|Trooper||3%||[ 1 ]|
|Heavy Trooper||0%||[ 0 ]|
|Raider||0%||[ 0 ]|
|Speedboat||0%||[ 0 ]|
|Light Artillery||0%||[ 0 ]|
|Tank||3%||[ 1 ]|
|Anti Aircraft||12%||[ 4 ]|
|Hovercraft||0%||[ 0 ]|
|Assault Artillery||0%||[ 0 ]|
|Heavy Tank||0%||[ 0 ]|
|Heavy Artillery||0%||[ 0 ]|
|Helicopter||0%||[ 0 ]|
|Jet||6%||[ 2 ]|
|Berserker||32%||[ 11 ]|
|Bomber||3%||[ 1 ]|
|Destroyer||35%||[ 12 ]|
|Sub||0%||[ 0 ]|
|DFA||3%||[ 1 ]|
|Battleship||3%||[ 1 ]|
|Total Votes : 34|
|10/04/2009 15:49:00 [Suggestion] What unit(s) could use some rebalancing?|
Hello folks, there is several threads concerning some unit behavior a player is not satisfied with by some means or other. Mostly those threads and discussions are outdated or focus on a single unit feature and there is no place in the forum (as far as I know) that deals with general unit set balancing as main topic.
So here is my opinion I formed during the last weeks: In general the unit balancing is quite good, but there is still 3 units (Jet, Destroyer, Trooper) that are too good in relation to their price and 1 unit too bad (Berserker).
I summed up my arguments on my little external site.
What units or their specifications would you like to see changed most of all and why?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 10/04/2009 15:54:12
|10/04/2009 18:02:55 Re:[Suggestion] What unit(s) could use some rebalancing?|
zerk is highly overrated. zerk v htank 1 on 1 is almost a even fight due to repair ability of the htank.
3v2 (at cost value) i'd take the htanks
|10/04/2009 22:29:04 Re:[Suggestion] What unit(s) could use some rebalancing?|
What he said.
Destroyers are pretty fierce as well, as was discussed in another thread. Maybe up the cost a little.
|11/04/2009 02:06:45 Re:[Suggestion] What unit(s) could use some rebalancing?|
|I've always felt that anti-air isn't worth it.|
|11/04/2009 02:29:27 Re:[Suggestion] What unit(s) could use some rebalancing?|
The sea needs rebalancing. Destroyers might be fine as is if there was another naval unit, like those mentioned in other threads.
I think anti-air is worth it, however I think there needs to be a stronger anti-air land unit, perhaps one with about twice the power, twice the cost, and 3 fewer movement points. Currently, you need a few anti-air to threaten an air unit unless you have your own air units.
Berserkers need beefing up too. More defense or maybe repair of 2.
|11/04/2009 11:50:25 Re:[Suggestion] What unit(s) could use some rebalancing?|
I agree with spade that we need another anti air unit. I suggested a close range anti air unit in the new unit suggestion thread.
A problem with this poll is that you cannot select multiple units which needs rebalancing.
For me the destroyer needs to get stronger weaknesses because currently it is to versatile. Lower damage against boat and a cruiser with a range of 1-3 but very high damage against boats but weaknesses vs subs and air units would help.
The beserker definately needs improvement. A repair of 2 is a good idea. Also the defense needs improvement (+1 ?) in order to make this unit worth 900 compared to the heavy tank.
The anti air gun is useful if you know how to use it.
The tank could need a minor improvement like increasing the attack vs hard/amphib/speedboat and boat by 1.
For the jet. The jet is mainly there to fight other air units and works quite well for the task. If there are changes for the jet reducing the attack vs hard by 1 or 2 makes imo the most sense, but I am not sure if that is necessary.
Jets can be countered with destroyers, heavy troopers and anti air guns.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 11/04/2009 11:52:16
|11/04/2009 16:56:18 Re:[Suggestion] What unit(s) could use some rebalancing?|
I voted Destroyer, but forgot about Zerks. In either case... those are the two most unbalanced units and need fixing first.
Another close range anti-air unit that doesn't lose defense on bases would sort out any jet/copter advantages as it's crap that when you build an anti-air to threaten a jet or a copter, it gets blown up and the opponent hardly takes any damage. This would also solve the issue of the anti-air being underpowered as in a group anti-air are deadly! Just try bringing a jet at someone who has three or four anti-air. You'll drop like a fly and the opponent won't take any retaliation damage. One new unit, solves unbalance for about 4.
I also think the tank could use a very minor boost. Just like jeye outlined.
