2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Issues dealing with gameplay balance.
User avatar
Torpid
Moderator
Posts: 3536
Joined: Sat 01 Jun, 2013 12:09 pm
Location: England, Leeds

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Torpid » Sun 13 May, 2018 5:40 am

Kvn wrote:
Torpid wrote:For about 3x gen bashing effectiveness.


Which is getting cut in half.

Torpid wrote:~3x compositional effectiveness (due to its inter economic and compositional synergies with eldar and its AV capacity) and about... 1.5x more anti-infantry effectiveness.


Do you really think the Falcon has 3x the compositional effectiveness of something like IG who can support their transport with mass repairs and reinforce for much cheaper/much more quickly? Of Space Marines, who actually benefit from the increased mobility? Of Orks who get both mobility and reinforcement?


Yes, because IG can easily be base-locked in T1 and lose their entire power. At the same skill level that will never happen with eldar. At best you can play SM and if lucky play a trick on your foe and get a sneaky tac ninja bash. That's map dependent and requires luck. Most MUs eldar is never gonna lose a gen even if they build 4 which they often can easily afford whilst still winning every major engagement in t1 and maintaining superior map control. Thus by the time a bloodcrusher or deff dread comes out the falcon is out. This is what I mean by it having a compositional advantage. Such vehicles do nothing vs a falcon and the falcon instantly goes ahead and gets a very quick bash. This is part and parcel of why the current falcon would sincerely be worth it even at 130 power. I'd just have to go a heavier t1 instead since I wouldn't be able to instantly get it out to fight that DD/BC/RB or similar vehicle and thus I'd lose my power before it came out and lose.

But I'd still get it, I'd just go 2 ranger, 1 shuri. 4x ranger. 3x shuri in t1. One of those. Then get warp spiders when I hit T2, then falcon for 130 power after. I sincerely would still buy it a fair bit for 130 power. Just compare the default chaos dreadnought to the falcon. That's 120 vs 130 power I am proposed. Chaos dreadnought has very inferior anti infantry, much slower, much more vulnerable to AV in spite of its higher hp due to the low speed. It gets snared it is boned. Lower gen bash potential. Lower AV potential, BUT STILL I buy the chaos dreadnought and often even keep it in its default mode. I can tell you now everytime I do that as chaos I'd rather have a 130 power falcon.

Torpid wrote:It is pulled back in line by nerfing that gen bashing capacity and the anti infantry one. Probably could do with a build time increase as well to weaken the composition effectiveness, that or more power cost.

Kvn wrote:Losing 25% of its accuracy on the move is more than just an anti-infantry nerf.


Only it's AV was proposed to get nerfed by 25% I believe. I can't seem to find the thread now. But it's AI guns are 75% accuracy atm, AV is 100%. Still, I think all should lose 25%.
Lets make Ordo Malleus great again!
User avatar
Nurland
Moderator
Posts: 1343
Joined: Mon 04 Feb, 2013 5:25 pm
Location: Eye of Error
Contact:

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Nurland » Sun 13 May, 2018 8:19 am

When it comes to hp T2 Falcon isn't the sturdiest but still by far the hardest to kill/easiest to keep alive out of those transport.

Rangers and Eldar heroes are imo the main reasons for that combined with the high damage.
#noobcodex
LOCALgHOST
Level 3
Posts: 431
Joined: Mon 15 Jan, 2018 2:48 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby LOCALgHOST » Sun 13 May, 2018 10:08 am

Nurland wrote:When it comes to hp T2 Falcon isn't the sturdiest but still ba far the hardest to kill/easiest tp keep alive.

Rangers and Eldar heroes are imo the main reasons for that combined with the high damage.


just see the time unit comes to field - when u get T2 (which eldar gots sooner, as you all know, because of their mobility/map control) with SM or any other race, they get falcon, and other races could get that SUPERIOR HP transports, which could be killed by Falcon alone with it's 100% accurate AV hits.

Someone mentioned missile tacs? lol I stopped to buy that shit about a hundred games before. it's worthless. 40 power - hilarious.

combine this conversation with bug in the viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3146 (dread lucky with the wrong shee's aspect)
Kvn
Level 3
Posts: 262
Joined: Wed 29 Jul, 2015 8:04 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Kvn » Sun 13 May, 2018 2:59 pm

Torpid wrote:Yes, because IG can easily be base-locked in T1 and lose their entire power.


