Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

General balance of lore's (1)

LLumanLLuman Registered Users Posts: 26
After years of reading the balance forums this is the first time I think I might have something worth to post.
Firstly, I want to thank you all the feedback and problems reported. You are the voices that keep changing the game, making it more and more balanced each update.
Secondly, I want to thank the ones in CA who hear the community and, even if you are too conservative for my opinion, translate a portion of the requests into balance changes.
Lastly, I want to apologize for my English, because it is not my native language.

This is the first of a series of posts in which I will give my opinion (after a month of revising and EXCELing) about all the spells of the game.
My view is MP centered, but I will talk in a few exceptions about the campaign when the balances I suggest are too aggressive and changes the SP balance.

As all the posts on this section of the forum these changes are opinions and are open to debate. If you have any question about the numbers behind each suggestion feel free to ask for them.

Rigidity of the spell system

The lores and spells were made with consistent rules and regular numbers. That was a huge help for comparison reasons, but I think some of them should be open to modification.
The rarity of the spells set the range of gold cost (with 2 exceptions) and the cast time (always 1, 3 or 5 seconds) and the number of each tier of spells are limited to 2 in each lore. The rarer a spell is the most value it is “supposed” to bring, but the cast time that come with those tiers can reduce their viability, sometimes too much.
In my suggestions I will try to respect the number of rarities/lore and I will suggest both casting transitions (5 to 3 or similar) and untraditional cast times (of 2 or 4 s) while keeping the range of gold cost.

Types of spells


Now I will state my general thoughts on the different spells so I can see which assumptions that I made are wrong. I will use the feedback for estimate the changes that must be done to the balances I already wrote. At the end of the post there is a revision of a lore as an example.

Direct damage

Pays for being unavoidable (except some AoE), non-situational and low micro in exchange of having low value/WoM.
Some are very expensive or difficult to set, but the very fact of bringing them makes your rival avoid the blob up.
Apart from a couple of them, who are underwhelming, the damage spells are balanced right now.

Regeneration

For some reason the earlier equation of low micro +non situational +unavoidable doesn’t mean less cost efficiency with these spells, but all the opposite, because they are on the high positions of the ranking by value/cost.
It’s true that you must bring a bunch of expensive units for get greater results, but in a meta where expensive tools are brought in nearly every match that doesn`t present a disadvantage.
All that, plus the survivability that brings to those units without having counter-play is the reason why those spells are between the most picked on ranked and tournaments.
Over tuned (with 1 exception).

Breath

Difficult to balance due to their short cast time + the morale bomb caused by the burst damage. If you give them too much damage you make a Wind Blast, but with low ap ratio you can only wipe chaff with them, so it’s a waste of WoM.
I think they are too focused on the damage output while keeping the breaths as cheap spells. I would increase the WoM cost of the op ones and do the opposite with the worst ones.

Wind

They have some similar advantages as the breath spells, but with more disadvantages. They are above 15 WoM and its length doesn’t get rewarded because the enemy won’t make a straight line, and the longer cast time puts some of them on the unviable list.
The difference between the ones with 3 seconds of cast time and the ones with 5 s are huge. The first are very difficult to dodge, translating in guaranteed value. The seconds cost even more, but come with flashy or loud animations, which increases its practical cast time too much.

Projectile

While they all suffer the same obstruction problems and some bugs with the casting or the explosion damage (which can knock down the lighter characters doing them no damage or doing about 25% more damage than the theoretically possible on big targets) I would divide them into two:
Single projectiles. Easier to dodge, less damage/WoM and can profit from the spaghetti lines casting them like the winds in TWW I (but you have to be careful with the terrain). With the consecutive nerfs to FB now are ok.
Multi projectiles. More susceptible to terrain obstacles. Once fixed the issue with the explosion damage I would change their penetration, so they don’t pass through the infantry models, improving the options for avoiding the damage and helping the more susceptible characters (foot lords).

Bombardment

They are in a weird position right now. Most of them are supposed to be better against infantry, but because of the thin lines and the area being circular the damage output is in the lower ranks. For contraposition the ones more oriented against high hp models are more profitable due to the blobs that the goon squads usually form.
The infantry oriented are overshadowed by other anti-infantry tools and the high damage are fine.

