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

CA, we need a balancing patch!

2»

Comments

  • RazeAndBurnRazeAndBurn Registered Users Posts: 475

    RawSugar said:

    talking about balance in SP is really weird to me when the game is so customizable. I'd rather talk about gameplay/difficulty.
    For SP id like :
    supply lines rework to be based on number of higher tier units not number of armies
    better AI armies so sometimes you get rush or skimish armies and get punished for going too heavily into some unit type
    fewer wall battles
    a few quality of life mods made part of maingame, like decline diplomacy, queue skills, a way to queue buildings
    rework of count and horde economy. possibly both into very low upkeep/low income

    but balance? im not sure how or why you'd even want that, nor what factions need buff/nerf

    Balance in SP is equally important as in MP. You still want units to behave as intended which doesn't pan out with imbalanced games.


    If balance didn't matter Doom, X-Com, Dark Souls, Sekiro, etc. wouldn't have gotten balance patches after balance patches
    You're missing the point of the OP, it is focused on quick and easy MP balancing of the biggest offenders of the past year and asking for more frequent balancing in general for MP as it develops metas at a faster pace than SP.
  • griffithx#1314griffithx#1314 Registered Users Posts: 1,548

    RawSugar said:

    talking about balance in SP is really weird to me when the game is so customizable. I'd rather talk about gameplay/difficulty.
    For SP id like :
    supply lines rework to be based on number of higher tier units not number of armies
    better AI armies so sometimes you get rush or skimish armies and get punished for going too heavily into some unit type
    fewer wall battles
    a few quality of life mods made part of maingame, like decline diplomacy, queue skills, a way to queue buildings
    rework of count and horde economy. possibly both into very low upkeep/low income

    but balance? im not sure how or why you'd even want that, nor what factions need buff/nerf

    Balance in SP is equally important as in MP. You still want units to behave as intended which doesn't pan out with imbalanced games.


    If balance didn't matter Doom, X-Com, Dark Souls, Sekiro, etc. wouldn't have gotten balance patches after balance patches
    You're missing the point of the OP, it is focused on quick and easy MP balancing of the biggest offenders of the past year and asking for more frequent balancing in general for MP as it develops metas at a faster pace than SP.
    I remember patches used to be more frequent before warhammer 2 and what happened with norsca. CA made a blog post explaining things and seemingly explaining why patch cycles needed to be the length they are. I got the sense it was them learning from past mistakes.....but I happened to stumble across their blog post from way back then so everyone can take their own interpretation from it.

    The part about patch frequency is near the end

    https://www.totalwar.com/blog/warhammer-ii-development-update/
  • eumaies#1128eumaies#1128 Registered Users Posts: 9,614

    RawSugar said:

    talking about balance in SP is really weird to me when the game is so customizable. I'd rather talk about gameplay/difficulty.
    For SP id like :
    supply lines rework to be based on number of higher tier units not number of armies
    better AI armies so sometimes you get rush or skimish armies and get punished for going too heavily into some unit type
    fewer wall battles
    a few quality of life mods made part of maingame, like decline diplomacy, queue skills, a way to queue buildings
    rework of count and horde economy. possibly both into very low upkeep/low income

    but balance? im not sure how or why you'd even want that, nor what factions need buff/nerf

    Balance in SP is equally important as in MP. You still want units to behave as intended which doesn't pan out with imbalanced games.


    If balance didn't matter Doom, X-Com, Dark Souls, Sekiro, etc. wouldn't have gotten balance patches after balance patches
    You're missing the point of the OP, it is focused on quick and easy MP balancing of the biggest offenders of the past year and asking for more frequent balancing in general for MP as it develops metas at a faster pace than SP.
    I remember patches used to be more frequent before warhammer 2 and what happened with norsca. CA made a blog post explaining things and seemingly explaining why patch cycles needed to be the length they are. I got the sense it was them learning from past mistakes.....but I happened to stumble across their blog post from way back then so everyone can take their own interpretation from it.

    The part about patch frequency is near the end

    https://www.totalwar.com/blog/warhammer-ii-development-update/
    Sure but basic MP cost changes or unit stat changes don’t require elaborate testing.
  • griffithx#1314griffithx#1314 Registered Users Posts: 1,548
    eumaies said:

    RawSugar said:

    talking about balance in SP is really weird to me when the game is so customizable. I'd rather talk about gameplay/difficulty.
    For SP id like :
    supply lines rework to be based on number of higher tier units not number of armies
    better AI armies so sometimes you get rush or skimish armies and get punished for going too heavily into some unit type
    fewer wall battles
    a few quality of life mods made part of maingame, like decline diplomacy, queue skills, a way to queue buildings
    rework of count and horde economy. possibly both into very low upkeep/low income

    but balance? im not sure how or why you'd even want that, nor what factions need buff/nerf

    Balance in SP is equally important as in MP. You still want units to behave as intended which doesn't pan out with imbalanced games.


    If balance didn't matter Doom, X-Com, Dark Souls, Sekiro, etc. wouldn't have gotten balance patches after balance patches
    You're missing the point of the OP, it is focused on quick and easy MP balancing of the biggest offenders of the past year and asking for more frequent balancing in general for MP as it develops metas at a faster pace than SP.
    I remember patches used to be more frequent before warhammer 2 and what happened with norsca. CA made a blog post explaining things and seemingly explaining why patch cycles needed to be the length they are. I got the sense it was them learning from past mistakes.....but I happened to stumble across their blog post from way back then so everyone can take their own interpretation from it.

    The part about patch frequency is near the end

    https://www.totalwar.com/blog/warhammer-ii-development-update/
    Sure but basic MP cost changes or unit stat changes don’t require elaborate testing.
    Hey, i'm not making an argument against more balance patches just thought many people would not have seen this since devs explained their take on it a long time ago.
  • RazeAndBurnRazeAndBurn Registered Users Posts: 475

    RawSugar said:

    talking about balance in SP is really weird to me when the game is so customizable. I'd rather talk about gameplay/difficulty.
    For SP id like :
    supply lines rework to be based on number of higher tier units not number of armies
    better AI armies so sometimes you get rush or skimish armies and get punished for going too heavily into some unit type
    fewer wall battles
    a few quality of life mods made part of maingame, like decline diplomacy, queue skills, a way to queue buildings
    rework of count and horde economy. possibly both into very low upkeep/low income

    but balance? im not sure how or why you'd even want that, nor what factions need buff/nerf

    Balance in SP is equally important as in MP. You still want units to behave as intended which doesn't pan out with imbalanced games.


    If balance didn't matter Doom, X-Com, Dark Souls, Sekiro, etc. wouldn't have gotten balance patches after balance patches
    You're missing the point of the OP, it is focused on quick and easy MP balancing of the biggest offenders of the past year and asking for more frequent balancing in general for MP as it develops metas at a faster pace than SP.
    I remember patches used to be more frequent before warhammer 2 and what happened with norsca. CA made a blog post explaining things and seemingly explaining why patch cycles needed to be the length they are. I got the sense it was them learning from past mistakes.....but I happened to stumble across their blog post from way back then so everyone can take their own interpretation from it.

    The part about patch frequency is near the end

    https://www.totalwar.com/blog/warhammer-ii-development-update/
    That was almost 4 years ago and evidently their approach proved wrong since then. However I do not advocate for big balancing changes all the time but for more frequent minor updates to help shift the meta. Tying MP balancing to the content updates is wrong.
Sign In or Register to comment.