Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 42

Thread: Race & Unit Balance Thread

  1. #1
    Developer Hoverdog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Boat City
    Posts
    570

    Race & Unit Balance Thread

    This thread is dedicated to race and unit feedback.

    Which race feels the best? Which seems underpowered?
    Do you mass produce a single unit type? Are there any OP units? Any underwhelming ones that you don't bother with? Summons?

  2. #2
    Mage’s Assistant
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    107
    I have only played as Elves and Dwarves - but have conquered enough Draconian and Human cities that I can 'speak for' these 4 races.

    - Draconians are in general overpowered, simply because the AI doesn't deal with flying units very well. They are pretty fragile if you actually have to attack anything and their ranged unit sucks. But early on, Draconian neutrals are the biggest threat (speed kills). And their high end unit is actually good. In general, Trackers are too similar to Hunters and Javelineers (sp?) should be a bit better but value/cost/performance are pretty well balanced

    - Humans: just so darn vanilla. Pikemen have value, Paladins are good, spearmen are 'cannon' fodder, swordsmen are slightly better/less useless - but only slightly, crossbowmen hardly ever hit anything and don't do much damage when they do, clerics are OK. Use them as garrison troops because their more useful early units are slow and not that good. Do have Paladins in later mobile armies. The 'internal' cost/value balance is OK but they are by far the weakest army in the game - and least fun to play.

    - Dwarves: rock hard, good range of units, no real weaknesses (the arbalasteers aren't a great ranged unit but better than crossbowmen or javelineers), really slow but they play/feel like a dwarven army should. Engineers really good at building useless roads.

    - Elves: the best all round army if only because archers are the most cost effective unit in the game by a very large margin. Druids are not very good; glaive guards are a nice intermediate H2H unit but almost never get made by me (by the time I can make them, I can also make much better units and I dislike building 40 point units in cities with significantly higher production capacity). Faradrax, whatever they may be, are a darn good H2H units who can turn werewolves into dog food. Rangers are hugely overpriced, pathfinder is nice but they are no better a ranged unit than archers (at a huge production and maintenance cost hit) and ranged units who are also good at H2H are generally overpriced - because that is a capability that should seldom be exercised. One Ranger per mobile army, then grit my teeth and produce archers in cities with the capacity to turn out 4per turn, if the game allowed that.Unicorn riders are a really nice tactical unit, especially against ranged units plus charge is nice. But they are pretty fargile against any tough opponent. Pegasi fly and fly fast. Best scouts in the game as neutrals tend not to attack them and higher level ones can hold their own in combat. But they are very pricey for waht they do. Grey mages are a nice magic unit. Their higher movement capability and devastating ranged units make then my mobile lair/neutral conquering mobile armies even if I started with dwarves (because the Prime Plane terrain generator sucks so badly).

    I don't summon, except in desperation, so no real opinion on those units.

    One issue is that units with spell casting get worse and worse as the game progresses. A druid with 20 magic points at T20 is pretty useful; at T150 it is almost useless. Leveling spell casting abilities (both points and maybe spells) would make them much more useful. It would also make a 20 point druid pretty overpowered at a high level. But if every race at a unit with similar capabilities, it would be at least balanced.

    The armies all feel about right for their races and all except humans have racial strengths. And weaknesses for that matter - and the latter definitely includes humans.

    ---------- Post added at 11:54 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:41 AM ----------

    I have only played as Elves and Dwarves - but have conquered enough Draconian and Human cities that I can 'speak for' these 4 races.

    - Draconians are in general overpowered, simply because the AI doesn't deal with flying units very well. They are pretty fragile if you actually have to attack anything and their ranged unit sucks. But early on, Draconian neutrals are the biggest threat (speed kills). And their high end unit is actually good. In general, Trackers are too similar to Hunters and Javelineers (sp?) should be a bit better but value/cost/performance are pretty well balanced

    - Humans: just so darn vanilla. Pikemen have value, Paladins are good, spearmen are 'cannon' fodder, swordsmen are slightly better/less useless - but only slightly, crossbowmen hardly ever hit anything and don't do much damage when they do, clerics are OK. Use them as garrison troops because their more useful early units are slow and not that good. Do have Paladins in later mobile armies. The 'internal' cost/value balance is OK but they are by far the weakest army in the game - and least fun to play.

    - Dwarves: rock hard, good range of units, no real weaknesses (the arbalasteers aren't a great ranged unit but better than crossbowmen or javelineers), really slow but they play/feel like a dwarven army should. Engineers really good at building useless roads.