Vortex

They are so bad that one could argue that they were designed for campaign only. I said I wouldn’t talk much about campaign balance, but this is a must for trying to make viable those spells in MP (despite thinking that the “keep them only for campaign” is a valid argument).
The problem with them is that despite the long time it takes to dish the intended damage and being expensive they require you to have units that you “don’t care” about. That results in an extra cost that for some reason is not accounted in the overall cost of the spell.
My solution would be to decrease the WoM cost significantly, so in the gamble of vortex you can win or lose comparing with other spells (this goes specifically for the non-stationary ones). Now talking about campaign, the way to balance it so they don’t turn grossly broken is to deny the WoM reduction if you put more points into the spell, only taking the benefit of the reduced miscast.

Buff

Like other spells they have 2 different types, and their viability differs very much from one another.
The singular buffs are overall bad. If you want to gain advantage on a lord fight you usually use a goon squad, so you are more interested in AoE buffs or hexes to the target. If you want to protect a single unit the most effective methods are taking them away from combat or win the fight as early as possible. In addition of that, the protective buffs are pretty bad on value/WoM and it’s better to bring heal.
The area buffs are mostly ok. On particular the protective spells are subpar with the heals, and the base damage buffers are terrible and specially on infantry, not only because the kills are worth less, but because, for example, a saurus warrior would (in average values) require 3 hits for killing another saurus with or without wildform.

Hex

Their viability is more linked to the stats they debuff, but the difference between the AoE and the single target are not that big (in fact the single target is more useful than the AoE for sniping key targets).
Its more complex to rate its usefulness because of the disparity of the spells.

Summons

A type of spell that seems to maintain its pick rate no matter the changes and the nerfs. The blocking potential is very impactful and the damage that they can do while doing that is not ignorable either.
I like the commonly suggested nerf of halving their hp (maintaining its current active time) so the decision of wiping it out could be the right one in certain scenarios. That said I wouldn’t cut that much health in the elite summons or the ones who are never overcharged (like skeletons), so they could also be a viable alternative.
In campaign this change will affect too much the summons, so investing skill points in those spells could lead to great WoM discounts and more maximum casts.



Lore of Life

General

The most used lore of the multifaction ones (excluding the vampire lore), in QB, Tournaments and even in 2 vs 2, for good reasons.
This is the lore focused on the survivability of your own key units, and in this meta who encourages pricey SEMs and units with few models it really shines. But that is the thing, only healing gets picked while other options of survivability are less cost-effective while being more situational and micro-dependent.
As I wrote on the general healing, this mechanic not only surpasses other damage spells in terms of value/WoM, but it dishes value quicker. In terms of nerfs I prefer the view healing as a late game mechanic, not a tool to just erase your mistakes, but I will post both, the value nerf, and the cooldown nerf.
With all the suggested balances the lore would give about the same amount of survivability/time while outvaluing other lores, but more spells should be brought to keep the actual level.

Earth blood

The most OP spell on the lore. The only things that you need to make it pay its value are multiple expensive targets and group them up. Not difficult when you always have 1 expensive unit and a few specialized units that you want to keep alive, and in addition you don’t have to be in combat, or in any position of danger to heal them.
With only 2 targets (of a maximum 4) normal EB gives the same value/WoM as the best multi projectiles spells (if they land all of them and your character is big enough to take all the explosion damage, and I still think they should be nerfed) while you can cast it again 10 seconds earlier, you can use the terrain for evading part of the damage, and the enemy caster needs to approach. Meanwhile you can go to a safe zone to heal your units and your enemy can’t make you to heal less.
My favorite approach is to increase the cooldown, so it takes more time to outvalue the enemies spells, but a decrease of active time is also an option. Lastly, I would put two alternatives that would break my “keep the spells as intended” rules that would turn it into an infantry healing so Regrowth no longer would need nerfs (although I know the devs are really reluctant to severe changes on the code of the spells, but the invocation changes are a thing that could happen again).

SG: Cooldown 30>60 or Active time 7[14]>5[10] or ticks heals 1 HP for a maximum of 75 entities/unit, radius of effect 30>40, Active time 7[14]>4[8] or chance of tick for succeed 18%, max affected entities/unit 18, each tick heals 3 HP.

