Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Elite (and related) releases.
User avatar
Crewfinity
Level 4
Posts: 712
Joined: Tue 03 Dec, 2013 2:06 am

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Crewfinity » Wed 02 Nov, 2016 3:31 pm

appiah4 wrote:Is this the build where the action now is? Should I install and play or wait for official release?


It's compatible with 2.5 so you can have both installed and play whichever one you prefer. I highly recommend you download it, try it out, and leave some feedback. Once the official 2.6 comes out you can always redownload it :)
Atlas

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Atlas » Wed 02 Nov, 2016 5:18 pm

We are not going back to reverted Rangers imo. The Sniper changes have done a lot to cut out the really cancerous parts of sniper play. While they might be due for a slight buff, a revert is totally not needed imo.

Rangers just don't compete with Shuris. They now do basically the same job but Shuri does it cheaper, easier and with transitional AV. I don't really know what you can do about them now :X
Tinibombini
Level 2
Posts: 106
Joined: Thu 25 Feb, 2016 6:47 pm

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Tinibombini » Wed 02 Nov, 2016 5:42 pm

Atlas wrote:Rangers just don't compete with Shuris. They now do basically the same job but Shuri does it cheaper, easier and with transitional AV. I don't really know what you can do about them now :X


This is probably too off topic but is the transitional AV really necessary on the shuri? Now with fire dragons, FoTM WG (which has been changed but will it be reverted back?) and the strength of the synergy between buffed DAs and falcons, it seems like there is a less compelling reasons for the buff of transitional AV on the shuri that first appeared from the transition from Retail to Elite. Also makes eldar the same as every other race that has a suppression platform that can be upgraded to AV.
User avatar
Ace of Swords
Level 5
Posts: 1493
Joined: Thu 14 Mar, 2013 7:49 am
Location: Terra

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Ace of Swords » Wed 02 Nov, 2016 7:20 pm

Atlas wrote:We are not going back to reworked Rangers imo. The Sniper changes have done a lot to cut out the really cancerous parts of sniper play. While they might be due for a slight buff, a revert is totally not needed imo.

Rangers just don't compete with Shuris. They now do basically the same job but Shuri does it cheaper, easier and with transitional AV. I don't really know what you can do about them now :X


Rangers need to snipe models, same for scout snipers it's not that hard of a concept to grasp otherwise just remove them from the game and give eldar a real alternative to detection.
Image
User avatar
Lost Son of Nikhel
Contributor
Posts: 636
Joined: Wed 13 Feb, 2013 4:26 pm
Location: The Warp

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Lost Son of Nikhel » Wed 02 Nov, 2016 7:45 pm

Ace of Swords wrote:Rangers need to snipe models, same for scout snipers it's not that hard of a concept to grasp otherwise just remove them from the game and give eldar a real alternative to detection.

That was one of the mains reasons of the Sniper rework.

Sniper don't need to snipe models, but force to reposition the enemy squads and soft them for the next assault.
"Pater, peccavi in caelum et coram te; iam non sum dignus vocari filius tuus". Dixit autem pater: "manducemus et epulemur, quia hic filius meus mortuus erat et revixit, perierat et inventus est"

There will be no forgiveness for us.
User avatar
Ace of Swords
Level 5
Posts: 1493
Joined: Thu 14 Mar, 2013 7:49 am
Location: Terra

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Ace of Swords » Wed 02 Nov, 2016 7:59 pm

Lost Son of Nikhel wrote:
Ace of Swords wrote:Rangers need to snipe models, same for scout snipers it's not that hard of a concept to grasp otherwise just remove them from the game and give eldar a real alternative to detection.

That was one of the mains reasons of the Sniper rework.

Sniper don't need to snipe models, but force to reposition the enemy squads and soft them for the next assault.


Which failed miserably.
Image
User avatar
Torpid
Moderator
Posts: 3536
Joined: Sat 01 Jun, 2013 12:09 pm
Location: England, Leeds

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Torpid » Wed 02 Nov, 2016 10:22 pm

Ace of Swords wrote:
Lost Son of Nikhel wrote:
Ace of Swords wrote:Rangers need to snipe models, same for scout snipers it's not that hard of a concept to grasp otherwise just remove them from the game and give eldar a real alternative to detection.

That was one of the mains reasons of the Sniper rework.

Sniper don't need to snipe models, but force to reposition the enemy squads and soft them for the next assault.


Which failed miserably.


I would like to say that I think scout snipers atm work really well.

Rangers are mess.

The key thing of course is that default scouts are really cheap and good for capping and then they can be upgraded to shotguns or snipers as you see fit. It's easier to just throw some snipers in on as SM on top of your jump squad and your SUTs than it is for eldar to throw rangers on top of the rest of their composition.
Lets make Ordo Malleus great again!
User avatar
Cyris
Level 4
Posts: 649
Joined: Fri 22 Mar, 2013 10:22 pm

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Cyris » Thu 03 Nov, 2016 2:41 am

Torpid wrote:The key thing of course is that default scouts are really cheap and good for capping and then they can be upgraded to shotguns or snipers as you see fit. It's easier to just throw some snipers in on as SM on top of your jump squad and your SUTs than it is for eldar to throw rangers on top of the rest of their composition.


I agree strongly with this.

Scouts are so adaptable, Rangers are too one dimensional, and Shuricans exist. Rangers provide useful tools on the T1 battlefield, but transitioning into them is so vulnerable. Rangers, despite the useful and unique tools they provide, fill a very similar T1 role as Shuri. But the Ranger is also more expensive (240/30 vs 365/45) and lacks T2 scaling (while the shuri provides AV!) So Rangers are 125/15 more in the end, scale worse and preform the same role. Short of a few very special matchups, why invest in that?

Compare this to scouts. A cheap fast side capping unit that sports an impressive array of upgrade options and timings to adapt to just about every T1 threat. And it stays relevant in all tiers. And getting 3 of them totally works.

I personally liked Rangers when I played with them in 2.5, but I couldn't justify using the build seriously, in large part from the suppression inconsistency. If the cover suppression penalty goes away and the unit preforms more reliably, I will absolutely experiment with it again in 2.6 I don't think it will be good though, not until it gets a bit more buffed. Here's what I'd do: either add T2 scaling, or make it cheaper. Either could work, making Rangers less risky and hopefully vary Eldar openings more.

T2 Scaling:
I think the most reasonable T2 upgrade gated enhancements would be soft AV, a new spell or enhanced stats.
AV would want to be an ability, no sustain damage. Focus Ranger as a soft AV option, like a Zoan focused warp blast. Maybe a T2 upgrade enhances kinetic shot to now target vehicles, and deal a flat amount of damage (or snare, or both, or a debuff, whatever).
New spell would want to be something that combos with Rangers T2 role - spotting and side capping. Maybe set land mines? Detection wards? Double the Rangers suppression damage for X seconds?
Stats would be either damage, rate of fire or energy/regen. Any of those tied to a T2 upgrade would be great.

Cheaper:
Pretty simple, drop the price. Either of the base unit, or Pathfinder gear. Spitballing: 280/30 for the Ranger, 50/10 for Pathfinder. This puts the whole package at 330/40 which is still more then Shuri, but not by as much (90/10). Could also reduce the upkeep or pop.
...or nerf the shuri a bit. Upping Shuri price from 240/30 to 250/30 seems super reasonable, especially if the DA stay at 270.
Tex
Level 4
Posts: 909
Joined: Sat 27 Jul, 2013 9:33 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Tex » Thu 03 Nov, 2016 3:12 am

Well I guess its my turn to provide some thought...

I will list things I think are missing in blue and my hot contention points in red.

