Feedback Changes to The Future and Arctic Future Balancing

[DeletedUser7239]

Theres no point in talking now, they already sent the msg announcing the rebalançe

 

[thephantom]

"Initiative"? I guess its referring to "Movement", isnt it?
btw the battle fortress movement has been really nerfed bcos its current value is 20 not 21

Not quite. Movement means how much a unit can move across the battlefield. Initiative means in what order units move (highest first). In almost all cases the initiative matches the movement of the unit though. That's why units with higher movement go first, unless there's an ability or different initiative given to that unit.

 

[DeletedUser4256]

Not quite. Movement means how much a unit can move across the battlefield. Initiative means in what order units move (highest first). In almost all cases the initiative matches the movement of the unit though. That's why units with higher movement go first, unless there's an ability or different initiative given to that unit.

alright, thanks for the clarification

 

[Sl8yer]

You're mentioning a bottleneck as if players are just starting out to build these Great Buildings in Arctic Future and don't have the time to level them up. All 3 of them are actually very early era Great Buildings. If you have all 3 Great Buildings at level 19 you have 105% attack and defense. But that would mean you not having any other bonuses from anywhere and already matching the bonuses of the enemies you're facing in a few final encounters of GE (which are intended to be difficult). If you have a higher attack from somewhere then that of course makes quite a difference - your defense may be weaker so you're taking more damage, but you're also making more damage since you have a higher attack.

Nice theory again. Can you explain to me what would be the reason to do so before? Like I said before, it takes two levels for only 1%. Who would be wasting their fp's on that whenm it wasn't needed?

You're not taking into account basic items, like the fact that you are playing against an AI and how you can make much smarter decisions than the it. Say for example that you have 96% attack/defense bonus (that's the 3 GBs at level 13, I'd say that's not a very high goal considering you're in Arctic Future). If we take the enemy's Recon Raider, with 105% it has 369 attack and 205 defense. With 96% boost your Recon Raider has 353 attack and 196 defense. Except, if you can use the terrain to your advantage you get an attack bonus of +80 or +40, just as you can get a defense bonus of +50 or +35. Those several points of attack/defense difference on the basic stats won't make a difference, bit these other huge bonuses will. You won't be able to do that for every unit/attack but doing it for some will be more than sufficient for you to win. Which is also why selecting the right units is important. That above is a 1vs1 of the units of the same type where you have a lower boost than the enemy. There are units who will get hundreds of attack/defense bonus on the right terrain and versus the right enemy.

So the AI doesn't use the terrain? Other than it does attack rogues first the AI isn't that stupid.

Right terrain, right enemy? Once again, you are fighting two waves. You do not have that luxury.

The AI is never going to match your own capabilities. I can't count the number of times a Surrogate Soldier or Hover Tank wasn't on Grass/Plains terrain, rendering their Stealth ability useless; or the number of times an enemy was too close to my own units, getting crushed because of the Contact or Blast or Close Quarters abilities. While ultimately the final calculations are based on numbers, you have a huge influence on those numbers based on the strategy you make with every move. It's never going to be about the base attack/defense stats when the difference between yours and the enemy's stats is so small.

The enemy does not fight with wounded units the second wave. Wounded units do less damage.

And no, none of that is "easy" because it's a bit like chess where you have to be careful about your every move. But it's not supposed to be easy. If you want easy you can get your GBs to a very high level and don't worry about the battles so much.

In chess your opponent can not put lost pieces back halfway through the match.

 

[DeletedUser4285]

Plasma should have been given "plasma power" or whatever in order to ignore "reactive armor" of battle fortresses and anything else with that.

 

[thephantom]

Nice theory again. Can you explain to me what would be the reason to do so before? Like I said before, it takes two levels for only 1%. Who would be wasting their fp's on that whenm it wasn't needed?

If you didn't feel like the leveling up was necessary then you chose not to level up your GBs. Needless to say though, a ton of players already have those GBs way over level 10 when the change was made to lower the % beyond level 10. Otherwise people wouldn't have been bothered by the change since it would not have affected them in any way.

So the AI doesn't use the terrain? Other than it does attack rogues first the AI isn't that stupid.

Its primary focus is to attack, and no, very often it does not utilize terrain properly. Certainly nowhere as good as a human can, which is the point being made there.