Awakening of the wood

Deals ok damage/WoM and the speed reduction is great. If you cast it on a nearly routed unit you can chase it better, you can cast it for retreating, or you can try to hit a unit in movement, which is difficult, but with 1s casting +1.5 of delay is not impossible if the enemy doesn’t pay attention.
I won’t suggest anything because balance wise it seems like a miasma of Melkoth which deals less damage and it can be missed, but it does greater slow and can affect various units. Not clearly over tuned, not clearly underwhelming.
I haven’t used it enough times in MP, so I will leave the SG in parenthesis for the ones that know the spell better.

SG: (none).

Flesh to stone

This spell wasn’t useful even in the release of Warhammer 1, and with the AP creep is just a waste of WoM. The unit that you want to protect usually haves more than 90 armor (so the increase is less eficient), and the ones who deals the damage have high AP ratio, so you get less value in return. The normal cast doesn`t have more utility than preventing a random manticore to nuke your caster (being this the only situation in which you get roughly the same damage mitigation as a healing spell, but in a cheaper character), and the upgraded last much longer than the regular duels.
The lazy fix is to make it viable just cutting WoM, but I think a unique buff can be added so you have a strong motivation to bring the spell. Turning it into a counter net combo (because dodging always mitigates more) would give it a unique value who requires the timing and micro to pull it out while increasing the cooldown so you have to be more careful of the second combo.

SG: WoM 6[10]>3[4] or Duration 44[88]>33[33], Missile Resistant +22[55], Cooldown 43>60.

Shield of thorns

Edit: after debating in the comments and checking the calculations I have another opinion of the spell.
I still think that is very situational and have a lot of counters, but that comes with a reward.
If EB or Regrowth are nerfed the normal cast won’t need any buffs other than the overcast. Around 2/3 or more of the hole value of the spell comes from the PR (in the cavalries that have a good amount of base damage) and the overcast pays too much for that 1/3 value being doubled, so it should be cheaper.

SG: Physical Protection 22[22]>33[33] WoM 8[12]>8[10] or WoM 8[12]>7[9] (if If neither EB nor Regrowth get nerfs).

Regrowth

Same problems as EB, but less over-tuned. It still outvalues sniper spells while having no counter play, it is non situational because you at least would want the general to be alive and doesn’t require to blob your high value units, but has half the value of a EB (on 4 units) and the time between casts is longer.
If EB takes any nerfs in value this spell would need little tweaks, or arguably none. Otherwise cooldown nerf should be granted, so it takes more time to heal the same.

SG: Cooldown 48>68 (if Cooldown is nerfed on EB) or Cooldown 48>58 (if value is nerfed on EB) or none (if design changes on EB).

The dwellers bellow

A spell that was OP back on the days of Warhammer I. In those times you could see sometimes a Comet of Casandora causing damage and the meta was more infantry centric.
The spell was nerfed, and the medium player skills have raised. I think it can have a little buff (especially on the upgraded version).
I see two main forms of buffing it.
Focus on his utility, causing greater slow so it helps better with the chasing or retreating (because now if you want that you simply use the awakening of the wood) alongside with a little damage increase of the vortex.
Focus on the direct damage of the hex, taking advantage of the recent patch (now the hexes don’t apply to allies) and forcing combat to get its maximum value.

SG: AP damage 4>5, Speed Multiplier 0.76[0.52]>0.64[0.28] or Direct Damage tick 55>110, Max entities affected/unit 4>3, Speed Multiplier 0.76[0.52]>0.76[0.4].
Post edited by CA_Will on
«1

Comments

  • eumaieseumaies Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 9,435
    Excellent analysis. Can quibble with a few details here or there but overall well done.
  • another505another505 Registered Users Posts: 3,182
    EB isnt op, is hard to optimize it with the 4 cap in the midst of combat. Is a good spell but no means op

    Awakening cool down is really long still, but i dont mind it as much now

    Missile resistance to Flesh to stone would be nice

    Shield of thorn is amazing, stack with units with phy resist in critical fights. WE and Bret love this spell

    Regrowth is better than EB, RG heal essential units more effectively. Though i dont think it needs a nerf, just maybe vigour to 60percent on normal cast, 100 on OC

    Dweller just needs faster casting time so it can hit more reliably. The damage and speed debuff is already good enough. but it can be dodged too easily even if opponent is slow to react
  • LLumanLLuman Registered Users Posts: 26
    Green0 said:

    tl;dr but I already disagree with the premise that you make in the first few lines that Lore of Life is "the most dominant in tournaments".