And Eldar can easily lose their power to an aggressive push, in addition to needing said power to support their power-dependent roster.

Torpid wrote: At the same skill level that will never happen with eldar.


They might not be baselocked, but they can absolutely lose their gen farm.

Torpid wrote: Most MUs eldar is never gonna lose a gen even if they build 4 which they often can easily afford whilst still winning every major engagement in t1 and maintaining superior map control.


And this is just delving into the "Eldar is perfect and can never lose" mindset, which is flat out wrong. Eldar start to get hurt against certain factions (namely SM, IG, and Orks) once T1.5 rolls around. They will not be winning every major engagement, and against those factions, losing their gen farm is a very real possibility.

Torpid wrote:Thus by the time a bloodcrusher or deff dread comes out the falcon is out.


Unless you are seriously ahead, this is not the case.

Torpid wrote: Such vehicles do nothing vs a falcon and the falcon instantly goes ahead and gets a very quick bash.


Which is made pretty risky given the low hp and slower movement, where the Falcon is made more vulnerable to av that can hit the field if you mismicro it.

Torpid wrote:This is part and parcel of why the current falcon would sincerely be worth it even at 130 power. I'd just have to go a heavier t1 instead since I wouldn't be able to instantly get it out to fight that DD/BC/RB or similar vehicle and thus I'd lose my power before it came out and lose.


You likely wouldn't be able to get it out, period. Eldar eco is more power heavy than average as is, and giving them such a massive price hike on a unit like the Falcon would be enormous. Not to mention losing said Falcon would then become game ending with the amount of investment put into it.

Torpid wrote:But I'd still get it, I'd just go 2 ranger, 1 shuri. 4x ranger. 3x shuri in t1. One of those.


I'm not sure what matchups you've been playing, but going 4x Rangers is just begging to die to an early vehicle since you have no transitional av except possibly Banshees. The 3x shuri is also pretty vulnerable to an early vehicle given it puts you behind economically and leaves the opponent in T2 during that early stage where they can make a push for your gen farm. You'll likely be able to get out a brightlance shortly thereafter unless they managed to hit you in T1, but by then the damage is probably done.

Torpid wrote:Then get warp spiders when I hit T2, then falcon for 130 power after.


You realize the huge amount of money needed to support this build order, right? This is pretty crazy investment.

Torpid wrote: I sincerely would still buy it a fair bit for 130 power.


Then, in my opinion, you are vastly overestimating the value of the Falcon itself.

Torpid wrote: Just compare the default chaos dreadnought to the falcon.


...Huh? The Falcon and the Chaos Dred do two very different things for two very different factions. People were already having issues with me comparing transports across factions.

Torpid wrote: That's 120 vs 130 power I am proposed. Chaos dreadnought has very inferior anti infantry, much slower, much more vulnerable to AV in spite of its higher hp due to the low speed.


Except that it does aoe splash damage, meaning it is actually better against blobbed up infantry, has the benefit of finishing its volley even if the target moves out of range, can fight melee threats better if caught, and can be upgraded to very hard anti-melee or very hard anti-vehicle in T2.

All of this is rendered a moot point given that it is a walker, and walkers can't exactly be compared to transports.

Torpid wrote: It gets snared it is boned.


Same for Falcon.

Torpid wrote:Lower gen bash potential.


And is part of a more aggressive roster that can support gen-pushes better, since Eldar aren't very good at digging in around the opponent's gen farm.

Torpid wrote:Lower AV potential,


And can be upgraded to significantly higher av damage in T2.

Torpid wrote: BUT STILL I buy the chaos dreadnought and often even keep it in its default mode.


Once again, you are comparing a walker to a transport. Don't do that.

Torpid wrote: I can tell you now everytime I do that as chaos I'd rather have a 130 power falcon.


I can tell you that a 130 power Falcon would almost never see play.

Torpid wrote:Only it's AV was proposed to get nerfed by 25% I believe. I can't seem to find the thread now. But it's AI guns are 75% accuracy atm, AV is 100%. Still, I think all should lose 25%.


My mistake. I misread the 2.8 Consesus Changelog "scatter laser" as "pulse laser" and believed that was what was being nerfed.
Kvn
Level 3
Posts: 262
Joined: Wed 29 Jul, 2015 8:04 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Kvn » Sun 13 May, 2018 3:00 pm

Nurland wrote:When it comes to hp T2 Falcon isn't the sturdiest but still by far the hardest to kill/easiest to keep alive out of those transport.