    - Elves: the best all round army if only because archers are the most cost effective unit in the game by a very large margin. Druids are not very good; glaive guards are a nice intermediate H2H unit but almost never get made by me (by the time I can make them, I can also make much better units and I dislike building 40 point units in cities with significantly higher production capacity). Faradrax, whatever they may be, are a darn good H2H units who can turn werewolves into dog food. Rangers are hugely overpriced, pathfinder is nice but they are no better a ranged unit than archers (at a huge production and maintenance cost hit) and ranged units who are also good at H2H are generally overpriced - because that is a capability that should seldom be exercised. One Ranger per mobile army, then grit my teeth and produce archers in cities with the capacity to turn out 3-4 per turn, if the game allowed that.Unicorn riders are a really nice tactical unit, especially against ranged units plus charge is nice. But they are pretty fargile against any tough opponent. Pegasi fly and fly fast. Best scouts in the game as neutrals tend not to attack them and higher level ones can hold their own in combat. But they are very pricey for what they do. Grey mages are a nice magic unit. Their higher movement capability and devastating ranged units make then my mobile lair/neutral conquering mobile armies even if I started with dwarves (because the Prime Plane terrain generator sucks so badly).

    I don't summon, except in desperation, so no real opinion on those units.

    One issue is that units with spell casting get worse and worse as the game progresses. A druid with 20 magic points at T20 is pretty useful; at T150 it is almost useless. Leveling spell casting abilities (both points and maybe spells) would make them much more useful. It would also make a 20 point druid pretty overpowered at a high level. But if every race at a unit with similar capabilities, it would be at least balanced.

    The armies all feel about right for their races and all except humans have racial strengths. And weaknesses for that matter - and the latter definitely includes humans.

  3. #3
    Archmage of the Central Tower Happerry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,770
    I still kinda wish that we'd done the humans on an Arthurian theme, even if I get why at least one 'normal' race is a good thing. Doesn't make them not bland though.
    The Wiki.

  4. #4
    Sorcerer of the Lesser Tower
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    76
    I havent seen any appealing units anywhere in the human line-up besides paladins. the melee units are underpowered, and the tier 3 crossbowman is probably worse than the tier 1 elven archer at greater cost. clerics are almost exactly equal to swordsmen except for the healing spell, which is kindve useless anyway because theyre basically just swordsmen, and any turn you spend healing other swordsmen is better served dealing damage. I honestly havent lasted farther than clerics before getting wiped out by neutrals.

    Elves are the most OP by far, not just because of the archers, who cost 40 gold to buy, and no gold maintenance, but with several units who play off of each others strengths like teleport anywhere on the map unicorns, and flying pegasai. The units are also rather cheap and the power bonus per population is useful on a number of fronts. with the elves I find myself taking alchemy, and the +1 gold per pop perks, funneling all my power into mana, and just using it as a gold pool to rush archers when needed. It does get annoying having to cancel the same building repeatedly to rush more archers though.

    havent tried orcs, but they seem to have a respectable racial identity, with decent positive and negative traits.

    Dwarves have solid units, but theyre all expensive, such that I had to turn taxes up to double the base value just to meet unit/building maintenance for buildings and 1 roaming army (not a lot of threatening neutrals on the air plane.). I would like to add that I had the +1 gold per citizen trait, also to be fair my air plane map seemed to have no gold resources. (yes, dwarves on the air plane) they also dont feel like they have much of the advertised production bonus, just an extra 25% if you build all the way through the production building tree. they top out at 100% after that where most races top out at 75%. doesn't feel like much of a ++production. On the other hand the big cities quickly get overburdened by building maintenance, compounded by high unit maintenance, forcing you to raise taxes, and stifling growth in smaller cities. In the end whatever production bonus the dwarves gain quickly gets lost to maintenance costs, as their population growth gets outstripped by costs, which then get compounded by rebels. dont get me wrong, larger cities tend to fare adequately with enough temples and the like, but less established cities cant grow as well due to the fact that they are suffering rebellion, and all the production bonuses are tied up in high tier buildings which cost high maintenance, and time. they might be better served by getting more production bonus from terrain, or more production per craftsman. I acknowledge I may have compounded my economic problems by spamming settlers from my capital city, while also rushing my way up the production building tree there which was incurring a good portion of the maintenance costs I've mentioned, but it was the air plane so i expected to find a few gold resources somewhere XD

    Havent played much with the draconians, but having all flying units and a power per pop seems pretty strong.

    overall the elves are the best by far.

    ---------- Post added at 01:52 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:47 AM ----------

    also havent played with the undead but they sound like a pretty good race with its own identity. I also never ever see them spawn, so I cant even comment on their general balance. Honestly I feel like they need their own neutral faction so they see some use outside of player chosen undead races, and the shadow plane.