    Lately, idk if you watched any tournament, the meta faction have been Norsca, Coast. You also see a few DE and Skaven here and there.

    Runner ups include High Elves, Empire and Lizardmen.

    Since none of the meta factions have access to lore of Life, I wonder how it's possible that it's the most picked lore.

    Not to mention, if something like Norsca is stronger than lore of Life, doesn't that indirectly imply that a lore like Shadows is also very very competitive?

    And if VP is the perhaps #1 faction in the game, doesn't that imply that summons are stronger than healing?

    I agree with you. Summons are stronger than healing and shadows is very competitive, but when I were talking about pick rate I were referring amongst the factions they have access to that lore.
    I will write my opinions on those lore’s on future posts.
  • SeswathaSeswatha Registered Users Posts: 4,805
    edited August 2020
    I don't think it's very helpful to say that because race X is good its magic is better. It can be good due to its roster and synergies, not necessarily magic.

    High Elves have access to summons (Beast), damage spells from Shadows and Fire, but would often bring heals instead because they have dragons.

    Norsca would often bring Fire or Shadows foe aoe damage to clear infantry and archers and that works well for them. I'm pretty sure they would love some heals on their mammoth though.

    DE can go both for summons or damage from Shadows/Fire with varied success.

    Coast has lore of vamps, which has both summons and healing. It's pretty strong but it was designed to be that way for Counts to make up for their other shortcomings.

    Overall it's hard to say that "healing is the best" or "summons are the best" or "damage spells are the best", there are competitive healing, summon and damage spells even if you put them right next to each other and have an option to pick from all of them. Depends on the MU and roster synergies.

    There are a lot of trash spells no one in their own mind would ever pick though.

  • TheShiroOfDaltonTheShiroOfDalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 34,001
    What can be said however is that healing is never not useful because you're directly turning a non-essential resource, WoM, into an essential one, HP. So picking Lore of Life is never a sub-optimal pick, especially when you have many SEs to heal where this transfer has a lot of dividends.
  • LLumanLLuman Registered Users Posts: 26

    EB isnt op, is hard to optimize it with the 4 cap in the midst of combat. Is a good spell but no means op

    Awakening cool down is really long still, but i dont mind it as much now

    Missile resistance to Flesh to stone would be nice

    Shield of thorn is amazing, stack with units with phy resist in critical fights. WE and Bret love this spell

    Regrowth is better than EB, RG heal essential units more effectively. Though i dont think it needs a nerf, just maybe vigour to 60percent on normal cast, 100 on OC

    Dweller just needs faster casting time so it can hit more reliably. The damage and speed debuff is already good enough. but it can be dodged too easily even if opponent is slow to react

    EB don’t have to be optimized for bringing more value than other spells. An EB on 2 units gives the same healing value as a regrowth (split into 2 targets and without the vigor replenishment). And his cooldown is rather short for outvaluing damage spells and while having no counter.
    Shield of Thorns negate damage, yes, but have many counters and is avoidable. In ideal situations can bring more burst value than EB, but brings less value/WoM while presenting all those downsides (revising the Excel I think I went too far with the suggestion, 33 physical resist would do fine).
    The suggestions of regrowth and The dwellers that you make are good to.

  • another505another505 Registered Users Posts: 3,182
    LLuman said:

    EB isnt op, is hard to optimize it with the 4 cap in the midst of combat. Is a good spell but no means op

    Awakening cool down is really long still, but i dont mind it as much now

    Missile resistance to Flesh to stone would be nice

    Shield of thorn is amazing, stack with units with phy resist in critical fights. WE and Bret love this spell

    Regrowth is better than EB, RG heal essential units more effectively. Though i dont think it needs a nerf, just maybe vigour to 60percent on normal cast, 100 on OC

    Dweller just needs faster casting time so it can hit more reliably. The damage and speed debuff is already good enough. but it can be dodged too easily even if opponent is slow to react

    EB don’t have to be optimized for bringing more value than other spells. An EB on 2 units gives the same healing value as a regrowth (split into 2 targets and without the vigor replenishment). And his cooldown is rather short for outvaluing damage spells and while having no counter.
    Shield of Thorns negate damage, yes, but have many counters and is avoidable. In ideal situations can bring more burst value than EB, but brings less value/WoM while presenting all those downsides (revising the Excel I think I went too far with the suggestion, 33 physical resist would do fine).
    The suggestions of regrowth and The dwellers that you make are good to.