Rangers and Eldar heroes are imo the main reasons for that combined with the high damage.


I know. And I agree with the idea that it can be kept alive. What I was disputing wasn't its survivability, but its durability, which I went over a little while ago.
User avatar
Swift
Moderator
Posts: 2174
Joined: Wed 22 Jan, 2014 6:40 pm
Contact:

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Swift » Sun 13 May, 2018 3:25 pm

So much is lost to misunderstanding on this thread I cannot even begin.
The internal battery has run dry, the game can now be played. However, clock based events will no longer occur.
User avatar
Torpid
Moderator
Posts: 3536
Joined: Sat 01 Jun, 2013 12:09 pm
Location: England, Leeds

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Torpid » Mon 14 May, 2018 1:38 am

Kvn wrote: -


I mean most of what you said above is just flat out wrong. Or irrelevant such as saying chaos dreds get upgraded to better AV potential - yeah, and then are extremely slow, very vulnerable to melee and shit vs infantry. Unlike the falcon which is about 60 power cheaper and only mildly worse vs vehicles xD

Tbh I think you need to play more and get gud tbh. Because you're clearly not using eldar to a proper potential based on all the above. Seriously, if you get gen bashed in a sustained push and are not fast teching as eldar you are lower skill than your foe. Eldar just don't allow for that - their t1 is insanely strong.
Lets make Ordo Malleus great again!
Kvn
Level 3
Posts: 262
Joined: Wed 29 Jul, 2015 8:04 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Kvn » Mon 14 May, 2018 2:28 am

Torpid wrote:I mean most of what you said above is just flat out wrong.


So claiming that Eldar can never be gen-bashed, assuming the most power intensive race in the game can casually drop 130 in T2 for 500hp of generalist fire support, and that said fire support is apparently so game breakingly overpowered that it is the single strongest unit in the game while at the same time having 3x (where did that number come from again?) the synergy with its faction than any other transport in the game despite previously mentioned drawbacks, is all perfectly logical?

Torpid wrote:Or irrelevant such as saying chaos dreds get upgraded to better AV potential - yeah, and then are extremely slow, very vulnerable to melee and shit vs infantry.


Or, you know, maybe they're not meant to be compared at all given that one is a transport in a highly power-dependent roster while the other is a walker in a highly rec-dependent roster. Also, you seem to be ignoring the fact that the Dred can be specialized (which is a big deal), comes with the ability to fight back in melee when/if caught, and can drop crowd control in the form of its aoe from autocannon or the barrage.

Once again, all of this is a moot point since you are comparing units not meant to be compared.

Torpid wrote: Unlike the falcon which is about 60 power cheaper and only mildly worse vs vehicles xD


If by "mildly worse" you mean "dealing roughly half as much dps" (28 for Falcon, 48 for T-Dred) then yes. Only "mildly" worse.

Torpid wrote:Tbh I think you need to play more and get gud tbh. Because you're clearly not using eldar to a proper potential based on all the above. Seriously, if you get gen bashed in a sustained push and are not fast teching as eldar you are lower skill than your foe. Eldar just don't allow for that - their t1 is insanely strong.


You know, I respect you Torpid, but you need to recognize when you're talking beyond reason. The fact that you think Eldar are unstoppable in T1 is pretty over the top. The fact that you think they can fast tech while suggesting a 100+ power investment in T1 with your previously mentioned builds is self-contradictory. I never said their T1 was weak. What you need to realize is that they're not the only ones with strong early game units, and that they come with their own set of drawbacks on top of those. Eldar counteract strong forces by avoiding them and hitting the rest of the map. If you get caught in a bad engagement and forced off (yes, believe it or not, even Eldar players can be caught in bad engagements) the enemy can push your gen farm, and you're suddenly in a bad way.

Right now, you're sounding a lot like those people who go around ranting about how Eldar are the perfect invincible race, and I know that's not what you're intending.
User avatar
Torpid
Moderator
Posts: 3536
Joined: Sat 01 Jun, 2013 12:09 pm
Location: England, Leeds

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Torpid » Mon 14 May, 2018 3:59 am

Kvn wrote:
Torpid wrote:I mean most of what you said above is just flat out wrong.