@ Casa: Don't be touchin muh troopers! I don't think they're overpowered by a long shot. It's true that they're cheap but they fall like flies to any ranged units, any air units without retaliation and pretty much everything else for very little damage in return. For the money they cost, they do an ok job. Nothing outstanding like the destroyer. Comparing twelve troopers to one destroyer isn't really a fair comparison. You'd have to compare twelve to twelve. In a game with three bases you can only produce three troopers a turn so they're really only juiced up on terrain with a lot of bases, forests and hills. Let's not forget they suck on sand too.
@ jeye: You made a good point about reducing jet's attack against hard. Don't know why you think it's not necessary though. It's an anti-air unit. Not an anti-land. Attacking both air AND land is the role of the helicopter. Destroyers are good against jets, sure, but for the most part you keep jets away from the seas and there are plenty of maps without navies. Heavy troopers go 5-6 for 8 so they're actually a decent counter, but you'll never friggin catch a jet with that movement. They rip them to shreds when they do get close enough though, especially with terrain bonuses and gangs. Anti-air however.... WAY too weak. 3-4 to 8! The sole purpose of an Anti-Air is to be strong against air units and it does the same damage as a heavy trooper, but loses two more units. That's just not right. Not to mention that the unit cannot get a terrain bonus and is even penalized on a base where you first build it. I most definitely think that reducing the jet attack against heavy is necessary.
|11/04/2009 18:23:12 Re:[Suggestion] What unit(s) could use some rebalancing?|
I was referring to
Name: Flak Tank (HARD)
Purpose: The Flak Tank can put out a lot of damage against enemy air units but only at close range.
Can move and shoot.
The flak tank should be able to kill a heli or jet on a 1on1 fight if both fight it out. And 2 flak tanks would be able to kill any air unit unless it is on an airfield. But a tank could kill the flak tank.
I think that the jet is not extremely strong and if something like the flak tank would come in this would weaken air units where a reduction of the hard attack for jets could be unecessary. Also the jet is a rather expensive. For example the heavy art is cheaper and deals more damage to anything but air and is even ranged. The ranged destroyer which is only a little more expensive than a jet deals more damage to land units as well.
|11/04/2009 23:24:02 Re:[Suggestion] What unit(s) could use some rebalancing?|
Destroyers aren't worth anti air unless you have at least 1 more destroyer than thier air. The simply aren't powerful enough. But the range is helpful. I hate how the battleships can attack air, but deal like one damage. Just don't let them attack air at all!
I'm voting hover. Hovers are too weak. They're supposed to have the strength of a raider, yet keep getting pwned by three troopers that spawn the turn before the hover arrives at a base. Plus, capturing hovers should get more armour than capturing troopers and heavy troopers. It's only fair since you paid 3-5 times more for the unit.
|13/04/2009 12:20:42 Re:[Suggestion] What unit(s) could use some rebalancing?|
I don't agree. Just take Pluto's Battle Simulator and you will see 10 strenght bomber vs. 10 strenght destroyer ends most probably with 4 or 5 strenght for both with mostly same losses.
example 1*: Assume its destroyers turn. Both had 4 strenght left, destroyer moves 1 or more hexes away and shoots bomber down to 2 strenght without retaliation. Destroyer would kill it next round, so bomber has to flee in its turn.
example 2*: Assume its bomber's turn (which is not very probable because destroyer would have attacked the bomber stupidly from 1 range the turn before and enabled it to defend). Both had 4 strenght left, bomber attacks again and both have 2 strenght then. Destroyer repairs 2 strenght in its turn and ends with 4 strenght, bomber with 2 strenght has to flee to stay alive.
Conclusion: Bomber can hardly ever win in a clean fight* against a destroyer.
*(no other units were involved, destroyer was not hindered to move by terrain)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 13/04/2009 12:20:54
|13/04/2009 14:33:03 Re:[Suggestion] What unit(s) could use some rebalancing?|
@ jeye: The heavy artillery has very low defense, crappy movement speed, crappy repair, doesn't retaliate within two spaces next to it, it can only get degraded on unfavored terrain and to top it all off, it doesn't retaliate against air at all. I think the 300 credits to fix most of that up and improve on it drastically is a huge bonus. As for the the destroyer... well yes, but as we both mentioned, the destroyer is potentially the most overpowered unit, so it's probably a bad basis for comparison. One thing you have to keep in mind at all times is the 8 movement range of the jet. It's friggin insane... and the 6 than 2 thing is actually very helpful too. It makes for a versatile getaway in many spots... or allows you to attack for a gang up bonus, move the jet back and attack with another unit.
As for the flak tank... I like the idea, but personally, I think a trooper might work better... if only because it gets a bonus on bases and other terrain. There's nothing more annoying then when you build an anti air and before your next turn is up, you have a 2 health anti air on a base facing an 8 health jet.
@ ShadowPanther: Absolutely not. I've already pointed out in another thread just why the destroyer is overpowered. It rips ALL air units to shreds, including the bomber. One on one it should always win.