn 11 without money couriers, with the added bonus of also reducing enemy damage by 2 and speed by 1 per shot of the slinger).

Druid:
- Geass Attack removes movement to avoid bug, like mentioned

Then maybe a +3 damage would be better?

- 4 actions of even weaker Geass Survive would create greater wall on mid game

But only made of celt units, which don't have units with already big defensive stats like, say, a shield knight or a spartan, so I don't think that would be too strong, even more so because of the new bonus vs irregular infantry against highlanders. An elite celtic warrior, for example, would have 7/7 armor with the buff, it would still be possible to deal considerable damage to it with something that has a bonus against them, like most cavalry, or foot knights, or other celtic warriors, or some upgraded archers, to name a few, without it blocking almost all the damage, but neither being almost killed by it.

Battlefield Blacksmith:
- was always supposed to be cheap buffing unit, so whole proposition seems more like completely different unit.
- ranged physical upgrade seems weird to me and I wouldn't know how to present it's explosion

Well, then I think just a nerf might be an improvement already, because it currently brings way too much extra damage to units for the entire game, while also being needed in masses later in the game, so the idea of his rework was to make less of them needed to buff a bigger amount of units, but with weaker and more restricted buffs.

Onmyoji:
- Declare Oni would be nerfed to oblivion if dismiss propaganda removed it. This effect already is resisted, so it's really a little worse version of conversion.
- no real reason to increase cost, just to increase actions

I had in mind that dismiss propaganda would be removed from herbalists too, so the opponent would need to have specialized religious units to remove it, and also that with 2 actions and increased range, it would be way easier to apply it. The cost increase was more to increase durability and actions (which otherwise might be too strong for mask of oni and tell fortune).

And general summing up:
It's true, that accumulating too many buffs may make game weirder and shift balance to need of buffers - I even had an idea of removing some similar buffs based on groups, but dropped it for some time (thinking about all group names and assignments became too tedious).
It could be reintroduced in some more general way - e.g. Only one mental attack buff (or only one mental at all, apart of auras), one physical, one chemical weapon covering, etc.

Yeah, it would be great if players had to decide between giving a physical attack, a physical defense, or a physical speed buff, instead of always going for all of them at once, for example, so I think that idea could work very well.

General way has some big advantages in being useful for future additions.
Supportive buffing units could also have abilities more exclusive to culture, just like druid to avoid too many overlapping buffs.

Another way would be to provide some more dispelling capabilities on units, but that wouldn't change 1st turn over-buff.

Well, if the buffs are changed to have longer durations and become more reliant on the player using their effects across many turns, instead of being more instantaneous like the current hero song, for example, dispelling would become more useful too.

[Endru1241]

How are animated explosions made, in terms of images? Just a single image that expands?

That's first half (and sometimes could suffice), but group pay, group heal, sacrifice altar also have symbolic icon appear blinking and disappearing over area of effect.

Herbalist:
- I see absolutely no reason for dismiss propaganda removal, as it's important defensive tool vs conversions

That one was because I think herbalist is already filling too many roles for her cost. She's a buffer, some of her buffs apply debuffs, she heals, and has dismiss propaganda, so I thought about removing the one that (at least in my mind) made the least sense for her to have.

- proposition of Strong Poison is very interesting, considering mentioning poison archer being too strong in the same topic. Since 4 additional damage is too strong on early game, how does 5 damage on each of e.g. slinger attacks works in middle game (8 turn + Veche Izba build)

Yeah, would probably need a little more research cost, 4 or 5 turns probably (technically, it's already possible to do that by turn 11 without money couriers, with the added bonus of also reducing enemy damage by 2 and speed by 1 per shot of the slinger).

The idea was to have all healers have either dismiss propaganda or promote loyalty or both.
Sole dismiss propaganda fits more.
And without touching Declare Oni - it's less meaningful to remove it.