So claiming that Eldar can never be gen-bashed, assuming the most power intensive race in the game can casually drop 130 in T2 for 500hp of generalist fire support, and that said fire support is apparently so game breakingly overpowered that it is the single strongest unit in the game while at the same time having 3x (where did that number come from again?) the synergy with its faction than any other transport in the game despite previously mentioned drawbacks, is all perfectly logical?


It doesn't sound like it should be right, but it is indeed completely true.

Kvn wrote:Right now, you're sounding a lot like those people who go around ranting about how Eldar are the perfect invincible race, and I know that's not what you're intending.


They're quite clearly the most overpowered race atm at the highest level. So many mistakes were made with how they were balanced in elite. Their entire t1 is insane, every single unit is overpowered in their t1 roster. The additions they got in T2 were never needed in the first place and only fleshed them out to make them even stronger. WG were buffed pretty unnecessarily and they got a T2 tank which completely breaks the race as it was certainly never designed to have such a unit.
Lets make Ordo Malleus great again!
Kvn
Level 3
Posts: 262
Joined: Wed 29 Jul, 2015 8:04 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Kvn » Mon 14 May, 2018 4:12 am

Torpid wrote:It doesn't sound like it should be right, but it is indeed completely true.


Given that Eldar only have a 47% winrate according to the Codex stats (putting them dead center in the middle of all seven factions), and I have seen no evidence of your claims being true in high level replays, I still don't believe that. Yes, the Codex is still a fairly small sample size, but it's the best we've got aside from the perspective of people saying "this is what I've played against/seen." which just leads to disputes like this.

Torpid wrote:They're quite clearly the most overpowered race atm at the highest level. So many mistakes were made with how they were balanced in elite. Their entire t1 is insane, every single unit is overpowered in their t1 roster. The additions they got in T2 were never needed in the first place and only fleshed them out to make them even stronger. WG were buffed pretty unnecessarily and they got a T2 tank which completely breaks the race as it was certainly never designed to have such a unit.


...Okay. Never mind. You don't sound like one of those people. You are being one of those people. I still respect your skill in game Torpid, but this is just silly right here. I see there's no point in continuing this discussion further.
User avatar
Schepp himself
Level 3
Posts: 201
Joined: Sun 01 Oct, 2017 4:42 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Schepp himself » Mon 14 May, 2018 11:43 am

Atlas wrote:Zoanthrope:
Zoanthropes now have two fire modes - Warp Blast and Focused Warp Blast. Requires a toggle to go between them. 6 seconds to swap between the two modes.
Warp Blast is the same as the default attack.
Focused Warp Blast removes area of effect damage, changes the damage type from psychic_pvp to explosive_pvp. Setup time is required before firing?


To come back to the initial discussion: I just throw in that a simple change in damage type would make the zoanthrope pretty underwhleming when dealing with vehicles. The focus blast costs power (which then can't be used for defensive shield) but made at least 160 dmg. The standarrd attack of the zoanthrope just does 60dmg, 11,76 dps. Personally I wouldn't let my flimsy Zoanthrope chipping away at vehicles with that little to gain.

Greets
Schepp himself
Greets schep himself thingy
User avatar
Dark Riku
Level 5
Posts: 3082
Joined: Sun 03 Feb, 2013 10:48 pm
Location: Belgium

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Dark Riku » Mon 14 May, 2018 6:19 pm

Kvn wrote:...Okay. Never mind. You don't sound like one of those people. You are being one of those people.
And what do you sound like Kvn?
I'll answer it for you: someone who is completely clueless about this game.
And you know it's bad when I'm backing Torpid up ...
Antandron
Level 2
Posts: 196
Joined: Sat 15 Jul, 2017 11:50 am

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Antandron » Mon 14 May, 2018 8:07 pm

-
Last edited by Antandron on Thu 02 Dec, 2021 9:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
egewithin
Level 5
Posts: 1144
Joined: Mon 26 Jan, 2015 7:08 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby egewithin » Mon 14 May, 2018 8:13 pm

Why on earth do you even compare these vehicles Antadron? Since you know, they are all different things and stuff?