Random stuff
-General bug fixes are always very welcome!
-Hold fire ability is a great work. Thanks so much for this guys!
-Rotation rate changes are very "caeltosian". The only one I can see having a significant impact is on plague marines and it limiting their ability to kite. So... good change I guess?
-Hotkey changes look good. I like that most keys have migrated to being within range of the left hand.

Chaos
-Blood sacrifice cost increase to 175 red is a good change. Its a semi-powerful global that allows a high pressure hero to apply even more pressure. I agree with bringing the CL to heel.

-Nurgle shrine fix is good. Now how about we take a look at making the shrines more comparable in performance? CL shrine is absurdly powerful with shot blockers. Sorc shrine is awful. In fact, the aura from tzeentch shrine doesn't even stack up against the aura from the khorne shrine (10% ranged damage reduction from T-shrine compared to 10% blanket damage buff from K-shrine) , let alone the fact that the doombolts are absolute trash compared to getting free bloodletters appear.
A fair start would be making the khorne shrine only buff melee damage, and not ranged damage.


-Dark flames cost reduction from 150 to 125 is a bad change. This is a strong global. It got moved to T2 for that very reason. Excellent retreat killer and can be combined with all kinds of sorc shenanigans to good effect.
-Sorc bolt pistol damage increase is a good change. The sorc is such crap against low model count squads. This will definitely help him peel models and be a real threat in the early game.
-Rod of warpfire change is something I will reserve comment on. When it hits, it hits hard. When it misses, you just wish you didn't waste 30 power on something so trivial. Let's see how it plays out. (PS, the ability is supposed to do plasma cannon damage so supposedly this wargear should be supplementary AV but I have never been able to get a noticeable result... anyone else notice this?)

-MoK upgrade cost reduced. Good change for internal balance.
-Nerf to havocs and bc's, heading in the right direction. Spammable anti-all is cancer.
-Plague marine AI capacity is too much. This is the main problem with these guys, not upkeep, rotation, or squad size.
-Chaos dreadnaught changes are inexplicable to me.
-Predator normalization... thank goodness!

I think a few chaos wargears need looking at as well, such as the Icon of Tzeentch which has been made into absolute garbage. Also, The CL gets a ton of sustain from his armor of the inferno. Even if it would need a req reduction, I think it would make sense to make this armor more of a casting option and less of a "buy this to get massive HP and an I WIN spell for a very reasonable price".

Eldar
-Buffs to warlock underused wargear. I welcome these buffs, now please make gates cost 75 red.
-Entangling web moved to T2. I'm indifferent to this change, I didn't see root + grenade combinations nearly as much as I thought I would. I think a more appropriate change to the WSE is to remove his special attack and tie it to his melee weapon upgrade.
-Dire avengers are getting a hp shift from initial to upgradable. Dire avengers were underperforming at 300 req and are now overperforming at 270 req + having a high hp leader with detection that prevents them from being hit by mines or boobytraps. Obvious answer to me in fixing this balance issue is to increase their initial cost to 285 and to remove their detection in T1 when mines and traps are of greatest consequence.
-DA exarch changes are unnecessary if the previous line is followed.
-Banshee exarch cost reduced to 90-20. This is probably fair. We've all seen the exarch dying a lot.
-Warp spider changes to haywire grenades. Warp spiders never became bad. They never became unusable. They simply require a touch of micro and planning to use, and compared to fire dragons, are much less convenient to use for obvious reasons... The changes are almost too numerous to list that have internally nerfed warp spiders. Buffing haywire grenades to me seems absurd.

-Falcon changes. I think any nerfs to the falcon in its current state are good. This is the most dominant unit in this entire patch. The falcon is just doing so much damage though. I'm actually okay with it being a hard to kill/sustain kind of unit (although the shield battery does indeed need to recharge MUCH SLOWER), I just think that it needs to be less of a threat to either vehicles or infantry. Either one will give the opponent a much clearer choice on soft countering/hard countering strategies.
-Wraithlord change is inconsequential. Wraithlord could probably be made fine again simply by improving its hp to 1100 from 1000.
-Wraithguard changes have made them go from OP to UP. Wraithguards could probably be given a slight range increase, courage damage increase, and windup decrease, given that they now need to fire from being stationary. It would also make sense to move their leader to the back or side of the formation.

-Power cost increase for fire dragons from 30 to 40. The way that fire dragons are performing in this meta probably warrants their cost to be increased to 45 power, pending a re-evaluation of how eldar performs with what presumably should be a net nerf to their performance. Their high levels of performance across the board should very likely be tied into two seperate abilities that both cost 60 to 65 energy. This seems to be the magic number for balancing an ability choice on a level 1 squad. I also don't like the leader mechanic on this squad at all.

Ordo Malleus
I'm going to make general commentary here. I don't think my feedback is nearly as valuable in this section because I simply have not put enough time into GK since 2.5 launched.

-new global looks pretty bad

-Aeges mechanic seems good. requires more micro but offers an overall greater focus on synergy and helps to provide the theme and flavor we have all been dying for GK to have.
-New Canticle mechanic is decent, but I would rather have it as an energy costing ability that must be activated to shorten the cooldowns by 50%. What this would amount to is the brother captain having enough energy to reduce his cooldowns, and then cast a spell. He would then need energy supplementation either by strike squads or by the global bar to continue casting spells. I see this being a much more micro intensive and rewarding system for using the canticle. Think about 2 hammer strikes or 2 warding staff usages in a single large engagement. I don't see this being done in a meaningful way with a 30% cooldown reduction passively.
-Nemesis vortex change is good. Maybe make the snare effect vehicles?
-Psychic lash seems like it will be an integral part of BC play against certain races. I fear the ability knockback will allow it to be used for cheesy retreat killing though.

-Acolyte leader change seems strange to me...
-Strike squad I'm going to reserve comment on mostly. Seems like they will actually need to be in melee combat, vs being proficient at it if need be???
-Psycannon/Psilencer rework seems okay
-Ops seem useful again in a big way. Great work on this one!
-Great attempt at making GK dread variants all useful in some way. Let's see how it plays out.
-Other GK changes seem like largely inconsequential changes that could be listed under the "optimization category".

Imperial Guard
-Good changes in general for inquisitor.
-ST call in seems a bit too cheap at 200-125 tbh.
-Commissar execute changes look good
-Fist of Brokus nerf could probably be limited to 20 seconds instead of 15, but I think it will still be super powerful when used correctly.
-Lord General changes are great. I think the LG grenade launcher could use a slight range increase
-Heavy weapons team cost normalization is okay. In terms of tanks and HWT''s I'm totally okay with a certain level of standardization.
-Auto cannon nerfs, good!
-I'm going to call the catachan changes a net buff. I think this is an interesting change that will only hurt people like me who use double catas in T1 for a very early double (sometimes triple with an execute) dose of AOE damage.
-Flare shell is fantastic. Spotters have now gone from niche to almost necessary. Only problem is that it has a prohibitive cost!
-Storm trooper anti armor squad hp buff. Change seems okay, might end up exposing the fact that these guys actually do a good job and are probably being used poorly.
-Banewolf nerfs are no brainer. Good job!
-Leman changes I'm neutral on. They did seem pricey, but the plasma one does pretty big damage...
-Baneblade changes just prove that this unit is a mess. It has been tinkered with many times and we still haven't found a sweet spot for it. I can appreciate the attempt at making this unit more accessible.
-I think that a couple items might have been glossed over for IG. I feel like guardsmen could use a slight nerf in their cost efficiency, but I would also like to take a little bit of damage away from the sentinel and put it into basic GM las fire. Further, I think that the Lord Commisar power fist is an underperforming upgrade compared to its counterparts and it could use a slight cost reduction to compensate. And lastly, I would like to see more accessibility for the "mobile base" upgrade and its uses as compensation for less cost efficient guardsmen. The upgrade could either be made cheaper or the mobile base could setup and tear down faster. I want to also mention that I think Kasrkin are a bit too expensive as an initial purchase and that their plasma upgrade is garbage.