    If its about oc eb on two vs rg, the numbers do look good. But in practice i never find eb to be too strong. Oc also do damage on yourself so you might need to spend gold on getting a decent mount for more hp

    Shield also give wd, amazing for shock cav. 22 phys resist is really good, and it has no limit on how many units being buff which makes critical engagement really helpful. With units like grail knigh, dragon prince or wild rider that have phys resist, you can about 40 phys resist negating half the damage. That would be a lot more than eb can do

    This is speaking from someone who uses shield of thorn a lot. It doesnt need a buff

  • Cukie251Cukie251 Registered Users Posts: 1,213
    Problem is that those don't really equate. Ultimately healing is entirely in the players control. Healing is always guaranteed value. Aoe spells can always be dodged (or at least positioned properly against to mitigate damage). Debuff and buff spells can be mitigated by other abilities or simple repositioning units/committing other resources. Direct damage usually has a brutal cost (see fate of bjuna post nerf), and at the very least requires you to aggressively posture your mage. Healing has none of these restrictions.

    I don't even think healing should be outright nerfed, but I do think it would be an overall positive gameplay change if healing was less effective on single entities in exchange for being better on multi-entity units. I think it would especially help cav and infantry play, which has been suffering. Also it would increase the relative appeal of other lores for factions with access to healing if it was a less effecive crutch for SE's.
  • tank3487tank3487 Member Registered Users Posts: 2,482
    edited August 2020
    Green0 said:


    It is also true that SEMs in healing factions are slightly weaker than SEMs in "chaosy" factions. If you don't believe this, you can test Kholek vs a Star Dragon, Karl Franz, etc. For similar price, Kholek wins most of the times.

    Kholek do not fly. How you can compare performance of mobile flying SEM with breaths vs SEM that are stuck to ground?
    Btw. You can just net+breath Kholek with Star Dragon.

    Compare performance of Star Dragon to Chaos or Black Dragon.
  • TheShiroOfDaltonTheShiroOfDalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 34,001
    Notice how Green0 is comparing a generic monster to a monstrous legendary lord. That's the level of discourse he's offering.
  • TheShiroOfDaltonTheShiroOfDalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 34,001
    Notice how he laces his post with smarmy, passive-aggressive condescension. There's no confusion, just your usual and very transparent attempts at gaslighting. Legendary Lord =/= generic monster. Kholek compared to Imrik on star dragon mount would be the correct level of comparison, but that wouldn't serve the agenda.

    Expected answer "Imrik costs more than Kholek, and therefore the comparison doesn't count >add smarmy condescending taunt<". Rebuttal, your argument was about stats, not price.
  • tank3487tank3487 Member Registered Users Posts: 2,482
    Green0 said:


    The breaths thing, you can just dodge breaths with Kholek.

    You CANNOT dodge breaths with Kholek. Because HE has net. Each breath on net from Teclis do 1500 damage to Kholek. After 3 breaths you Kholek would have 2000 hp left out of 6400 and would rout after charge by Star dragon. You would still have full health dragon after that. And it would cost you 3x9 WOM=21 WOM to kill 2800 gold LL Lord.
    HE right now is top faction. That utterly run away from balance limits and roam burning other factions.
  • tank3487tank3487 Member Registered Users Posts: 2,482
    Green0 said:


    Monsters also have tiers, and Star Dragon is an A tier monster no doubt but so are Kholek, Sphinx of Useph, Malekith, Harkon (this last one is even A++), Blood Dragon, Settra, the list goes on.

    Half of your list are Lords. If you are forced to compare generic unit to Lord, you have problems with balance.

  • TheShiroOfDaltonTheShiroOfDalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 34,001
    edited August 2020
    And if you had the means to heal Kholek, he'd automatically become more useful because you could use him less cautiously and let him sponge up more damage. That's the actual usefulness of healing, it serves as a very wide safety net and makes mistaken unit usage more forgiving.