Just tell me this : Go to market and look at apples and oranges. They are different, and they have different costs. If you find a way to make them both "balanced", then we may care about your "comparing fetish".
Antandron
Level 2
Posts: 196
Joined: Sat 15 Jul, 2017 11:50 am

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Antandron » Mon 14 May, 2018 8:56 pm

-
Last edited by Antandron on Thu 02 Dec, 2021 9:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Psycho
Level 3
Posts: 367
Joined: Thu 24 Dec, 2015 3:08 am

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Psycho » Tue 15 May, 2018 7:01 am

The last one is the most entertaining of the lot though
User avatar
Schepp himself
Level 3
Posts: 201
Joined: Sun 01 Oct, 2017 4:42 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Schepp himself » Tue 15 May, 2018 8:38 am

Antandron wrote:[Some wild mathhammering]


Great, now I imagine a falcon with a plasmagun armed Space marine hanging on the one side and a flamer armed Space Marine hanging on the other side roaming the fields of Green Tooth Gorge like the Psychos in Borderlands. Thanks for thatimagine!

Not really apples and oranges. More like different types of apples. And it seems while the apples of all races are pretty ok for eating right away, you can make excellent apple juice and a delicious apple pie with the Eldar apple. But I don't want to stress the analogy here. I think I already did.

To the point: Yes, the damage is what makes the falcon good. Too good apparently because it is getting a nerf. Maybe it would be okay to up its costs a little bit in 8.1. Nerfing it any further would get into the "dangeroulsy unfluffy" reagion with the falcon being the Main Battle tank of the Eldar more alike the Predator tank than the Rhino/Razorback.

Greets
Schepp himself
Greets schep himself thingy
Thibix Magnus
Level 2
Posts: 118
Joined: Fri 20 Mar, 2015 7:10 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Thibix Magnus » Tue 15 May, 2018 8:53 am

I'm an expert psychologist so I think this is the perfect moment to ask. Have you guys given some thoughts about my suggestion of a massive speed boost to falcon and fire prism ?
User avatar
Ayy Eye
Level 2
Posts: 80
Joined: Wed 28 Mar, 2018 5:21 pm
Location: Britbong Land

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Ayy Eye » Tue 15 May, 2018 9:08 am

Thibix Magnus wrote:I'm an expert psychologist so I think this is the perfect moment to ask. Have you guys given some thoughts about my suggestion of a massive speed boost to falcon and fire prism ?


Oh dear god...
She/Her gamergirl
User avatar
boss
Level 3
Posts: 497
Joined: Mon 22 Aug, 2016 11:48 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby boss » Tue 15 May, 2018 9:51 am

Thibix Magnus wrote:I'm an expert psychologist so I think this is the perfect moment to ask. Have you guys given some thoughts about my suggestion of a massive speed boost to falcon and fire prism ?






Image
Forums great more stuff to talk about.
Thibix Magnus
Level 2
Posts: 118
Joined: Fri 20 Mar, 2015 7:10 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Thibix Magnus » Tue 15 May, 2018 10:49 am

boss wrote:
Thibix Magnus wrote:I'm an expert psychologist so I think this is the perfect moment to ask. Have you guys given some thoughts about my suggestion of a massive speed boost to falcon and fire prism ?






Image


OMG it's only when you see him full screen for the first time that you realize the GENIUS Da Vinci was

These discussions can be discouraging for the humble average Eldar player. You crawl your way into a very taxing faction, you subjectively feel you have to put so much more effort to achieve some results, and then you realize it was all a lie, that some people in the inner circle think Eldar are auto win and total BS and should be nerfed.

(beyond the usual haters who never recovered from DoW1 trauma of course).

If really this is true, there is so much gap between experience levels, it almost tells something's weird with the game itself...

But seriously for me it leads to a difficult question: aren't you guys evaluating balance under the condition of perfect play? And if so, is it reasonable? Even the best make mistakes, we see it in tournament finals. If a game was balanced assuming unlimited amounts of "concentration", there would be no point in playing factions that are more micro-intensive than others. Or maybe then no faction should be harder to play or punishing than others and let's rework the entire mod?

(drama incoming)

And from the perspective of humble mid-level players, there will be no point in investing time into a faction that we will only have fun with (=winning more than 5% games) when we are world #1. There will be no fun in the process of reaching #1.

And in time, no GUD eldar players anymore. So no one will be left to actually prove that the faction is so good 8-) It will only be a legend, a whisper in the wind, singing how good Eldar are with no one alive to be worth Them until a new chosen of Asuryan arises.