Orks
-Warboss changes are overall good. Boss pole going back to 25 power I'm unsure about. We didn't even see it used that much at 20 power and I feel like putting it back at 25 power makes it not a serious tier 1 option when angry bitz offers so much.
-On angry bitz, can we not all agree already that this wargear just outright over performs? If anything lets make angry bitz cost 130-25 and keep the boss pole at 110-20...I mean my goodness... 40 second cooldown,112.5hp regenerated, huge speed bonus for charge, knockback, and a melee damage bonus bigger than that of a stim pack! Only thing keeping this wargear in check is a reasonable energy cost of 50, but for what it gives I feel like it should be 60!
-Spiky armor changes are a good start. It's still going to be a free pass armor against eldar though.

-Knob is taking a big hit with hide da boyz nerf. I think 60 seconds should be plenty of CD

-More Dakka global getting a huge buff it seems? 0 reload modifier means ranged units will be unaffected by suppression in terms of their ranged damage output. Maybe lets try 0.25 before jumping into "shoot through suppression".
-Turret cost reduction and electric armor cost reductions I strongly agree with.
-Overcharge nerf is a very good thing. This wargear is super strong.
-Super Tuff Beam nerfs are good. I think this wargear is very strong, but I don't know that it was every a game breaker simply because its a deep T3 item.

-Slugga changes are awesome.
-I'm indifferent to the shoota boy changes. They already dish out buttloads of damage when they are fully upgraded.
-Stormboy changes make sense.
-Painboy change is a double edged sword. He does nothing to solve suppression. Buying him is usually a huge risk/reward gamble. Why on earth would we need to pay another 5 power for something he should have had in the first place?
-Stikkbommas are a bit less enticing to purchase with the drop of melee skill to 70. Could 75 still be considered? Otherwise I can't see a reason to not spend only slightly more on a weirdboy who gets plasma cannon damage.
-Kommando squad cost increase is fair. They are currently pretty dominant.

-I feel like Lootas are still doing too much damage and suppressing too easily. Something seems a bit off. I also think that Flash Gitz could come down to 50 power. Banners also need to be looked at in terms of team game stacking. Lastly, I don't think that the Knob's extra equipment wargear needs to give such an enormous energy bonus. It is a survivability wargear and should probably give no more than 20 or 30 extra energy.

Space Marines
-Force Commander terminator armor changes seem fine.
-scout regen nerf is a good change.
-Tac and Stern changes are very good!
-ASM and Vanguard changes are very good!
-LRR changes are good. The suppression flamers were just insane.
-Ven dread cost reduction is good. Hard to believe it costs more than a LR drop and yet it cant be upgraded with ranged weapons...
-Terminator changes are acceptable. Assault cannon might be a touch too appealing not, not sure.

-I was going to say that the Tac ML could use a power cost reduction to 35, but with the sarge getting a power cost reduction, I'll take it. I also want to address the very important issue of the Force Commander Thunder Hammer. That thing is still STUPIDLY powerful and it usually isn't even purchased for what it's supposed to do (That is, it is purchased as an anti-ranged blob weapon in tandem with teleport, when really it is supposed to be an AOE melee counter)! Either this hammer needs to do less AOE damage and more AOE knockback, or it needs to offer a greatly reduced damage buff to the surrounding army of the FC player. The hits are guaranteed and the damage is so impressive that there is never a reason to purchase or to keep the powersword. Also, why do sanguine chainsword and stormbolter both cost 25 power? The apo is still very easy to focus down when he buys the sanguine sword. I have used this thing consistently and it is almost always a bad investment when compared to the stormbolter. Further, let's bump the power axe up to 25 power and give it a bit more damage than a Tier 1 power weapon.
Lastly, and very importantly, the librarian needs more love!His initial cost is incredibly prohibitive in terms of internal balance, and a better initial purchase in T2 will almost always be a razorback or whirlwind. My proposal is that the Librarian should be designed around an initial cost of 360-40. In fact, the way he currently performs, that is probably the fair price to pay for him without changing anything! I also think that because he is so incredibly vulnerable against dedicated melee squads, you should be able to upgrade his hp by an additional 60. In essence, the changes would be as follows:
-Librarian starting price reduced to 350-40.
-Librarian ability "quickening" duration increased from 5 seconds to 8 seconds.
-Librarian tome of time upgrade cost changed to 50-25, upgrade no longer grants +100hp, upgrade now increases energy regeneration by 1 e/s.
-Librarian psychic hood upgrade cost changed to 75-20, upgrade now grants +150hp and increases energy regeneration by 1.5 e/s.
-Librarian force staff upgrade cost changed to 100-25, upgrade now grants +210hp.
*NOTE* ---- My reasoning for the reallocation of stats on the librarian is such that you can buy the librarian earlier, and upgrade to his most powerful ability earlier, but you are not granted any additional combat capability on the librarian himself.


Tyranids
-HT venom cannon nerfs are much needed. Good job!
-Brood nest nerfs much needed! Good job!
-RA tunnels holding 7 squads... can you say retreat kill?
-Ravener squad changes I'm curious about. I have no comment for now other than I am very interested to see how the slower timing will affect the reward of purchase.
-Tyrant guard should still be strong. Let's see if the shield wall nerf is sufficient to bring this thing to heel.
-Ripper nerf is welcome. They are quite strong.
-I feel like a few things are missing from the nid change list. If anything it looks very thin. HT bio-plasma could certainly use some flavor. Either make it more castable or make it do a little less damage with more knockback. This needs to be a more cost efficient anti-HWT option in T1 than the infamous charge/rending talons combo, which to be fair, is OP.
I also feel that the lictor alpha "assault leap" could easily have its damage greatly reduced or removed, and still be a very effective ability. We can easily sight the fact that other jump troops have on landing effects that don't include damage and are still very effective. Having the AOE damage tied into this ability really damages the internal balance of the LA's wargears, and I feel especially strong about this one because with the jump and the knockback, he can easily do AOE damage afterward by following up with "Scythe" ability, which by all accounts is practically energy FREE! And this leads me into my next point, that being that the LA has never received the attention he deserves in terms of a redesign on energy management. This hero is simply too easy to play, and the LA has wargears that reward a player FAR TOO HEAVILY for purchasing them. I mean, let's just take a look at the energy requirements of his abilities (and also consider that the LA is one of the easiest heroes to gain early levels on in the game because of fleshhook and cloaking) shall we? Flesh hook costs 45 energy, toxic burst costs 30, assault leap costs 20 energy, scythe costs 20 energy, pheremone costs 65 energy and terrify costs 60 energy. THE ONLY ABILITY WITH A PROHIBITIVE ENERGY COST IS PHEREMONE!!! Using pheremone as the example, the energy cost is probably the only thing that keeps this ability in the realm of being balanced! 20 energy for a full range jump with knockback and 35 piercing damage? 20 energy for a 25 piercing damage stomp that suppresses? 30 energy to regenerate 100hp and do 100 piercing AOE over 10 seconds, castable every 40 seconds!? Like damn... toxic burst isn't even a huge offender, but the efficiency per energy used on these abilities (including flesh hook mind you!) is just off the charts. Why buy adrenal glands armor slot wargear when you simply don't need it right?


I hope at least some of this is insightful. Thankyou to the team for working so hard and making this game great again!

Kappa
User avatar
Black Relic
Level 4
Posts: 844
Joined: Mon 29 Jul, 2013 3:05 am
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Black Relic » Thu 03 Nov, 2016 4:59 am

Tex totally agree on the Force Commander and Thunder Hammer.

I would like the TH to KB units that are within 12 meters from him but only damage units that are within 7. Because then he can be easier to kite. Note units will still be knocked around but wont take damage so if there isnt any follow up behind the FC then the teleport TH is for not. Plus it wont kill default heretic all that much in retreat which chaos will approve.