Right terrain, right enemy? Once again, you are fighting two waves. You do not have that luxury.

You can still see the enemy units in both waves ahead of time.

The enemy does not fight with wounded units the second wave. Wounded units do less damage.

The enemy does not use start with a whole row of Rogues which soak up the first hit, you do. Those Rogues will transfer to that second wave.

In chess your opponent can not put lost pieces back halfway through the match.

That does not negate the point that you need to be careful about your every move.

 

[DeletedUser7239]

I want a hard and equal game! The chance is there for EVERY player to become better & stonger! I could delete my GBs but the others who thinks its's very funny to ruin others (not just mine, but our and any guild's every members') efforts, could do the same what they do now and this is RIDICULOUS!!! These are the weak players who reached nothing in this game but do have rail guns, so they could act like kings of this game because of an overpowered unit, they can be in the top 10 just because they have the ability to click a lot every day without losing their units! Can't you just understand the fact, everybody got the SAME chance to become even the no.1 player in this game when registering and if a player stays weak then it's that player's fault, not mine and not the balanced units'??? It's not acceptable a unit could solve everything instead of the player in this game! But our arguement is totally unnecessary because the devs fortunately made the change, get used to it! An overpowered unit is just a positive discrimination of players who aren't smart enough to handle harder things so they get everything for free, they have nothing to do, and the others who do have a good strategy, made some efforts to become better can't have the deserved advantage just because there is no difference in anything, nothing is easier (because it can't be than already is) etc, everything is the same, no losses with 90% boost and no losses with 200% boost, where's the motivation then??? Is it really so hard to understand this??? You really can enjoy the game without challanges or you just don't use rail gun to make a challange for yourself??? Because if you do, then i just can write what i already had, you are not in a top guild which got much to lose and is a main target of lots of guilds, point farmers etc. (many of them just can do what they do because of an overpowered unit), so you can afford yourself not to care about these boring and annoying things because you never lose anything... You say i have to take care about weak players who all have the chance to become stronger, i say you're the one who has to take care about the better players who did already a lot, to have the advantage but now that advantage doesn't mean anything, only a stat but causes no difference for them opposite to others who just don't want to make efforts andcan enjoy dumb things too! What you want to keep alive in this game is this: if you're dumb to be good in this game, you'll deserve to get everything easier, if you're smarter, and/or may bought diamonds too, spent much more time here to evolve etc., then you will get nothing more cause it's not fair to the first group! Like if you tell your child, it's OK not to learn because that's normal that everybody has the same chance to reach the same things in life and those who learn harder never deserve better things, the weak and dumb people could have everything whithout doing nothing, more efforts=no advantages, this is a very good thinking even this is just a game... I'll quit this conversation i think, i can't explain these things more and better, you just don't care or simply dn't understand...

There is no point of us continue to discuss this anymore, since they already did their way (in regards to RG) so, now i only must think on sunk cost fallacy and thats it
On my main world discontent among players is installed so lets rock xD

 

[HuscarlTW]

If you didn't feel like the leveling up was necessary then you chose not to level up your GBs. Needless to say though, a ton of players already have those GBs way over level 10 when the change was made to lower the % beyond level 10. Otherwise people wouldn't have been bothered by the change since it would not have affected them in any way.

Okay... you lost me.

Innogames cut attack GBs boost from 5% per level to 3% before they removed the level cap of 10. And after 10, attack GBs have always been 0.5% per level.

 

[HuscarlTW]

Pre-AF4. Yeah you really got it. You are really on top of things. Great insight. You didn't happen to notice that this whole discussion is about changes made to units AFTER AF4?

How about you read up before replying? We were both discussing the game as it is on the live servers.

Since when does industrial have 2 waves? In a one-wave fight, you only need 1 unit to survive that fight.

It doesn't. But those fights are much harder than the AF GE fights in the live game. I am glad they're making it harder.

 

[thephantom]

Okay... you lost me.

Innogames cut attack GBs boost from 5% per level to 3% before they removed the level cap of 10. And after 10, attack GBs have always been 0.5% per level.

You're right, sorry, that's my mistake. Somehow confused myself with the vouchers in mind... Clearly shouldn't be writing when I'm too tired to think.