And speaking of tournament finals, is there any video where I can see how broken Eldar are? This is no rhetoric question, I just need it to ease the mourning of my aspirations.

(end of drama, hoping I'm wrong)
User avatar
Torpid
Moderator
Posts: 3536
Joined: Sat 01 Jun, 2013 12:09 pm
Location: England, Leeds

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Torpid » Tue 15 May, 2018 11:21 am

Thibix Magnus wrote:These discussions can be discouraging for the humble average Eldar player. You crawl your way into a very taxing faction, you subjectively feel you have to put so much more effort to achieve some results, and then you realize it was all a lie, that some people in the inner circle think Eldar are auto win and total BS and should be nerfed.

(beyond the usual haters who never recovered from DoW1 trauma of course).

If really this is true, there is so much gap between experience levels, it almost tells something's weird with the game itself...

But seriously for me it leads to a difficult question: aren't you guys evaluating balance under the condition of perfect play? And if so, is it reasonable? Even the best make mistakes, we see it in tournament finals. If a game was balanced assuming unlimited amounts of "concentration", there would be no point in playing factions that are more micro-intensive than others. Or maybe then no faction should be harder to play or punishing than others and let's rework the entire mod?


The question of where the balance direction comes from, i.e. top-down, bottom-up or somewhere inbetween is a very good one. When I done all my balancing it was from a perspective of 1v1 top-down balance. I think that makes the most sense as it rewards those who commit to the game and have been part of its community for the longest. It feels unfair to punish those who have got so good they outclass the majority of the playerbase (and yes I am aware how rich saying such is coming from me, but I think the principle holds true regardless). It seems to me that was in the spirit of the elite mod in the first place. A balance modification set up by the best of the players who all shared a passion for the game and refused to let it die in its state of horrendous balance with Relic's departure from active support of it.

Thibix Magnus wrote:(drama incoming)

And from the perspective of humble mid-level players, there will be no point in investing time into a faction that we will only have fun with (=winning more than 5% games) when we are world #1. There will be no fun in the process of reaching #1.

And in time, no GUD eldar players anymore. So no one will be left to actually prove that the faction is so good 8-) It will only be a legend, a whisper in the wind, singing how good Eldar are with no one alive to be worth Them until a new chosen of Asuryan arises.

And speaking of tournament finals, is there any video where I can see how broken Eldar are? This is no rhetoric question, I just need it to ease the mourning of my aspirations.

(end of drama, hoping I'm wrong)


Well, that's certainly dramatic haha. I'm almost sure eldar aren't -that- hard at the none-optimal levels anyhow, given how having spoken to many a newbie facing newbie eldar's they still struggle. So it's not like you are going to be a solid 200hours or so behind someone of equal skill in terms of being in a fair match due to eldar holding you back at low level.

And that just means you will be rewarded even more when you finally do reach that level where instead of eldar holding you back at your skill level, on the contrary, it accelerates you forward. You'll get a rush of win potential and suddenly in weeks start overcoming foes who were previously way out of your calibre. That's a good reason to stick with eldar, right?

If not, there's nothing to stop one from playing another race first, getting gud, then swapping back to primarily playing eldar.

Keep your eyes open for the next elite mod league, I'm gonna be primarily playing eldar in that.
Lets make Ordo Malleus great again!
User avatar
Rostam
Level 4
Posts: 545
Joined: Wed 12 Oct, 2016 8:32 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Rostam » Tue 15 May, 2018 12:21 pm

Thibix Magnus wrote:
boss wrote:
Thibix Magnus wrote:I'm an expert psychologist so I think this is the perfect moment to ask. Have you guys given some thoughts about my suggestion of a massive speed boost to falcon and fire prism ?






Image


OMG it's only when you see him full screen for the first time that you realize the GENIUS Da Vinci was

These discussions can be discouraging for the humble average Eldar player. You crawl your way into a very taxing faction, you subjectively feel you have to put so much more effort to achieve some results, and then you realize it was all a lie, that some people in the inner circle think Eldar are auto win and total BS and should be nerfed.

(beyond the usual haters who never recovered from DoW1 trauma of course).

If really this is true, there is so much gap between experience levels, it almost tells something's weird with the game itself...