As for the Powersword. Have his battle cry buff start at 15% rather than 10% or have the buffs last to 20 seconds instead of 15. Because atm its inspiration premise still lacks luster and is crap.

I also what to make a suggestion that the Flesh over steel ability does not stop melee walkers from hitting shit in melee. and the ability only stops range weapons. Walkers are so vulnerable, even melee walkers with the melee resistance, to this ability. Nor do i think it should be a completely 100% movement snare. I would like the range of the ability to go up but the snare reduced to 75% and the vehicle can still use melee if any.

I would ask for the Storm shield have an ability to switch it out for a default bolt pistol (of course lose the extra HP given by the shield). But it might remove the wargears only weakness. Although imo it doesn't really matter in the later tiers since players just ignore the FC since he isn't too much of a threat with this upgrade.Tbh AoA does Storm shield job better and can be kept through out the game.


As for the Libby i would like to have him have another upgrade. And it increase health (150) and HP regen( 1.5), and added an ability called Force Dome that all units inside gains light cover bonus and projectiles are blocked. The upgrade would be available in t3 though.

As for his upgrades. Agreed on tome of time. but rather than energy regen i would rather have a base speed increase. That would benefi him more than energy regen imo. Since that speed is what will help get away from melee. The speed will help get into melee with range squads. That speed increase will have him put up force barrier faster since he can get into position for it quicker. Since his positioning is very important i think a base speed increase would be better. I would like his abilities not be spammable but require some thought first.

Dont read any further due to petty childish wishes.

Apothocary Wish list:

That laramen blessing be changed to vanilla but increase the heal it does and add like 7 seconds of invulnerability? I miss the play off having the enemy over commit to a kill on the hero only to be revived again from the global to get a return kill. Cost increase to 175.

His armor of purity his very underwhelming tbh and only works with storm bolter and Improved Medical equipment. The Armor upgrade adds 5 HP on melee hit specifically. Cost then increase to 120/20. Never used in a melee build. Needs some love.

Power Axe. Wind up and wind down time decreased to 0.9 on each from 1. That will increase the Dps for those who don't know. (Same complaint with the techmarine's power axe) He just attack so painfully slow.

Combat Stims, add damage resistance to the ability 20% (exclusive) and increase the cost to 130/25.

Purification rites. Atm the codex doesn't say this so if it does my bad. The Damage from the heal needs to go up as the Apo levels . by 1 for each level. then it will be worth its cost.

IME, has an ability to disable the healing aura to increase the Apo's regen by 2. Poor attempt at getting this to be a thing in a melee apo build. \

Purification Veils are still too spam able imo. The CD or the Energy cost needs to go up by 5/10

Techmarine Wish List:

Artificer armor's mines have an option top be detonated manually (same with every other mine in the game apart form the LC mine drop global). Or he can build cover.

A New armor upgrade that increase his HP by 100 and increases his repair rate by x2 cost 100/20.

Putting the Brothers in Arms ability some where. Might be worth putting it on the Signum armor and removing the Mark Target ability and decreasing the cost of the wagear to 125/25.
"...With every strike of his sword, with every word of his speech, does he reaffirm the ideals of our honored master..." -From the Teachings of Roboute Guilliman as laid down in the Apocrypha of Skaros. Space Marines Codex pg. 54
User avatar
Adeptus Noobus
Level 4
Posts: 991
Joined: Sat 15 Feb, 2014 12:47 pm
Contact:

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Adeptus Noobus » Thu 03 Nov, 2016 10:11 am

Cyris wrote:
Torpid wrote:The key thing of course is that default scouts are really cheap and good for capping and then they can be upgraded to shotguns or snipers as you see fit. It's easier to just throw some snipers in on as SM on top of your jump squad and your SUTs than it is for eldar to throw rangers on top of the rest of their composition.


I agree strongly with this.

Scouts are so adaptable, Rangers are too one dimensional, and Shuricans exist. Rangers provide useful tools on the T1 battlefield, but transitioning into them is so vulnerable. Rangers, despite the useful and unique tools they provide, fill a very similar T1 role as Shuri.


First of all, I agree with you on that Rangers can not be simply compared to Scout snipers since Scouts fullfil an entirely different purpose when they hit the field and can be upgraded to many roles, which makes them very good. Snipers is just one of the choices. Where I disagree is when we talk about Rangers purpose. We (not the two of us but the community) still has not found common ground on wether they are supposed to be a utility unit only with some dmg potential or a unit that inflicts bleed with some utilities and I believe it should be the latter.
I would also disagree that Rangers do not scale into mid- or late-game very well because detection, scouting, giving sight and using the holofield or the kinetic pulse are very important at all stages of the game for Eldar.
You also wrote your answer in a way that makes me believe they are in competition with Shuriken Plattforms, which in my most humble opinion they should not be because that is not their purpose even though they now can suppress units...Correct me if I misunderstood you here though.

Tex's post:

Chaos changes - agree with all statements
Eldar changes:
  • so much yes on the Gate change suggestion
  • even more yes on the WSE melee special suggestion (it has been said by so many ppl so many times - it needs to finally go and be tied into his blades)
  • Dire Avengers - I have suggested reverting them somewhat for some time now BUT (and this is key) Rangers need to be fixed in conjunction with moving the Exarch to T2
  • The rest I pretty much agree with as well especially the Wraithlord and Wraithguard suggestions

Space Marines - I agree with most. I would really like to test this Libby idea since I agree about his cost/benefit

IG/Orks/Nids are not my forte 8-)
User avatar
Adila
Level 3
Posts: 229
Joined: Fri 26 Jul, 2013 4:41 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Adila » Thu 03 Nov, 2016 12:43 pm

The Dire avenger changes look pretty good to me, also pretty smart changes on the exarch.
Rangers however need to be changed a bit, the underperform in the current stats I would suggest to increase the dmg from 80 to 100 with the upgrade instead of adding surpression to the unit, it made them like a worse shuri choice imo. With the lower reload time and dmg buff they will fit the actual role again.
The falcon and fire dragonchanges are ok, I think going with the 45 power suggestion on the firedragons would be a better idea, but decrease the exarch cost by 5 power instead. Would also love to see some kind of change to the Dark Reapers, 440/40 is way to high for what they provide, csm can get that way easier and cheaper, the cost should go down to 400/40.
The wraithlord should get its hp back the upkeep change wont do enough.

Thats at least my opinion
User avatar
Cyris
Level 4
Posts: 649
Joined: Fri 22 Mar, 2013 10:22 pm

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Cyris » Thu 03 Nov, 2016 2:58 pm

Adeptus Noobus wrote:We (not the two of us but the community) still has not found common ground on wether they are supposed to be a utility unit only with some dmg potential or a unit that inflicts bleed with some utilities and I believe it should be the latter.

Yep, and I'm squarely in the "old snipers were toxic, never again" camp. 100+ damage per shot is a non-starter. That was a bad time, it should never return. As such, I want more utility/scaleability to justify cost, or less cost.

Adeptus Noobus wrote:I would also disagree that Rangers do not scale into mid- or late-game very well because detection, scouting, giving sight and using the holofield or the kinetic pulse are very important at all stages of the game for Eldar.

If you were right, and Rangers did provide tools that scaled well into T2 and T3, then there would be no debate on how to help Rangers out - they'd be fine. The reason they aren't used isn't mainly because they underpreform in T1, but that by investing in them you sacrifice too much in the long term. Clearly I know Rangers have interesting tools and tricks, and that they stay useful in later tiers, but it's overall impact decreases despite these tools, while the Shuri/Scout stay more relevant.

