A minimal cast distance should be applied onto grenade abilities

[hastaga]

Codex, asmon apparently didn't read any of the argument and just typed, or he intentionally chose to ignore them. I can't see how's he trying to have a 'discussion' or contribute to one. He also tried attacking me for bringing up issues to discuss. I did go through all the effort to analyze the problem, unlike him.

[Black Relic]

Giving nades (on any squad with the ability) a small minimum cast range (like i mentioned before) wouldn't remove the threat of a nade in the face of a melee squad. It still acts as a melee deterrent, but it would have some flight time = reaction to dodge. Thats a good 0.5 seconds. Now that is a big deal and alot of time but that will still bleed models if placed well. Having it drop at a squads feet while they are being engaged in melee combat feels abusive of the melee mechanic. Model HAVE to finish their attack or special attack animation and that mean they aren't moving. The fuse on that nade is less the 1 second. And most units take at least 0.6 seconds to finish their attack animation. They only way the dodge those kinds of nade spike is if you pay attention to their energy. And you will most likely still be hit. This ability functions as a get out of jail free card and bleed or wipe ya squad all at the same time. Now i don't want to completely remove this aspect but give a player a bit larger reaction time of 0.3-0.5 second of a reaction window.

Now a minimum cast range would affect how effective a nade acts as a melee deterrent, but it would still remain a big threat.

[KanKrusha]

Vapor makes a good point about fun and game design.

There is a precedent: weird boy warp vomit ability used to have no minimum cast distances and one was added because it was apparently unbalanced. This is On an ability that doesn't actually wipe squads itself.

Also a good example of where balance is a perception or experience and comes down to opinion. I personally felt warp Vomit with no minimum cast distance was balanced and was good design but The majority of players felt it was unbalanced due to its relation with the rest of the ork player's army.

[Kvn]

There is a precedent: weird boy warp vomit ability used to have no minimum cast distances and one was added because it was apparently unbalanced. This is On an ability that doesn't actually wipe squads itself.

I'm certainly not there in the heads of the mod designers to see the reasoning behind some of the balance changes, but it was my understanding that the reason the Weirdboy Warp Vomit was nerfed with a minimum range was because it was both capable of swinging an entire engagement (with the massive aoe stun that has no friendly fire) while also being impossible to dodge since it has such a large target radius.

Grenades, by comparison, have a small area of effect, and can be dodged quite handily by almost all squads (with a few exceptions for things such as Storm Boyz thanks to their jumping charge and after-landing delay) so long as the person microing them is paying attention. If they were an auto-hit ability like Warp Vomit is/was, they would be OP. Since they can be almost entirely negated by a reasonably small amount of micro, they're not.

That's how I see it at least. It's hard for me to conceive of how a grenade-spike could be considered so broken that it needed to be removed given that it only needs a bit of discipline to dodge, and will pose just as much of a threat to the ones throwing the grenade in those situations where the two squads are right on top of one another.

[Asmon]

I'm not sure if someone has said so in the previous post, so I might repeat it: dodging grenade spike is not difficult. If the squad is kiting, you command move then attack then repeat not to be bothered with things like leap and jump, while still retaining your melee charge (if you're lucky to have one). If you're already in melee, you move right or left at the start of the animation, obviously not backwards, since it is usually the worst choice.

Finally, how to predict the spike? Take a look at the energy bar of enemies. That plus the animation is much more than 0.5s.

The only actual concern about grenade spikes comes from sync-kills, and that's partly why sync-kills have been made less frequent and are still discussed from time to time.

I'd add a final thought: the mind game that you play with your opponent, baiting the spike, baiting the melee attack, is one of the many layers of fine micro that shapes the skill around this game.

Once again, I'd be happy to show this to anyone who asks me.

[saltychipmunk]

Vapor makes a good point about fun and game design.

There is a precedent: weird boy warp vomit ability used to have no minimum cast distances and one was added because it was apparently unbalanced. This is On an ability that doesn't actually wipe squads itself.

Also a good example of where balance is a perception or experience and comes down to opinion. I personally felt warp Vomit with no minimum cast distance was balanced and was good design but The majority of players felt it was unbalanced due to its relation with the rest of the ork player's army.

ugh then you clearly haven't dealt with ork chain stunning before. it was the same issue the wierd boy is not supposed to be around dangerous melee. however pre nerf you could do just that because warp vomit was a get out of jail free stun card that also had the benifit of completely screwing over what ever was attacking him.

sure he did not kill anyone with vomit. but a stun is a stun, and a non FF stun in a blob of slugga boyz is insane already.

When you look at it that way, nade spiking is exactly the same as pre nerfed vomiting.

A unit that is designed to be extremely vulnerable in melee gets an extremely effective method of covering their asses while putting a unit designed to punished them in an extremely bad situation.

having cake and eating it too at its finest. There isnt a more perfect example of this than perhaps maybe the current absurdity around GK terminators doing everything . but that is a whole other can of worms.