    I'd like to add that an everyman race aka the humans doesnt make sense for this game since the races are defined by having unique identities, and the humans are extremely bland. Not to say that humans need one thing theyre supposed to do super well like elven ranged units or orcish unit spamming, just that they need some flair.

    this is completely unrelated but Ive had to re-log in at least 3 times in the process of writing this for some reason XD
    Last edited by forfor; 01-17-2015 at 10:54 AM.

  5. #5
    Developer Hoverdog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Boat City
    Posts
    570
    Dwarves have solid units, but theyre all expensive,such that I had to turn taxes up to double the base value just to meet unit maintenance for average sized garrisons. to be fair my air plane map seemed to have no gold resources. (yes, dwarves on the air plane) they also dont feel like they have much of the advertised production bonus, just an extra 25% if you build all the way through the production building tree. they top out at 100% after that where most races top out at 75%. doesn't feel like much of a ++production.
    Each warven worker gives 3 production instead of the normal 2.

  6. #6
    Sorcerer of the Lesser Tower
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    76
    Oh I didn't see that on the tooltip. I just finally got the website to accept the fact that I was trying to edit my post so it has a lot more meat now XD

    rewrote the whole thing then lost it all when I pressed save, and it told me I was no longer logged in.


    Also I would like to thank you for being up at 3 in the morning responding to the forums :')


    just quickstarted a game and can confirm the dwarven craftsmen say 2 production on the tooltip. Just pointing that out to be helpful

  7. #7
    Thank you for the detailed feedback guys! This is exactly what we need.
    Everybody needs friends! Aaron's Facebook Page

  8. #8
    Archmage of the Central Tower Happerry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,770
    Quote Originally Posted by Hoverdog View Post
    Each warven worker gives 3 production instead of the normal 2.
    Warven worker? Wow! A new race!

    Quote Originally Posted by forfor View Post
    I havent seen any appealing units anywhere in the human line-up besides paladins. the melee units are underpowered, and the tier 3 crossbowman is probably worse than the tier 1 elven archer at greater cost.
    This might be an artifact of the D&D rulesystem the game is running on, as Crossbows are basically never used, speaking in general, because of how they work making causing them to be less effective then bows. Though if this is happening I'll admit I was hoping that would be 'house ruled' so they actually were worth using.

    (Longer Explanation : Crossbows take actions to reload and bows don't, presumably in an attempt to balance out their higher base damage. (Shortbows usually do 1d6 verses a Light Crossbow's 1d8, and Longbows usually do 1d8 verses a Heavy Crossbow's 1d10.) Sadly, Heavy Crossbows take a full round action to reload, which means that a Longbow gets to make twice the attacks from the start, a ratio which gets worse as people level up and get more attacks per round. Because bows are reloaded as a free action, with a longbow you can use each of your attacks as long as you have arrows, where the crossbow, taking a full round to reload, means you fire once and then spend the next round reloading. By the time you get to level 20, the Longbow User can make an entire eight attacks per each single Heavy Crossbow shot...)

    (Anyway, I have no clue how the WoM crew is handling the crunch in that area, but Crossbows sucking is, sadly, a feature of the base system taken as written.)

    (On Light Crossbows verses Longbows, Light Crossbows still take a move action to reload verses the Longbows Free Action, so the attack ratio is barely any better (Level 20 fighter, 4 attacks from longbow per each single crossbow shot), and crossbows are longer ranged in the first place so... And you can use composite bows to add your strength bonus to damage whereas crossbows have no such version which moves things further into the 'bows are better direction. Anyway, getting a bit long winded here, but for people who care about the system these are the sad facts from the SRD.)
    The Wiki.

  9. #9
    Arcane Candidate
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    New York State
    Posts
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by Glorfindel7 View Post
    spearmen are 'cannon' fodder, swordsmen are slightly better/less useless
    Spearman are NOT cannon fodder. They often are the only real defense humans have early on against draconians, because they have reach. Later on, of course, they get supplanted. But if you are building swordsmen instead of spearmen early in the game, you can have problems. Consider them mere cannon fodder at your own peril.

  10. #10
    Mage’s Assistant
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    107
    Well, I have not played as humans so my view of spearmen is largely that I can take out a few spearmen with an archer and a druid with little or no risk, seldom even taking any damage. For human (and dwarven cities), I always supplement the base garrisons with a couple of archers. Archers make everyone better. In my conquered human cities, I almost never build swordsmen - so I agree with that part of it. However, spearmen remain 'arrow fodder' against elves.

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
footer