Adeptus Noobus wrote:You also wrote your answer in a way that makes me believe they are in competition with Shuriken Plattforms, which in my most humble opinion they should not be because that is not their purpose even though they now can suppress units...Correct me if I misunderstood you here though.

I see the two units in direct competition, yes. Both are zone control to support your T1 req only units, and both achieve it in a similar ways - forcing stand offs, crowd control, restricting space, kiting etc. When purchasing either unit I feel a similar amount of safety come into my army, with the single exception of detection. So when one is both cheaper and scales better, why get the other? Again, either get the Ranger cheaper or give it some extra scaling / utility in T2 seems the answer.
User avatar
Ace of Swords
Level 5
Posts: 1493
Joined: Thu 14 Mar, 2013 7:49 am
Location: Terra

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Ace of Swords » Thu 03 Nov, 2016 3:26 pm

Torpid wrote:
Ace of Swords wrote:
Lost Son of Nikhel wrote:That was one of the mains reasons of the Sniper rework.

Sniper don't need to snipe models, but force to reposition the enemy squads and soft them for the next assault.


Which failed miserably.


I would like to say that I think scout snipers atm work really well.

Rangers are mess.

The key thing of course is that default scouts are really cheap and good for capping and then they can be upgraded to shotguns or snipers as you see fit. It's easier to just throw some snipers in on as SM on top of your jump squad and your SUTs than it is for eldar to throw rangers on top of the rest of their composition.



That's because sniper dps was actually increased iirc, I really don't remember the math about but the scout snipers but they got the good end of the deal, but in any case I'd rather have proper snipers back, the shit we have right now just kills different approaches to gameplay, snipers as they are right now are just glorified tacts/DA with sightly more range, the perk of these units has always been the spike damage rather than the dps and they worked just fine before, all the changes that were needed was to give the rangers the same RoF of snipers and that would've balanced itself.




Black Relic wrote:


Don't touch the apo it's fine as it is and I use armor of purity/stims constantly in both the melee and ranged builds, if anything armor of purity + axe + rites permits to have a low CD kb on demand and it works just fine.
Image
User avatar
Oddnerd
Level 4
Posts: 727
Joined: Mon 27 Oct, 2014 1:50 am

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Oddnerd » Thu 03 Nov, 2016 6:39 pm

Tex wrote:I also want to address the very important issue of the Force Commander Thunder Hammer. That thing is still STUPIDLY powerful and it usually isn't even purchased for what it's supposed to do (That is, it is purchased as an anti-ranged blob weapon in tandem with teleport, when really it is supposed to be an AOE melee counter)! Either this hammer needs to do less AOE damage and more AOE knockback, or it needs to offer a greatly reduced damage buff to the surrounding army of the FC player. The hits are guaranteed and the damage is so impressive that there is never a reason to purchase or to keep the powersword.



Nice to have a high level player speaking up about this.
Atlas

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Atlas » Thu 03 Nov, 2016 7:11 pm

Tex wrote:Ordo Malleus
-new global looks pretty bad

-Aegis mechanic seems good. requires more micro but offers an overall greater focus on synergy and helps to provide the theme and flavor we have all been dying for GK to have.

-New Canticle mechanic is decent, but I would rather have it as an energy costing ability that must be activated to shorten the cooldowns by 50%. What this would amount to is the brother captain having enough energy to reduce his cooldowns, and then cast a spell. He would then need energy supplementation either by strike squads or by the global bar to continue casting spells. I see this being a much more micro intensive and rewarding system for using the canticle. Think about 2 hammer strikes or 2 warding staff usages in a single large engagement. I don't see this being done in a meaningful way with a 30% cooldown reduction passively.

-Nemesis vortex change is good. Maybe make the snare effect vehicles?

-Psychic Lash seems like it will be an integral part of BC play against certain races. I fear the ability knockback will allow it to be used for cheesy retreat killing though.

-Acolyte leader change seems strange to me...

-Strike squad I'm going to reserve comment on mostly. Seems like they will actually need to be in melee combat, vs being proficient at it if need be???

-Psycannon/Psilencer rework seems okay.

-Ops seem useful again in a big way. Great work on this one!

-Great attempt at making GK dread variants all useful in some way. Let's see how it plays out.

-Other GK changes seem like largely inconsequential changes that could be listed under the "optimization category".



I think I'm already way ahead of the curve on this one, because most of this is getting fixed/tweaked in the feedback revision. In order:

- Cleanse (now Sanctify cuz names) is just plain better. I don't know if it's too good, but the test revision should reveal that. I feel like this one is a global that's going to settle somewhere in the midpoint of what's on test and what's in revision.

- Sort of the same exact deal with Aegis. BC is getting an hp nerf, while Aegis gives him a better ratio shield. Combined with Sanctify buffs, could be op? Maybe. Again, might be split down the middle at the end of the day.

- If by Canticle you meant Mantle of Terra, the biggest feedback on the armor was that it's not helpful in T1 because the spells BC gets in T1 is just WatH and Lash. So atm, in revision, Mantle gives its own ability while being more expensive. I really do want it to be a T1 gear because having to dump ALL your resources right at T2 to get all the cool gears seems really prohibitive when it's easier to buy it in parts through T1/T2.

- The Canticle global itself is getting buffed though, so that it's actually worth the red, and it basically does what you're describing :D

- Nemesis Vortex seems to be in a really good spot now. Players have actually started to use it as an anti-melee spell, where they just park it on their own units and basically dare them to stay in the fight. It was a use I completely wasn't expecting when I was reworking it, and I think I might just keep it :D

- So, it turns out in test, I was going the completely wrong direction with IST and Strikes. Not that they were bad units or w/e, but rather talking whole game play. I looked at 2.5, saw that ISTs were ignored in favor of 2 Strikes. So nerf Strikes, buff ISTs right? Well, the problem isn't that IST are bad units or w/e.

The problem really is that ISTs and Strikes are both too front-loaded and fell off too hard. I somewhat corrected that in test with Strikes, but just reinforced it with ISTs by making their base stats better and their upgrades still a bit lackluster. ISTs in revision now start off weaker, but with way better upgrades and that includes the Acolyte. Strikes' power curve are also getting adjusted a bit more as well.

- Finishing up on the Strikes for you, as I was alluding to earlier here, I didn't quite mold early Strikes exactly where they needed to be. Strikes have been the single most hair-tearing unit to try and get right for me on this OM roster. Atm, I have Strikes down for being, in general, better melee combatants in exchange for not having their 360-no-scope special and I think it's a solid direction for them now. They now don't HAVE to get the Psycannon in T2 to still be a decent enough stance switcher with Justicar shenanigans in T2.

----------
And the rest just seems to be kudos, so ty!

Anyway, if you guys have any more questions/comments/concerns/complaints about OM I'd be glad to absorb that feedback and use it to refine them more! I don't fancy myself a master at game balance, but getting told where I'm screwing up is a huge help.
User avatar
Adeptus Noobus
Level 4
Posts: 991
Joined: Sat 15 Feb, 2014 12:47 pm
Contact:

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Adeptus Noobus » Thu 03 Nov, 2016 8:00 pm

Just a random that popped into my mind: why do Purgation not get any nerfs to their ranged dmg in T1 since they were moved from T2 without changing their dmg?
Atlas

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Atlas » Thu 03 Nov, 2016 8:31 pm

Adeptus Noobus wrote:Just a random that popped into my mind: why do Purgation not get any nerfs to their ranged dmg in T1 since they were moved from T2 without changing their dmg?


I'm going off of Codex here on this one, but Purg damage is anywhere from mediocre to bad depending on how much you value AoE. 6.75 x 3 flame for them, which is beaten in terms of pure dps by 8.75 flame + (2 x 14.58 pierce) for Flamer Tacs and 12.69 flame + (2 x 10.5 pierce) for NM, which are probably the closest equivalent flamer squads. The real boon of their incinerators is the suppression and their ability ofc.