Another question would be.. why should you need to bait? Why should a melee squad need to worry about being possibly 1 shotted by a squad they should easily murder. Was the punishment they had to take to get into melee not enough?

[CSM Emperor]

yes, grenade abilities should have a minimum limit. heretic barrage has already so why not rest ?

[Dark Riku]

yes, grenade abilities should have a minimum limit. heretic barrage has already so why not rest ?

Because grenade launchers have a way longer range than grenades!

[Toilailee]

yes, grenade abilities should have a minimum limit. heretic barrage has already so why not rest ?

Because grenade launchers have a way longer range than grenades!

Also they don't have timers.

[Interdiction]

A lot of people tend to retreat right after the grenade toss, especially Eldar, but if I'm quick enough I move forward anyway, if using shees fleet forward, as they run you can get some good hits on them, doesn't always work but many throw the grenade slightly forward at their feet which gives you the animation time and the grenade timer to move forward, so it is one way to micro your way away from the grenade. Whether the above is a smart thing to do or not, I still feel this is a L2P issue to an extent. Grenades hurt if you mess up but it's by no means unfair.

[Black Relic]

I said it before too, grenades to still be a melee deterrent but it should be a "get out a jail free and destroy a squad or caz massive bleed" card to a squad that is already in melee combat with said squad. Plus the minimum range i want would be pretty damn small so you can still do what we already are accustomed to but again it would allow time for animations to finish so the player can actually dodge.

Just saying pay attention to their energy is common sense. But you can't bypass a game mechanic like animations. Their animation will finish period. I have lost commanders and squads that just barely got out of being wiped only to be taken out by an incomplete animation. This is specifically the reason why I want a minimum cast range, allow melee units to finish their melee animation so the squad can actually carry out the move order to dodge the grenade. And what why to do that then add a bit of air time? We could increase the fuse time but then grenades would be near useless and i wouldn't want that. But these "point blank" grenades should go to "near point blank". Besides a minimum cast range of 3 would be about a scout model. Here I put the minimum cast range in my mod so we can see what 3 range minimum would be.

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/f ... =538125218

That dont really harm nade being a melee deterrent. And you can still nade spike to some extent. It just makes squads that are already in melee combat a bit safer and lowers the "get out of jail free" card that the grenade ability can provide. Now since this ability is casted by the squad ANY member can use it, even member that are outside of the minimum cast range. The model that is closest to a targeted location will throw the grenade. So they can still practically throw it at their feet. I don't think this change would hurt the grenade ability too much to makes it useless against melee squads.

A lot of people tend to retreat right after the grenade toss, especially Eldar, but if I'm quick enough I move forward anyway, if using shees fleet forward, as they run you can get some good hits on them, doesn't always work but many throw the grenade slightly forward at their feet which gives you the animation time and the grenade timer to move forward, so it is one way to micro your way away from the grenade. Whether the above is a smart thing to do or not, I still feel this is a L2P issue to an extent. Grenades hurt if you mess up but it's by no means unfair.

Understand that I mean when a unit is already in melee combat. Before the squad can actually dodge they have the finish their attack and then stumble around and then move. If your squads aren't in melee combat and you get hit by a grenade then by all means it is your fault.

[Cyris]

Reminder: IST nades currently work this way! They have also been nerf/buffed from the normal nade stats with lower damage but a 0 fuse time.

If you want to see a real world example of what some people are talking about in this thread, try them out. As I said before, I personally prefer it and would like all grenades to work this way (though the damage is still too low imo). It makes the nade less valuable against melee who have already closed, but better at hitting enemies as they come it, though juking is still an option on both the attacker and defender. It causes them to wipe squads less often, but more consistently put out damage.

I firmly believe they are living example of a way to make all nades less toxic for the game while still allowing for careful play and counter play. It also makes more sense to a viewer, as the nades don't teleport anymore.

[saltychipmunk]

It is also how they were in dow1

[Crewfinity]

i lost another squad of sluggas to a DA nade last night -_____-

TAKE THEIR NADES AWAYYYY rawr rawr imba rawr.


forreal though DA's are pretty badass right now. i'm getting more and more impressed with their exarch in T1 whenever i play them. really really good unit in the early game, one of the best starting ranged squads imo

Reminder: IST nades currently work this way! They have also been nerf/buffed from the normal nade stats with lower damage but a 0 fuse time.

I firmly believe they are living example of a way to make all nades less toxic for the game while still allowing for careful play and counter play. It also makes more sense to a viewer, as the nades don't teleport anymore.

So are you saying that you agree with the OP?

tbh i wouldn't mind adding a small minimum distance now that i think about it. the only things about nades that bug me are when i'm actually able to get into melee with them, and then they spike their feet and retreat. even if you notice as soon as their energy drops a lot of the time your melee squad is all piled in and doesn't move out of the way fast enough.