Poisoned weapon was intentionally left as melee only tool to have some advantage for melee units.
Leaving it as it is and only making slowing/weakening poison dispel each other seems much better.

Druid:
- Geass Attack removes movement to avoid bug, like mentioned

Then maybe a +3 damage would be better?

Maybe in case of general decrease.

- 4 actions of even weaker Geass Survive would create greater wall on mid game

But only made of celt units, which don't have units with already big defensive stats like, say, a shield knight or a spartan, so I don't think that would be too strong, even more so because of the new bonus vs irregular infantry against highlanders. An elite celtic warrior, for example, would have 7/7 armor with the buff, it would still be possible to deal considerable damage to it with something that has a bonus against them, like most cavalry, or foot knights, or other celtic warriors, or some upgraded archers, to name a few, without it blocking almost all the damage, but neither being almost killed by it.

9 normal armor still allows to deal solid damage. Cavalier deals 15.
6/7 on early game is strong, but not really game breaking - knight deals 9/8 damage.
Main difference is ability to make ranged attacks by regular arrows negligible with 10 p.armor, which is actually what I like the most.
But 5 p.armor is still an immunity to arrows in early game - such change would only make it weaker later on.
And mostly - more susceptible to ranged attacks.

Battlefield Blacksmith:
- was always supposed to be cheap buffing unit, so whole proposition seems more like completely different unit.
- ranged physical upgrade seems weird to me and I wouldn't know how to present it's explosion

Well, then I think just a nerf might be an improvement already, because it currently brings way too much extra damage to units for the entire game, while also being needed in masses later in the game, so the idea of his rework was to make less of them needed to buff a bigger amount of units, but with weaker and more restricted buffs.

How single +3 is too much?
All kind of bonuses were decreased, so in worst case scenario this +3, becomes +6.
It's not game breaking for melee.
Better results could be achieved by another ranged unit or melee unit.
Support units are fragile, so the problem here, if anything is possibility to hide them too good from damage.

Onmyoji:
- Declare Oni would be nerfed to oblivion if dismiss propaganda removed it. This effect already is resisted, so it's really a little worse version of conversion.
- no real reason to increase cost, just to increase actions

I had in mind that dismiss propaganda would be removed from herbalists too, so the opponent would need to have specialized religious units to remove it, and also that with 2 actions and increased range, it would be way easier to apply it. The cost increase was more to increase durability and actions (which otherwise might be too strong for mask of oni and tell fortune).

Choosing priest instead would reduce enemy hp to 1 or even get you his unit.
And to prevent that - leaders or buffers are needed to somehow increase resistance and remove too many Lower Resistance stacked.
Just as against Onmyoji Declare Oni.

So it's kind of like creating problem to make a solution.

And general summing up:
It's true, that accumulating too many buffs may make game weirder and shift balance to need of buffers - I even had an idea of removing some similar buffs based on groups, but dropped it for some time (thinking about all group names and assignments became too tedious).
It could be reintroduced in some more general way - e.g. Only one mental attack buff (or only one mental at all, apart of auras), one physical, one chemical weapon covering, etc.

Yeah, it would be great if players had to decide between giving a physical attack, a physical defense, or a physical speed buff, instead of always going for all of them at once, for example, so I think that idea could work very well.

No, originally I meant only to avoid stacking any buffs that are affecting similar stats.
So buff to both armor and attack are OK, but you could only have like max 2-3 sources of defensive buffs, max 2-3 sources of offensive.
E.g. Geass Attack, Battle Song and Hero Song would all dispel each other, being offensive mental buff.
Not sure if disallowing any stacking of single buffer buffs is good.
Culture specific is on the other hand much more enticing.

General way has some big advantages in being useful for future additions.
Supportive buffing units could also have abilities more exclusive to culture, just like druid to avoid too many overlapping buffs.

Another way would be to provide some more dispelling capabilities on units, but that wouldn't change 1st turn over-buff.

Well, if the buffs are changed to have longer durations and become more reliant on the player using their effects across many turns, instead of being more instantaneous like the current hero song, for example, dispelling would become more useful too.