I don't really think they need a damage nerf tbh, it sounds about right and nobody has really said anything about it. I'll look into it more though.

Ironically, people have been kinda complaining that Psilencers dps is too low, as on paper it basically is worse than what Psypurgs could do vs everything but HI/SHI. Loss of the AoE really hurt in this case.
User avatar
Adeptus Noobus
Level 4
Posts: 991
Joined: Sat 15 Feb, 2014 12:47 pm
Contact:

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Adeptus Noobus » Fri 04 Nov, 2016 1:06 pm

Atlas wrote:
Adeptus Noobus wrote:Just a random that popped into my mind: why do Purgation not get any nerfs to their ranged dmg in T1 since they were moved from T2 without changing their dmg?


I'm going off of Codex here on this one, but Purg damage is anywhere from mediocre to bad depending on how much you value AoE. 6.75 x 3 flame for them, which is beaten in terms of pure dps by 8.75 flame + (2 x 14.58 pierce) for Flamer Tacs and 12.69 flame + (2 x 10.5 pierce) for NM, which are probably the closest equivalent flamer squads. The real boon of their incinerators is the suppression and their ability ofc.

I don't really think they need a damage nerf tbh, it sounds about right and nobody has really said anything about it. I'll look into it more though.

Ironically, people have been kinda complaining that Psilencers dps is too low, as on paper it basically is worse than what Psypurgs could do vs everything but HI/SHI. Loss of the AoE really hurt in this case.


I have never ever seen Tac flamers own infantry the way Purgation do. On top of that their aoe seems to be much stronger than the Tac flamers' is. If you are insinuating I git gud or play this mu not only in theory, I have done so multiple times. Purgation many times seem to hit multiple units at once completely owning all of them to a point where one salvo forces a retreat from all said units. Also, have you taken into account that they have a ranged dmg modifier? They do more dmg up close than from max range. Add on top of that the "Purge by Fire" aoe dmg. I will lab it some more to be absolutely sure but they seem "fishy" to me when up against infantry.
Atlas

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Atlas » Fri 04 Nov, 2016 6:44 pm

Adeptus Noobus wrote:What Noobus said.

Nah, I'm not insinuating git gud or anything. I can really only talk numbers and feedback on this. The damage modifiers was not something I actually factored in on my initial discussion and you're right on that part. From range 24 and below, it gets a 1.1x and 1.25x modifier, bringing it up to a max of 8.4375 x 3 flame damage, which is considerable.

Here's the changes from when they went to T2:
- Purgation Squad moved from a T1 unit to a T2 unit
- Purgation Squad cost changed from 300/30 to 400 requisition only
- Purgation Squad Incinerator damage increased from 7 to 10
- Purgation Psycannon range increased from 42 to 44
- Clear Vision duration increased from 7 to 15s
- Clear Vision cooldown decreased from 60s to 30s
- Clear Vision now requires 60 energy to activate (from 0)


If by going on the old flamers, that would bring them to 4.725 x 3 flame damage in their blasts at base. I don't particularly mind reverting it. It's just something that has never come up or was mentioned to me so far.
User avatar
Crewfinity
Level 4
Posts: 712
Joined: Tue 03 Dec, 2013 2:06 am

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Crewfinity » Sat 05 Nov, 2016 4:11 am

Atlas wrote:
Adeptus Noobus wrote:What Noobus said.

Nah, I'm not insinuating git gud or anything. I can really only talk numbers and feedback on this. The damage modifiers was not something I actually factored in on my initial discussion and you're right on that part. From range 24 and below, it gets a 1.1x and 1.25x modifier, bringing it up to a max of 8.4375 x 3 flame damage, which is considerable.

Here's the changes from when they went to T2:
- Purgation Squad moved from a T1 unit to a T2 unit
- Purgation Squad cost changed from 300/30 to 400 requisition only
- Purgation Squad Incinerator damage increased from 7 to 10
- Purgation Psycannon range increased from 42 to 44
- Clear Vision duration increased from 7 to 15s
- Clear Vision cooldown decreased from 60s to 30s
- Clear Vision now requires 60 energy to activate (from 0)


If by going on the old flamers, that would bring them to 4.725 x 3 flame damage in their blasts at base. I don't particularly mind reverting it. It's just something that has never come up or was mentioned to me so far.


If any changes were to happen with purg damage, I feel lie it should be standardized across all distances and the damage it does to gens should be increased a bit. In 2.4 they bashed full farms in seconds and it was stupid, but now it takes ages to kill a single gen, there should be a middle ground somewhere
Venom
Level 0
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat 05 Nov, 2016 11:10 am

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Venom » Sat 05 Nov, 2016 11:53 am

I agree with most of the changes except these:

1. Eldar
They still seem to be ultra hard to beat imho. Banshees are still crazy and fire dragons too. I think everything you did to the triple dire - falcon combo won't be enough to make them balanced.

The Anti Grav Nade of the WS still breaks retreat and so is a fucking OP no brainer in combination with eldritch storm, plasma nade or any other sort of AoE attack. It is just stupid and a 0-Skill free win move.

2. GK
Lots of things changes - will see what happens

3. IG

Most changes seem to be pretty good but I miss a few things and dislike others.

- Kasrkin are still shit (yes, SHIT!) why should anybody buy them? I don't and I usually see them almost never on the battlefield. Why can't they just be made into a real good range combat unit similar to kasrkin in dow 1? Atm storm troopers with assault kit seem to be by far better imho.

- Leman Russ only got nerfed and somehow nobody seemed to realize that the LR is the slowest battle tank in this game AND has a horrible turret rotation speed. It already is a more or less stationary tank and vulnerable to fast melee attackers and relies alot on support - these changes will make that worse.

- the baneblade changes/nerf don't make any sense to me. Lowering its max range again without decreasing the minimun range makes it even more useless vs any sort of heavy melee squad. The dp reduction will further increase this weakness AND the BB still has its vulnerable rear armor which makes is horrible in combination with pathing issues.

AND MY MAIN ISSUE: If you balance designers think the synergy with bunkers or gm is too good then why don't you nerf that synergy instead of creating more and more glass cannons that need a full army support to survive a shot? You are only enforcing blob play and disable IG's capping potential.
User avatar
Black Relic
Level 4
Posts: 844
Joined: Mon 29 Jul, 2013 3:05 am
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Black Relic » Sat 05 Nov, 2016 8:34 pm

Leman Russ is actually amazing with the 35% damage resistance. And somehow people still refuse that fact. The Las pred does 220 damage to a Leman russ without damage resistance. With Resistance it does 143. That's a large amount of damage negated.

When they get in rear armor they are supposed to take 30% more damage. Not the Leman though. They take 5% less damage on rear armor due to the 35% damage resistance. So yes nerf are needed. And it quite appropriate to have the leman lose the resistance but gain hp instead. Make Repair support a bit more difficult. Because GM repair twice as fast making them repair 20 Hp of vehicle armor. And with the resistance they are repair per second is essentially 27 HP per second, almost triple the rate. So yes nerf is needed.

As for the BB i would actually want its HP to go down even further and for it have damage resistance of like 10%. Because then the BB can actually be repair effectively. The melee damage is still a major threat but it isn't like instant death for the tank. Reinforces the notion of better vehicles for the IG. Makes its still high pricing a bit more worth it. Thoughts on that?
"...With every strike of his sword, with every word of his speech, does he reaffirm the ideals of our honored master..." -From the Teachings of Roboute Guilliman as laid down in the Apocrypha of Skaros. Space Marines Codex pg. 54
Venom
Level 0
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat 05 Nov, 2016 11:10 am

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Venom » Sat 05 Nov, 2016 9:22 pm

Black Relic wrote:As for the BB i would actually want its HP to go down even further and for it have damage resistance of like 10%. Because then the BB can actually be repair effectively. The melee damage is still a major threat but it isn't like instant death for the tank. Reinforces the notion of better vehicles for the IG. Makes its still high pricing a bit more worth it. Thoughts on that?