    Anyone remember the healing potion thing CA tried in WH1? Yeah, we currently have a repeat of that.
  • TheShiroOfDaltonTheShiroOfDalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 34,001
    Green0 said:

    tank3487 said:

    Green0 said:


    The breaths thing, you can just dodge breaths with Kholek.

    You CANNOT dodge breaths with Kholek. Because HE has net. Each breath on net from Teclis do 1500 damage to Kholek. After 3 breaths you Kholek would have 2000 hp left out of 6400 and would rout after charge by Star dragon. You would still have full health dragon after that. And it would cost you 3x9 WOM=21 WOM to kill 2800 gold LL Lord.
    HE right now is top faction. That utterly run away from balance limits and roam burning other factions.
    so stay out of Net range problem solved.

    You're assuming that Chaos player doesn't do anything to retaliate against the Net, even then if SD does so much damage due to Net that sounds like a Net problem and not a Star Dragon problem.
    Keeping a melee lord away from certain areas, rendering him less useful since he can't generate value through his fighting prowess is called zoning, a term used in games, strategic or otherwise that allow for such types of play.
  • AWizard_LizardAWizard_Lizard Registered Users Posts: 1,747
    Green0 said:

    so stay out of Net range problem solved.

    Top comment for 2020.
    Prettiest of the foot overlords.
  • TheShiroOfDaltonTheShiroOfDalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 34,001
    Green0 said:

    Green0 said:

    tank3487 said:

    Green0 said:


    The breaths thing, you can just dodge breaths with Kholek.

    You CANNOT dodge breaths with Kholek. Because HE has net. Each breath on net from Teclis do 1500 damage to Kholek. After 3 breaths you Kholek would have 2000 hp left out of 6400 and would rout after charge by Star dragon. You would still have full health dragon after that. And it would cost you 3x9 WOM=21 WOM to kill 2800 gold LL Lord.
    HE right now is top faction. That utterly run away from balance limits and roam burning other factions.
    so stay out of Net range problem solved.

    You're assuming that Chaos player doesn't do anything to retaliate against the Net, even then if SD does so much damage due to Net that sounds like a Net problem and not a Star Dragon problem.
    Keeping a melee lord away from certain areas, rendering him less useful since he can't generate value through his fighting prowess is called zoning, a term used in games, strategic or otherwise that allow for such types of play.
    you realize the same applies for Star Dragon yeah? Marauder Horsemen (throwing axes) exist.
    Throwing axes are slow with very low range, Star Dragons have small hitboxes and are fast enough to dodge them. Also, if the Marauders actually manage to land hits consistently enough to do serious damage, which only happens when people grossly misuse the dragon, you can heal the damage with a simple point and click, while the Marauders will not be able to regain their spent ammo. So the Dragon retains its usefulness even if it took hits due to misplay whereas the Marauders have lost a good portion of their effectveness despite serving their purpose. Bad play is forgiven, good play is punished.

    That's why healing on SEs could do with a nerf.

    I remind people again, we already went through the whole rigmarole with the healing potions, this all was already tried and tested. CA should have known better.
  • LLumanLLuman Registered Users Posts: 26


    If its about oc eb on two vs rg, the numbers do look good. But in practice i never find eb to be too strong. Oc also do damage on yourself so you might need to spend gold on getting a decent mount for more hp

    Shield also give wd, amazing for shock cav. 22 phys resist is really good, and it has no limit on how many units being buff which makes critical engagement really helpful. With units like grail knigh, dragon prince or wild rider that have phys resist, you can about 40 phys resist negating half the damage. That would be a lot more than eb can do

    This is speaking from someone who uses shield of thorn a lot. It doesnt need a buff

    You have a point but let me illustrate my thoughts.

    Imagine that you bring Tyrion and Dragon Princes and you charge in Kholek and Dragon Ogres because you think you can outvalue them with spells.
    Now let’s analyze what Shield of Thorns brings you, because that is what you are paying WoM for: 22 PR and +30% Base damage.
    We will think of an ideal fight. All units fresh, all units on fight, Martial Mastery doesn’t switch off, no unit gets stunned, no unit gets killed, they don’t bring spells or make their attacks magical, neither they retreat. On top let’s suppose a clean fight in which all the damage from the lords goes to the other lord and the units hits themselves.