That is something to be considered, but on the other hand - average lifetime of unit is not so long, so maybe only in case of some HP increase overhaul.

[b2198]

That's first half (and sometimes could suffice), but group pay, group heal, sacrifice altar also have symbolic icon appear blinking and disappearing over area of effect.

I'm not good at drawing more complex things, like units, but I think I could make those effects if needed.

The idea was to have all healers have either dismiss propaganda or promote loyalty or both.
Sole dismiss propaganda fits more.
And without touching Declare Oni - it's less meaningful to remove it.

Ok, fair enough.

Poisoned weapon was intentionally left as melee only tool to have some advantage for melee units.
Leaving it as it is and only making slowing/weakening poison dispel each other seems much better.

That would be a big nerf for ranged units, while still allowing melee units to deal up to 7 poison damage in a single attack, and still be buffed to have multiple actions, so up to 28 poison damage total for a unit with 2 base actions buffed by both bard and herbalist, while the maximum possible for ranged units would be 9 for yabusames with weakening poison. Maybe make all 3 cancel out and buff the damage of all poisons by 1 instead?

9 normal armor still allows to deal solid damage. Cavalier deals 15.
6/7 on early game is strong, but not really game breaking - knight deals 9/8 damage.
Main difference is ability to make ranged attacks by regular arrows negligible with 10 p.armor, which is actually what I like the most.
But 5 p.armor is still an immunity to arrows in early game - such change would only make it weaker later on.
And mostly - more susceptible to ranged attacks.

But that's the thing, they currently negate basically all ranged damage from turn 5 on, without needing anything else researched, with this, they would only negate it while their researches were equal or ahead (and a bit behind too), but would still tank a lot in general, and would have more units buffed at the same time.

How single +3 is too much?
All kind of bonuses were decreased, so in worst case scenario this +3, becomes +6.
It's not game breaking for melee.
Better results could be achieved by another ranged unit or melee unit.
Support units are fragile, so the problem here, if anything is possibility to hide them too good from damage.

Multiply that by 3 with action buffs and you get +9 or up to +18 with bonuses. With a +18, basically any unit becomes op instantaneously. (Also multiply by 4 if the unit had 2 base actions, leading to +12 or up to +24 damage from that single +3)

Choosing priest instead would reduce enemy hp to 1 or even get you his unit.
And to prevent that - leaders or buffers are needed to somehow increase resistance and remove too many Lower Resistance stacked.
Just as against Onmyoji Declare Oni.

So it's kind of like creating problem to make a solution.

Ok, I get the point.

No, originally I meant only to avoid stacking any buffs that are affecting similar stats.
So buff to both armor and attack are OK, but you could only have like max 2-3 sources of defensive buffs, max 2-3 sources of offensive.
E.g. Geass Attack, Battle Song and Hero Song would all dispel each other, being offensive mental buff.
Not sure if disallowing any stacking of single buffer buffs is good.
Culture specific is on the other hand much more enticing.

Oh, ok, that would also be a good thing, if those buffs are not that strong individually.

That is something to be considered, but on the other hand - average lifetime of unit is not so long, so maybe only in case of some HP increase overhaul.

I honestly think the current state of buffs plays a major role in making units last for such a short time, because the offensive buffs stacked and multiplied with multiple actions simply deal too much damage in the end.

[Endru1241]

9 normal armor still allows to deal solid damage. Cavalier deals 15.
6/7 on early game is strong, but not really game breaking - knight deals 9/8 damage.
Main difference is ability to make ranged attacks by regular arrows negligible with 10 p.armor, which is actually what I like the most.
But 5 p.armor is still an immunity to arrows in early game - such change would only make it weaker later on.
And mostly - more susceptible to ranged attacks.

But that's the thing, they currently negate basically all ranged damage from turn 5 on, without needing anything else researched, with this, they would only negate it while their researches were equal or ahead (and a bit behind too), but would still tank a lot in general, and would have more units buffed at the same time.