But seriously for me it leads to a difficult question: aren't you guys evaluating balance under the condition of perfect play? And if so, is it reasonable? Even the best make mistakes, we see it in tournament finals. If a game was balanced assuming unlimited amounts of "concentration", there would be no point in playing factions that are more micro-intensive than others. Or maybe then no faction should be harder to play or punishing than others and let's rework the entire mod?

(drama incoming)

And from the perspective of humble mid-level players, there will be no point in investing time into a faction that we will only have fun with (=winning more than 5% games) when we are world #1. There will be no fun in the process of reaching #1.

And in time, no GUD eldar players anymore. So no one will be left to actually prove that the faction is so good 8-) It will only be a legend, a whisper in the wind, singing how good Eldar are with no one alive to be worth Them until a new chosen of Asuryan arises.

And speaking of tournament finals, is there any video where I can see how broken Eldar are? This is no rhetoric question, I just need it to ease the mourning of my aspirations.

(end of drama, hoping I'm wrong)


:O
lul
“Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself.” Leon Tolstoy
User avatar
Rostam
Level 4
Posts: 545
Joined: Wed 12 Oct, 2016 8:32 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Rostam » Tue 15 May, 2018 12:25 pm

fireprism and falcon with speed boost?
looooool
you can play dow1 if you want op eldar army :P in dow1 warp spiders are rapid teleporting termis, wraith lord is tzeench pred, dark reapers have assault canon damage and fireprism is leman russ with range of hammerhead and dmg of pred :)
“Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself.” Leon Tolstoy
User avatar
Rostam
Level 4
Posts: 545
Joined: Wed 12 Oct, 2016 8:32 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Rostam » Tue 15 May, 2018 12:29 pm

I mean aside the jokes Fireprism is fine atm, dont need buffs

PS:what i meant was ,in dow1 soulstorm
Fireprism: hp of leman russ + range of tau hammerhead tank + damage of sm pred + speed of dark eldar ravegers + disruption of looted tank + can freaking jump half a map
“Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself.” Leon Tolstoy
Thibix Magnus
Level 2
Posts: 118
Joined: Fri 20 Mar, 2015 7:10 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Thibix Magnus » Tue 15 May, 2018 12:47 pm

Torpid wrote:
Thibix Magnus wrote:These discussions can be discouraging for the humble average Eldar player. You crawl your way into a very taxing faction, you subjectively feel you have to put so much more effort to achieve some results, and then you realize it was all a lie, that some people in the inner circle think Eldar are auto win and total BS and should be nerfed.

(beyond the usual haters who never recovered from DoW1 trauma of course).

If really this is true, there is so much gap between experience levels, it almost tells something's weird with the game itself...

But seriously for me it leads to a difficult question: aren't you guys evaluating balance under the condition of perfect play? And if so, is it reasonable? Even the best make mistakes, we see it in tournament finals. If a game was balanced assuming unlimited amounts of "concentration", there would be no point in playing factions that are more micro-intensive than others. Or maybe then no faction should be harder to play or punishing than others and let's rework the entire mod?


The question of where the balance direction comes from, i.e. top-down, bottom-up or somewhere inbetween is a very good one. When I done all my balancing it was from a perspective of 1v1 top-down balance. I think that makes the most sense as it rewards those who commit to the game and have been part of its community for the longest. It feels unfair to punish those who have got so good they outclass the majority of the playerbase (and yes I am aware how rich saying such is coming from me, but I think the principle holds true regardless). It seems to me that was in the spirit of the elite mod in the first place. A balance modification set up by the best of the players who all shared a passion for the game and refused to let it die in its state of horrendous balance with Relic's departure from active support of it.

Thibix Magnus wrote:(drama incoming)

And from the perspective of humble mid-level players, there will be no point in investing time into a faction that we will only have fun with (=winning more than 5% games) when we are world #1. There will be no fun in the process of reaching #1.

And in time, no GUD eldar players anymore. So no one will be left to actually prove that the faction is so good 8-) It will only be a legend, a whisper in the wind, singing how good Eldar are with no one alive to be worth Them until a new chosen of Asuryan arises.

And speaking of tournament finals, is there any video where I can see how broken Eldar are? This is no rhetoric question, I just need it to ease the mourning of my aspirations.

