MegaPack balancing

[uuu]

The problem is still the same as titi explained it. Sorta.

for towers and ballistas:
x=tower
o=ballista
r=fire archers
imagine this:

Code: [Select]

enemy
xxxxxxxx
oooooooo
rrrrrrrrrrr
rrrrrrrrrrr
you

Thoughts?

I wish you guys play more and then you would not get such crazy thoughts. Ballista is so weak now (stable release 3.6.0.3) that advanced players don't build it. Actually, you made egypt's sphynx weaker for this reason, and now nobody builds sphynx unless you want to loose.

Let's have a look at this:

Code: [Select]

enemy
xxxxxxxx
oooooooo
rrrrrrrrrrr
rrrrrrrrrrr
you
Well, obviously:
a) if it's multiplayer (most games), all your allies died because you can't move that tower. You loose later 1 vs 4
b) if it's small map, you will never get a chance to build this
c) if it's big map, you will hold only one place and wait to die, because enemy will have all the gold and resources of the whole map
Easy kills for your code picture, I killed such structure(s) many times in games or Derek once killed this as me being roman:
- you have no eagle pillar (anit-air defense), so I can kill this easily with air units (I've done this)
- ballista needs food: you go around it and kill all cows, wait a bit till they starve - I've done this, you should see the poor Roman guy crying :-D
- strong fast unit get's near ballista and it will blow up itself with splash, possibly in combination with splash units

Only possibility, when such defense would hold, is vs persians, but persians are by far the weakest faction, so it's OK.

-------
Romans are not unabalaced (megapack 3.6.0.3), e.g. norsemen are much stronger. Egypt is at least as strong.
Why should all factions be the same anyway?! It's fine that e.g. persians suck, norsemen are strongest, indians or magic can rush, Egypt has good anti-air (lot of splash), Romans have no air units, etc. Let's not end up as dumb as some (ehm... not saying name here) other game, which has 3 types of units and it already tells you which one counters which one (RTS should be more than "rock-paper-scissors" game).

[Omega]

@uuu: You do realize the post is almost a year old, right? Lots has changed.

[uuu]

I missed that 
I must have had some new post to it, because it showed as one of new topics.

Still, I heard someone on IRC saying that in SVN ballista will be made even weaker, which is bad idea.

[softcoder]

I few changes were made to Romans in svn after many games were played Elimnator agreed Romans are still too powerful. Powerful in the sense that having eagles, ballista's and towers make it impossible to break through Roman defense. That should be a little more fair now (starting the next release)

[uuu]

That's exactly what I mean. No offense, guys who cannot play that well, tell how strong they are, and based on that opinion, you can make bad decision.

Truth is, they suck. To make it more fair, they will suck even more.

You can attack and destroy them fast with magic, indians. If you want to destroy them later, norsemen catapults do the job.

PM me - eliminator or whoever thinks ballista is too good, I will gladly show him otherwise, in a game.

E.g. look at thread https://forum.megaglest.org/index.php?topic=8036.0 (spamming with mummies), there are players, who think (or rather thought), that mummies are too strong in big numbers. Would it be good idea to make mummies weaker, based on this thought?

Maybe I will make scenario "Last Roman Fortress" so that you all guys can try it, that it is not so hard, and definitely not impossible.
Edit: no scenario for now - see https://forum.megaglest.org/index.php?topic=8081.0 (bug report)

[John.d.h]

Balance is always hard to do.  If a unit seems too weak, it's possible that you're just not using it to its full potential, and if a unit seems too powerful, it could be that you don't know how to counter it very well.  I've played games where the community was split between whether a particular unit was way overpowered, or nearly useless (bats in Wesnoth, the witch in Atlantica Online).  The Behemoth, for example, can be really strong in some situations, or it can fall in a matter of seconds if the enemy makes effective use of concentrated fire with piercing attacks (Archers, Horsemen, Battle Machine arrows).

[uuu]

Not bad example about Behemoth... not very good conclusion. Why? key points:
- 2x2 unit gets hit by archers when moving, 1x1 unit is not!
- 2x2 unit takes much more damage by splash attack
- behemoth (2x2 unit) cannot be produced fast
So to get your first behemoth, it takes enough time for enemy to produce units with good range (and possibly with splash): and in bigger (it's later in game) battle, behemoth will not be that strong at all - it will take all damage it can

I mean you are true about the piercing attack, but main weakness of Behemoth is in it's big size - clumsiness.

[Omega]

I've always found the Behemoth to be far too weak for the effort and costs, since it's very vulnerable to projectile attacks, suffers from poor pathfinding due to its large size, and is very slow and difficult to produce. Their strength seems pale in comparison. I'm really not so sure if Roman's defences need to be weakened either; as defences are supposed to be stronger than offensive units, right? Yet they're becoming far too underpowered that their purpose is becoming more of a distraction due to their health rather than a useable defence. In a realistic battle, would one expect to break through a solid line of defence towers unless they had some serious warfare (catapults, etc)? And if the foe has had time to turtle in with such a strategy, shouldn't you be able to make an equally strong offense with enough specialized units that can break through this defence? Attacking is always supposed to be harder than defending, those medieval fortresses exist for a reason.

[tomreyn]

Everyone, please at least try from time to time to keep discussions on topic, and do start a new topic when you're about to post something which has only little to do with the original topic. Thanks.

[John.d.h]

Sorry if I started something else, but I just mean that if he uuu thinks that the Ballista is too weak, there's a chance that maybe he's just not using it very well, or may have found a very effective counter.  He may also be right.  It's just something that would need a little research, consideration, and/or justification before making it more or less powerful.  PS, splitting this from the original topic.

[softcoder]

Staying on topic, we decided to weaken Romans a bit because we had 3 factions (Indian, Norsemen and Egypt) converge with hundreds of units against 1 Roman base. It took 45 minutes to overcome the tower + ballistas, this from 3 fairly experienced players (including the creator of the faction). I think John D.H. is right, that likely there are many ways people do not realize how the strengths can be used to overcome the weaknesses. In a discussion with the Debian games team it was mentioned that it took 'years' for Battle For Wesnoth to balance factions. This process is a slow and careful one. I guarantee that Elimnator could likely beat anyone using Romans (before this svn change).

[ultifd]

I agree with John and Softcoder.
I do remember those days...it was kinda hectic, I think.

[uuu]

... we had 3 factions (Indian, Norsemen and Egypt) converge with hundreds of units against 1 Roman base. It took 45 minutes to overcome the tower + ballistas, this from 3 fairly experienced players ...

That is exactly the problem. I don't see you "experienced" players playing online? Or I did, and haven't considered you such? I have been playing daily for very long time, which can be confirmed by other people, who actually play (titi, tomreyn, me, Derek, Pizza, Uncle, Frost, ...). Actually, I have to loose games (not trying to win too much, or playing impossible) sometimes to make it more fun.

You actually proofed yourself wrong in this quote. You say "hundreds of units" -- where did you get resources for them? You must have had the whole map with all the resources for yourself. It took you 45min, it might have taken 20min for somebody else. Romans lost, so what's the point? They are too strong, because they *lost*, so let's make theam *weaker*? 

I guarantee that Elimnator could likely beat anyone using Romans (before this svn change).

I guarantee that Eliminator, if he plays online (I haven't seen him yet?) would be badly beaten (overall, not by chance) by me or my brother Derek. E.g. by Norsemen, who are much stronger now. And no, please don't weaken Norsemen. Actually, on most maps, Romans have no chance of winning (no matter the great skills of clicking of Roman player), if played properly by Norsemen.