It may be better for endgame, but it would also mean, that as soon as player gets druid unit - he can create 4 unbreakable walls by the 4 turn (+ veteran roundhouse build).
Enough to completely block other player.
It could be worse than early berserk rush.

Poisoned weapon was intentionally left as melee only tool to have some advantage for melee units.
Leaving it as it is and only making slowing/weakening poison dispel each other seems much better.

That would be a big nerf for ranged units, while still allowing melee units to deal up to 7 poison damage in a single attack, and still be buffed to have multiple actions, so up to 28 poison damage total for a unit with 2 base actions buffed by both bard and herbalist, while the maximum possible for ranged units would be 9 for yabusames with weakening poison. Maybe make all 3 cancel out and buff the damage of all poisons by 1 instead?

How single +3 is too much?
All kind of bonuses were decreased, so in worst case scenario this +3, becomes +6.
It's not game breaking for melee.
Better results could be achieved by another ranged unit or melee unit.
Support units are fragile, so the problem here, if anything is possibility to hide them too good from damage.

Multiply that by 3 with action buffs and you get +9 or up to +18 with bonuses. With a +18, basically any unit becomes op instantaneously. (Also multiply by 4 if the unit had 2 base actions, leading to +12 or up to +24 damage from that single +3)

Not sure if disallowing any stacking of single buffer buffs is good.
Culture specific is on the other hand much more enticing.

Oh, ok, that would also be a good thing, if those buffs are not that strong individually.

Culture specific is the key imho.
If battlefield blacksmith would only be applicable to general/european (plus maybe some cultures without strong buffs), herbalist to slavic only, bard to nordic, etc. then none of mentioned values overstacking would be any issue. Stacking would barely exist.

It seems to be better, than trying to nerf everything to the point where individually it's much less cost effective than just getting blacksmith research.

Besides when (if) cultures are introduced - any player that selected some culture won't be able to stack those things anyway.
At least never all of them. Unless selecting the default one (current build set). So current set needs to limited to not allow too OP things inaccessible to other cultures.

[makazuwr32]

What if for default set you need to research culture in order to unlock things from it?

[Endru1241]

What if for default set you need to research culture in order to unlock things from it?

That could overcomplicate things.
Currently don't have neither research given by default to a race/faction/nation/culture nor conditional requirements (OR).
So setting it up like that would only make future culture implementation harder.

[makazuwr32]

But if you choose a specific culture you can simply make that research to be, you know, researched by default.

[Endru1241]

But if you choose a specific culture you can simply make that research to be, you know, researched by default.

I was under assumption, that it cannot be done and only members of tech_all are given, but to hard_ai or when map settings state it.
On random maps it could be changed in initialization.json as starting units probably.
But as far as I know - there is no way to make it given by default.
If it's possible then how?

[makazuwr32]

I will check further just in case. Maybe i was wrong.

[godOfKings]

I think the best way is make every support unit have mostly general purpose spell and some culture specific spell

Right now i see most problematic spell is extra action buff so what we can do:
For bard keep atk and speed buffs as general purpose while change double action spell name as song of valhalla or simply valhalla song

Description can b the nords want to gain recognition to enter valhalla so fight twice as fiercely

So now double action spell is nord specific, as a drawback nord doesnt have a single unit with more than 1 action

For herbalists all poison related spells can b general purpose but double action spell is slav specific (or nord and slav both but i m not sure if nord becomes too op)

Explanation is this medicine is made from rare adrenaline boosting herbs only found in slavic region and only native slavic (or both slav and nord) inhabitants can endure its side effects

Other nations can have some units with double action to make for this drawback (or other methods) such as celt warrior and samurai which is already considered somewhat balanced

This way bard can still do atk and speed boost on other units while herbalist can use poison weapon too so its not completely useless to combine with other nations but only some spells give nation specific advantage