That's exactly the wrong way to adress an issue in my opinion. I just say it again: If GM repair make vehicle XY op than it's probably the GM repair that is op and not vehicle XY. This really feels like a doctor who just treats the results of your sickness and refuses to cure the source of your health problems.

Another point is that i think it's lore-wise absolutely unacceptable to make the baneblade's armor/health that weak. It just feels bad to see that the dev's first degrade the baneblade like that and make it cheaper than a current Leman Russ and when they realize that no one will get a Leman Russ (fully upgraded) if they can get a Baneblade for less money they just nerf the Leman Russ. That enforces even more players to skip the Russ and go straight for the remnants of what was once a Baneblade.

EDIT:

A small example to point out what happens here:

If a normal person thinks birds are op because flying is just too good he will probably cut of the bird's wings.

If a dev of this mod thinks flying makes birds op, he will probably try to reduce the earth's mass to a point where it can no longer hold its atmosphere and so make flying impossible.
User avatar
Adeptus Noobus
Level 4
Posts: 991
Joined: Sat 15 Feb, 2014 12:47 pm
Contact:

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Adeptus Noobus » Sat 05 Nov, 2016 10:15 pm

Venom wrote:I agree with most of the changes except these:

1. Eldar
They still seem to be ultra hard to beat imho. Banshees are still crazy and fire dragons too. I think everything you did to the triple dire - falcon combo won't be enough to make them balanced.

The Anti Grav Nade of the WS still breaks retreat and so is a fucking OP no brainer in combination with eldritch storm, plasma nade or any other sort of AoE attack. It is just stupid and a 0-Skill free win move.


Banshees are fine, unless you don't deal with them properly. Fire Dragons are getting nerfed and further tweaks are being discussed. Falcon and 3 DA ist not always the smartest build you can go for since it will bleed you dry. DAs are also required to fight as they make up the key ranged fighting unit.
The Anti-Grav nade does not cancel/break retreat or lifts ALREADY retreating units into the air. If your unit on the other hand gets hit BEFORE you hit retreat you get caught ofc. It has been like that for ages.
User avatar
Dark Riku
Level 5
Posts: 3082
Joined: Sun 03 Feb, 2013 10:48 pm
Location: Belgium

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Dark Riku » Sat 05 Nov, 2016 10:38 pm

Venom :)

Have you ever considered what would happen early game with sent plays if you nerf the GM repair?
I would suggest you play and learn the game a little bit more before posting here.

I found your example point hilarious btw! :D
User avatar
Psycho
Level 3
Posts: 367
Joined: Thu 24 Dec, 2015 3:08 am

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Psycho » Sat 05 Nov, 2016 11:18 pm

Adeptus Noobus wrote:Banshees are fine, unless you don't deal with them properly.


The issue with banshees is them getting immunity to knockback while leaping due to faults of the game engine, coupled with their ability that allows one single model to suppress instantly which coincidentally synergizes with the previous issue. Catachans and shotgun scouts don't work as intended against them specifically due to such game engine faults, and those faults could very well be exploited; I'm sure everyone here has seen at least once a leaping unit (banshees, ASM, hormas, warlock, etc) suddenly flying at breakneck speed towards another squad regardless of the distance due to changing the attack target mid-leap.

Their stats and everything else is fine, though. Maybe a little look at their special delay since it makes them unkiteable if you're unlucky enough to get special'd, but otherwise it's as you say, they're alright, and what issues they may have rest more on outside factors like buffs from units or globals, but not from the unit itself.
User avatar
Torpid
Moderator
Posts: 3536
Joined: Sat 01 Jun, 2013 12:09 pm
Location: England, Leeds

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Torpid » Sun 06 Nov, 2016 2:39 am

Venom wrote:I agree with most of the changes except these:

1. Eldar
They still seem to be ultra hard to beat imho. Banshees are still crazy and fire dragons too. I think everything you did to the triple dire - falcon combo won't be enough to make them balanced.

The Anti Grav Nade of the WS still breaks retreat and so is a fucking OP no brainer in combination with eldritch storm, plasma nade or any other sort of AoE attack. It is just stupid and a 0-Skill free win move.

2. GK
Lots of things changes - will see what happens

3. IG

Most changes seem to be pretty good but I miss a few things and dislike others.

- Kasrkin are still shit (yes, SHIT!) why should anybody buy them? I don't and I usually see them almost never on the battlefield. Why can't they just be made into a real good range combat unit similar to kasrkin in dow 1? Atm storm troopers with assault kit seem to be by far better imho.

- Leman Russ only got nerfed and somehow nobody seemed to realize that the LR is the slowest battle tank in this game AND has a horrible turret rotation speed. It already is a more or less stationary tank and vulnerable to fast melee attackers and relies alot on support - these changes will make that worse.

- the baneblade changes/nerf don't make any sense to me. Lowering its max range again without decreasing the minimun range makes it even more useless vs any sort of heavy melee squad. The dp reduction will further increase this weakness AND the BB still has its vulnerable rear armor which makes is horrible in combination with pathing issues.

AND MY MAIN ISSUE: If you balance designers think the synergy with bunkers or gm is too good then why don't you nerf that synergy instead of creating more and more glass cannons that need a full army support to survive a shot? You are only enforcing blob play and disable IG's capping potential.

1)

FDs need more nerfs. Because of what Psycho describes below banshees are indeed problematic. Why won't the DA and falcon changes be enough?

Yet we see it so rarely - unless the meta has changed since 2months ago. Because it just does not break retreat. All you need to do is hit retreat before it goes off. It's quite a telegraphed and slow ability where the real boon is the ability to force off a squad quite easily, especially SUTs (although the shimmer orb also negates them while having more utility defensively).

3)

Kasrkin clearly fulfil a very different role from storms. They get an AV grenade for a start and HI instead of LI. They also cap faster. They are niche though. What would you suggest changing to make them less niche? A raw damage boost seems quite inappropriate tbh, IG have enough raw ranged dps come T3 without needing their own flash gitz.

The final changes to the leman will be the remval of its DR and the elite tank crew upgrade being implemented into the tank by default at a slightly increased cost. This will make the leman only 150 req less than the BB and only 50 or so power. This is fine though because the two tanks serve a very different purpose with the leman being so much faster and less vulnerable to melee/nukes it will be a lot better as a tank killer or as a "quick-hitting" unit like most other tanks are atm, but of course made a bit more "Imperial Guard" by being slower but very durable.

I don't believe the baneblade underperforms vs melee as heavy melee is meant to be its weakness alongside nukes - it's a giant weapons platform that you are not meant to be able to trickle away at and only force off in a gigantic push (which heavy melee units are designed for). If stationary it can still suppress most of them with its heavy bolters while moving backwards away. It should never be so out of position from one's base that it has to turn around to drive away and thus expose its rear armour. The reason for the demolisher cannon range nerf is because that thing decimates set-up teams which I don't really feel the baneblade deserved to do quite so well. It needs to telegraph its intention to blow up a SUT so the foe can retreat before it gets to them and live. It having lower range telegraphs it as you will see the BB moving forward suddenly - generally it should stay put to maximise its bolter dps and suppression. This is also why the main cannon has not received a range nerf.

I'm not entirely sure what this is in reference to, would it be the baneblade changes? Bunkers themselves are not being nerf and nor are GM atm although they ought to be just because they are far too cost effective. IG is not a race of glass cannons. In fact all of their squads are very durable bar kasrkin. So this comment confuses me.

Psycho wrote:
Adeptus Noobus wrote:Banshees are fine, unless you don't deal with them properly.