(end of drama, hoping I'm wrong)


Well, that's certainly dramatic haha. I'm almost sure eldar aren't -that- hard at the none-optimal levels anyhow, given how having spoken to many a newbie facing newbie eldar's they still struggle. So it's not like you are going to be a solid 200hours or so behind someone of equal skill in terms of being in a fair match due to eldar holding you back at low level.

And that just means you will be rewarded even more when you finally do reach that level where instead of eldar holding you back at your skill level, on the contrary, it accelerates you forward. You'll get a rush of win potential and suddenly in weeks start overcoming foes who were previously way out of your calibre. That's a good reason to stick with eldar, right?

If not, there's nothing to stop one from playing another race first, getting gud, then swapping back to primarily playing eldar.

Keep your eyes open for the next elite mod league, I'm gonna be primarily playing eldar in that.


I can't get gud with other factions, you don't choose Eldar, the Eldar choose you ;)

but yeah I fully agree with balancing the game from the perspective of the very best players who heroically keep the mod alive, and there is probably a way to keep the game open enough to new blood to enrich the gene pool of said best players. And one of my main biases is that, I really like to play other factions but the few times I play 1v1 it's always against better players, so I take my well known eldar to have a chance, and then get rekt.

Still fatigue and mistakes is an important component of high level play, which involves several consecutive rounds. I know this is all a heated discussion and all but I felt like the way you worded your surprising diagnosis was a bit assuming that no mistake was made ?

I mean, I'm always super stressed vs SM when going for a T2 vehicle. Because I know I can't afford to concede the next engagement and safely retreat, as the SM player can so easily transition into lascannon+fusion bomb and totally lock it to death. All factions face that threat but its 90 power for eldar... so yes if I win the engagement the falcon is a good investment but I consider it a risk while many here say it's the safer bet...

I don't know, it's just that we've seen a lot of discussions over the years about what opness Eldar were able to achieve in the absolutely perfect conditions, which for me, in theory was never a balance problem.

Anyway I'd be happy to see your eldar play.
Thibix Magnus
Level 2
Posts: 118
Joined: Fri 20 Mar, 2015 7:10 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Thibix Magnus » Tue 15 May, 2018 12:49 pm

Rostam wrote:fireprism and falcon with speed boost?
looooool
you can play dow1 if you want op eldar army :P in dow1 warp spiders are rapid teleporting termis, wraith lord is tzeench pred, dark reapers have assault canon damage and fireprism is leman russ with range of hammerhead and dmg of pred :)


nah just an old dream to play DoW2 where Eldar are balanced AND flying tanks are faster than 20th century muddy tracks ;)

but impossible dreams are the spice of life ain't them
User avatar
egewithin
Level 5
Posts: 1144
Joined: Mon 26 Jan, 2015 7:08 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby egewithin » Tue 15 May, 2018 2:57 pm

If someone can teach me how to change stats in game, I can make a mod where we can do whatver we want

- Genestealers explode on death and they are T1
- Terminators have 12 speed
- Eldar tanks have higher damage, speed, health and energy
- IG has walking medical bunkers
- Seer Council are 15 models
- Warp Spiders have tank armor
- Warlock leap range is 45
- Apo starts with both Chainsword and Stormbolter
- P-Dev effect radius on hit incrased to 30
- Ogryns have infanrty armor since they don't really have an armor, but their health per model increased to 5000
- LG can drop a Baneblade for 500 / 100 / 300
-etc
User avatar
Rostam
Level 4
Posts: 545
Joined: Wed 12 Oct, 2016 8:32 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Rostam » Tue 15 May, 2018 3:37 pm

How about giving chaos lord "Emperyial Abyss" ability in T1 instead of kill the weak
give warlock "Eldritch Storm" ability instead of Destructor
catachans should have Demolisher canons instead of shutguns, sarg should carry the BB battlecanon
“Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself.” Leon Tolstoy
Reg9678
Level 1
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed 27 Sep, 2017 3:10 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Reg9678 » Tue 15 May, 2018 5:31 pm

Coming back from vacation and it's impossible to quote or mention everything which was discussed before. Though it is nice to see this lively and mostly factually discussion here. I think we can conclude that there is a number of people not feeling to good about the Falcon while it's likely the best to wait for the changes coming in 2.8. Maybe some problems concerning it will be equalised once the Falcon's gen bash ability will be cut in half.

No comments on the changes to blind nades?

Return to “Balance Discussion”



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 42 guests