    The base damage value is:
    Tyrion. Base Damage 160, chance of succeeded attack 0.66, average Base damage mitigation per Kholek’s armor 0.7125, number of attacks 5, incremented BD 0.3.
    160*0.66*0.2875*5*1*0.3=45
    DP. BD 31, succeeded 0.39, A mitigation 0.45, attacks 4, units 45, increment 0.3.
    31*0.39*0.55*4*45*0.3=359.
    45+359=404

    The PR value is:
    Tyrion. Failed defense 0.51, AP Damage 405+21, BD 135+7, A mitigation 0.885, attacks 5, PR 0.22.
    0.51*(426+(142*0.115)) *5*1*0.22=247
    DP. Failed defense 0.51, AP Damage 77+18, BD 33+8, A mitigation 0.83, attacks 5, PR 0.22.
    0.51*(95+(41*0.17)) *5*12*0.22=679.
    247+679=926

    926+404=1330. Damage Value/WoM=166. Time between SoT 3+22+44=69s
    Earth Blood healing on 2 targets= 672. DamageValue/WoM=112. Time between EB 1+7+30= 38s
    OC EB on 2 targets=1344. DV/WoM=122. Time between casts= 45 s.

    Here it was supposed to be a paragraph where I would highlight the fact that even in a ideal world EB was better, but even counting stuns, fatigue, overkills, and so on the percentage of reduction would be between 10 or 30%, which would bring the 2 spells on a similar level. The calculations that I made prior to today show different results, but I tested the ones in this post several times, so that means I did something wrong in the other one.
    The T+DP test were in the middle of the effectiveness table and bring those results, so you were right. SoT brings more Burst value while being more situational.
    I still think the spell does deserve a little WoM decrease, at least in the overcast, who pays too much for the base damage, but those buffs are nowhere near the ones I posted.
    My apologies and thank you for your shared knowledge.
  • tank3487tank3487 Member Registered Users Posts: 2,482
    Green0 said:


    so stay out of Net range problem solved.

    Vs flying caster? Lol. And you can tank a bit of missile fire just fine due to dodging and heal.
    Green0 said:


    You're assuming that Chaos player doesn't do anything to retaliate against the Net, even then if SD does so much damage due to Net that sounds like a Net problem and not a Star Dragon problem.

    If said Star Dragon has 8 lores in a faction with flying Lord that has Net and regrowth. It is Star Dragon problem.
    Thing is. You have a combo of flying Kholek in a faction with Sarthoreal on steroids as you Lord(or to be precise 2 Sarthoreals, both Larry and Teclis are as tanky as him with not less magic punch).

    No one would take away 8 lores from HE, no one would take away Teclis from HE, no one would take away Larry from HE. So we need to nerf things like Star Dragon to put them in check.
  • LLumanLLuman Registered Users Posts: 26
    About all the other healing debate:

    The fact is that healing has more value/WoM than the direct damage spells or the sniper spells while having less counter play than damage spells and requiring low micro.

    I think it is fine to outvalue those spells, but all those advantages shouldn’t be free.
    My proposal is an increase in cooldowns so they keep the effectiveness, but you have to be more careful with your units because the healing/time won’t be the same.
  • SeswathaSeswatha Registered Users Posts: 4,805
    edited August 2020
    Without writing a wall of text to participate in the entertaining discussion of what faction is more OP I would point out that there's another faction with access to all 8 lores and all types of spells - Empire.

    Empire can play a variety of styles with existing lores, with Life, Fire, Metal, Beasts, Light all being viable. Doesn't mean Death, Heavens, Shadows are bad but I think they're less common due to how Empire roster works. I've seen them used successfully too, just not as often.

    Life + Franz is probably still the most popular combo though, probably because it's relatively easy to use and quite consistent. Maybe it wouldn't be a terrible idea to make heals less effective on SEMs as SEMs + healing is a pretty dominant but strategically dull playstyle. I can't say other options are not viable though, all other lores are usable too.

    E.g. Fire with Fireball sniping + Burning Head aoe is also very strong. So is Metal with Final transmutation and Plague of Rust. So is Beast summons or Light's Net and sometimes even Timewarp. All types of spells have their place.

    Notice how I name only a couple of spells per lore however. That's because like half of the spells are bad. Some can be excused as being useful in SP mostly tho (Vortex spells are the best in SP as AI doesn't know better).

This discussion has been closed.