 

[Sl8yer]

If you didn't feel like the leveling up was necessary then you chose not to level up your GBs. Needless to say though, a ton of players already have those GBs way over level 10 when the change was made to lower the % beyond level 10. Otherwise people wouldn't have been bothered by the change since it would not have affected them in any way.

There are no ton of players here and if they have their GB's way over 10 the change had nothing to do with it. When the % were dropped this also applied to the continent map, so balance stayed the same. There was no reason to bring up your GB's.

Its primary focus is to attack, and no, very often it does not utilize terrain properly. Certainly nowhere as good as a human can, which is the point being made there.

Watch an automatic fight on the app. All you will see is the AI using the terrain and getting bonus after bonus. First thing a recon raider does is run to a house, every time.AI isn't human, but humans make mistakes as well. Terrain isn't that clear.

You can still see the enemy units in both waves ahead of time.

And what exactly should be the advantage of that? I can't change my units halfway through the fight.

The enemy does not use start with a whole row of Rogues which soak up the first hit, you do. Those Rogues will transfer to that second wave.

So for you it is done after that first hit? You win without taking any damage?

That does not negate the point that you need to be careful about your every move.

Carefull still makes you lose units and get others wounded. No way to escape that and your opponent gets to replace all pieces.

How about you read up before replying? We were both discussing the game as it is on the live servers.

How about you read up? I am not discussing the game as it is on the live servers. Why should I? Changes haven't been made there yet.

 

[DeletedUser7855]

In every Era there is a unit, that is stronger then all others
For example, in Contemporary Era there is NO contra-unit against Assault Tank. Missile Artillery has bonus against heavy units, but it can't handle reactive armor and GETS LOST on retreat. So the whole CE map on GVG is defended with 8 heavy units (or 7 heavy + helicopter) as no one want's attack them with artillery and loose them all on retreat.

IMHO, either all eras should be rebalanced or only the new Arctic

 

[DeletedUser4446]

For example, in Contemporary Era there is NO contra-unit against Assault Tank.

If you attack 8 tanks with 6 artillery and 2 strike team, you will pretty much always win with (almost) no damage.
It will take a bit longer, because of manual moves (hiding the strike teams out of reach under a tree), but it's still a pretty good "contra army".
Just not one unit that you can combine with rogues and then click auto-fight without thinking. But that was never the idea anyway.

 

[DeletedUser7855]

midas89 if you attack with 6 artillery and 2 strike's and caught a defender army with helicopters, you will LOOSE 6 artillery on retreat.
there are also many good "contra armies" agaist RG, so why nerfing RG but keeping units like assault tanks in other eras?

 

[DeletedUser4446]

But you just said there was always 8 heavy, or 7 heavy + 1 helicopter.
That's where the two strike team come in.
You said there's no contra-unit against assault tank, but now all of a sudden we're talking about an army of helicopters?
confused.gif

 

[HuscarlTW]

Missile artillery are extremely effective against assault tanks. AAVs are much better units than CE tanks, IMO. The only CE unit that is at all effective against them is CE champions. That is based on my experience doing neighborhood fights there when most neighbors had 150-250% defense.

But back to the thread's topic...
Has anyone tried using RG + rogues against 75% boosted FE champions? I'm curious how many losses you take in that matchup now.

 

[DeletedUser4446]

I haven't myself, but logically it will make a huge difference if railguns are gone in 2-3 shots instead of 4+.
Depends on the fierce resistance of the defending army, I guess.

 

[qaccy]

Even though the changes now seem to be finalized with update announcements being pushed to the live servers, and on the whole things look better, I think Battle Fortresses are going to end up being too powerful now. Is there any unit that can reliably counter them now?

 

[DeletedUser7855]

But you just said there was always 8 heavy, or 7 heavy + 1 helicopter.
That's where the two strike team come in.
You said there's no contra-unit against assault tank, but now all of a sudden we're talking about an army of helicopters?
confused.gif

1) A contra unit should beat its counterpart without any other troops, CE's artillery can't do this, so it is not a contra-unit for tanks
2) I am speaking about GVG map, not GE, where you can see the defender's army before entering the battle. On GVG map your artillery gets lost on retreat, that makes artillery useless.

 

[Medribradrion]

strike teams should hide in plains instead of trees, that way they will do well vs tanks