The issue with banshees is them getting immunity to knockback while leaping due to faults of the game engine, coupled with their ability that allows one single model to suppress instantly which coincidentally synergizes with the previous issue. Catachans and shotgun scouts don't work as intended against them specifically due to such game engine faults, and those faults could very well be exploited; I'm sure everyone here has seen at least once a leaping unit (banshees, ASM, hormas, warlock, etc) suddenly flying at breakneck speed towards another squad regardless of the distance due to changing the attack target mid-leap.

Their stats and everything else is fine, though. Maybe a little look at their special delay since it makes them unkiteable if you're unlucky enough to get special'd, but otherwise it's as you say, they're alright, and what issues they may have rest more on outside factors like buffs from units or globals, but not from the unit itself.


This is 100% true and something we must try to address. It isn't fair that banshees are disproportionately good vs IG and SM because of the nature of shotgun mechanics with the leap. I definitely do not think the issue lies in the scream suppresses whole squads from one model - that has always existed and been part of what makes shees shees (instead of just being the objectively, cost-effectively in a 1v1 fight superior sluggas). Hit and running at speed past squads suppresses them all as you move into retreat path or onto another one is fundamental to good shee play. To remove that would be a deep shame.
Last edited by Torpid on Sun 06 Nov, 2016 2:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
Lets make Ordo Malleus great again!
User avatar
Torpid
Moderator
Posts: 3536
Joined: Sat 01 Jun, 2013 12:09 pm
Location: England, Leeds

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Torpid » Sun 06 Nov, 2016 2:46 am

Venom wrote:
Black Relic wrote:As for the BB i would actually want its HP to go down even further and for it have damage resistance of like 10%. Because then the BB can actually be repair effectively. The melee damage is still a major threat but it isn't like instant death for the tank. Reinforces the notion of better vehicles for the IG. Makes its still high pricing a bit more worth it. Thoughts on that?


That's exactly the wrong way to adress an issue in my opinion. I just say it again: If GM repair make vehicle XY op than it's probably the GM repair that is op and not vehicle XY. This really feels like a doctor who just treats the results of your sickness and refuses to cure the source of your health problems.

Another point is that i think it's lore-wise absolutely unacceptable to make the baneblade's armor/health that weak. It just feels bad to see that the dev's first degrade the baneblade like that and make it cheaper than a current Leman Russ and when they realize that no one will get a Leman Russ (fully upgraded) if they can get a Baneblade for less money they just nerf the Leman Russ. That enforces even more players to skip the Russ and go straight for the remnants of what was once a Baneblade.

EDIT:

A small example to point out what happens here:

If a normal person thinks birds are op because flying is just too good he will probably cut of the bird's wings.

If a dev of this mod thinks flying makes birds op, he will probably try to reduce the earth's mass to a point where it can no longer hold its atmosphere and so make flying impossible.


Anyone who is remotely aware of the basics of game design is wary of the problems of treating symptoms rather than causes and misinterpretating correlation with causation. That is not what is happening here.

As Riku said IG would go to shit if we nerfed the GM repair rate due to sentinels. And it would be a big nerf to the chimera and baneblade that is un-needed too. So clearly, the better route is to nerf the leman back into line with other tanks and units and thereby not hurt all the other vehicles IG have that are not at all in need of nerfs.

The baneblade changes overall are a buff, I have no doubt about this. More so of course in 1v1 than in 3v3 but still in 3v3 you have a lot more potential for nukes and getting swamped with heavy melee squads so baneblades die more and it being cheaper therefore helps it - you don't lose the entire game waiting forever to get out a BB that then gets rekt by an eldritch+OB combo for example.

It's not a matter of nerfing the BB for shits and giggles and then nerfing the leman because it would be too good internally compared to the BB. They are seperate balance changes.

The BB underperformed for its price in 3v3 and was too risky and rarely bought over 2x lemans. Many reasons why. Timing is a big one. It also was NEVER seen in a serious competitive 1v1. Therefore something had to be done. Because timing was a big issue I wanted to reduce the cost of it so it gets out earlier but obviously with such a huge cost reduction a performance nerf was needed to. However the changes I made to its performance have in mind its role as a mobile, giant weapons platform that denies a certain part of the map to the foe by being able to besiege with varied anti-all firepower. The nerfs I suggested be implemented will not deny it its ability to do that at all and it also gives it a clear distinguished purpose as a unit from the leman which is more mobile, better vs melee and at hunting down specific targets.

The leman change of course is to nerf it without making it worse at the above job and still maintaining the flare of IG having slightly slower but more durable units.

Your final analogy is quite hard to understand btw :P
Lets make Ordo Malleus great again!
User avatar
Black Relic
Level 4
Posts: 844
Joined: Mon 29 Jul, 2013 3:05 am
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Elite Mod 2.6(Test Version) Changelog and Feedback Thread

Postby Black Relic » Sun 06 Nov, 2016 6:18 am

Let me put some numbers here to help with understanding the damage resistance on the BB.

Of course correct me if i am wrong though.


Theroedical HP:

Damage Resistance as we all know take any damage taken and reduces it. Take this as an example if we have the leman Russ for example at 700 hp with 35% damage resistance. To get the units theoretical HP we take 700 X 1."damage resistance percentage" to get the theoretically hp of the tank. The amount of damage that will actually have to be applied to kill the tank not including repair rates. Out of the gate without getting any repair support a player has to do >=945 damage to the leman to kill it. That's not including the extra 100 (or 135) hp for elite crew.

Now lets go to my suggestion on the BB. With the 10% damage resistance. If we reduced the BB to 2500 hp and gave it 10% damage resistance what would its HP actually be if it didn't get any repair support? It would be 2750. The same Hp it is now. But here is the thing. That would also translate into other indirect buffs to the BB. Since instead of repairing 20 HP on the BB the GM are repairing 22 thoredical HP due to the damage resistance (20x1.1=22). Making supporting the BB even easier and making keeping the BB at max Health easier and helps a decent amount vs melee.

The 10% damage resistance and melee units:

Let's take the BB at 2500 hp. Heavy Melee damage does 50% less to a vehicle as you know. Now Terminator who for some reason have 100 heavy melee damage per hit (they don't btw) come smacking on it. Only 50 damage is getting through to the BB. It would take 50 hit to kill the BB if both were left to themselves.

If we added 10% resistance the 50 damage would be reduced to 45. That may not seem like alot but now let's ask how many times 45 goes into 2500? Thats 55.55555556. Meaning it would take 6 (not 55 because the BB will still have a small amount of HP left) additional hit from the terminators to kill the BB. I actually also took 2750 and divided by 50 to get 55 so the 2500 HP BB can actually take one more hit than how it is atm.

What 10% damage resistance would also help with:

GM repair rate. mentioned earlier, GM repair 20 HP per second. With 10% damage resistance the HP restored is "22."

2 Hp doesnt seem like much until you have 2 GM repairing it which is normally the case. That would be an additional "4" hp per second. after 10 seconds of repairing that's a additional "40" hp even though you only really repaired 200 hp. Making keepin the BB at full HP easier (which is a buff) making the BB a bit more desirable (because the rear armor damage would also be reduced from 1.3 to something like 1.2 extra damage) which also makes lascannons have their damage reduced by 10%.

The durability actually skyrockets with just 10%. This would do little injustice to the lore in how it's not a seen mountain of HP. Honestly i think it would be more enticing to purchase in 1v1 due to it being easier to support.

---

Thats all i got. Again correct me if i fucked up plz.
"...With every strike of his sword, with every word of his speech, does he reaffirm the ideals of our honored master..." -From the Teachings of Roboute Guilliman as laid down in the Apocrypha of Skaros. Space Marines Codex pg. 54

Return to “Releases”



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 29 guests