I'm fine with grenades being a melee deterrent but it feels like they should be a deterrent to approach, rather than punishing melee units that get close enough to engage them. maybe like a minimum distance of 3 or something? IST minimum is 5 for reference.



just realized i basically agreed with BlackRelic word for word

nice points made above by him.

[Cyris]

I'm fine with grenades being a melee deterrent but it feels like they should be a deterrent to approach, rather than punishing melee units that get close enough to engage them.

That is precisely what I like about the IST nades as well. The suicide bomber nature of nade spiking is just awkward and weird. Using a nade to disrupt a melee unit on the way in feels so much more correct, looks better, and 100% still allows play and counter play and counter-counter play. It just isn't based on watching energy bars It also allows for nade damage to be lower (since it's less all-or-nothing), which leads to less squad wiping which I believe is a meta goal of Caels.

In any case, I 0% expect this to change, it's been in the game for ages. I don't agree with all the arguments for or against that have been made in this thread, but I'm geeraly of the opinion that it's been a proven experiment with IST. It's healthier for the game, more "realistic" (if that's a thing) and still allows skill checks on both sides.

[saltychipmunk]

The ist sarge is a weird fella.

Fundamentally i like how his grenade is simply a more damaging form of knock back. however that being said he is not really worth the high power costs because of it and people have quickly focused on only buying that chain sword fella.

I wont go do far as to say his grenade being not very threatening is all that is bad about him (his ranged dps is terrible). but the thing is that for 25 power ( around the cost of most t1.5 low end units (in power)) his current tool set leaves much to be desired.

And i cant help but feel that if his grenade was as dangerous as other grenades he would be more valuable as a purchase.

So , I guess the question is if we were to follow through and make all grenades have minimum range , no timer , but non super lethal damage... would they still be worth the money they currently demand?

This is strictly hypothetical as really just giving a minimum range is a good start.

[Dark Riku]

You know the ist sarge is also a detector, right?

[saltychipmunk]

so are scout sarges, are we going to give them the weak grenade too?

I know that in most cases these leader upgrades are at 25+ power because of that ability to detect and pacing etc and that the other stuff is in there to sort of justify it.

I still stand by my assertion that the ist sarge is not very good. I should not have to begrudgingly buy a detector that offers little else in terms of value to just have a detector.

can you imagine how much weaker scouts would be if that sarge was 25 power and had the ist grenade?

[Dark Riku]

But then again, scouts aren't part of the GK T1 roster, a roster that deals more dmg than the SM counterpart.
You only have to compare scout dps to ist ...

[saltychipmunk]

But then again, scouts aren't part of the GK T1 roster, a roster that deals more dmg than the SM counterpart.
You only have to compare scout dps to ist ...

This is a strange argument. essentially i can read this as "it is ok for a unit to be purposely bad and overpriced provided everything else is too good and over compensates for it being a bad investment.".

I dont see that as a reasonable argument. by all means if all the other gk units over perform, then there is no reason for the ist sarge to be that good. but if that is the case he should not have the cost of a unit that should perform well. that just leads me to using those other units and *not using the sarge... which is what usually happens right now unless you absolutely need a detector.

It is ugly. And it is also why i find people using the larger composition of the race as a crutch to base cost balance arguments on is also messy.

if the other sm units are not doing as well as gk units . then either the gk units need a nerf or the sm units need a buff. but money is money and if i spend 75 req 25 power on a sarge , i want 75 req 25 power worth of return or i will simply buy something else which ... i ... do.

using race composition to justify unit performance is one thing and is viable. using race composition to justify unit cost to performance ratios is not as it suggests a certain rigid dependency that might not always be true in practice.

like for this example, ist sarge is crap and overpriced because ops are currently op and strikes are the best t1 heavy infantry in the game. Well what if ops are nerfed? what if strikes for some reason lose their edge in the ranged war? how do you justify the ist sarge being a bad buy when the units you claim justify it are no longer powerful enough to do so? Your crutch is removed and now that unit is flat on their ass.

If something is not worth the money then that is all there is too it. and no unit composition magic will change that fact.

And that is exactly why we need to consider a grenade change very carefully as i suspect several of these upgrades are balanced with spiking or squad wiping potential being viable. remove one or both and i have strong doubts they will still be worth their current price tags.

[Dark Riku]

This is a strange argument. essentially i can read this as "...".

Don't intentionally choose to read it in the wrong way then?

[saltychipmunk]

But isnt that basically what you are saying...

But then again, scouts aren't part of the GK T1 roster, a roster >>>>that deals more dmg than the SM counterpart.<<<<
You only have to compare scout dps to ist ...

roster implies unit line ups , roster implies you are comparing more than just a unit to a unit. and you flat out say that roster is superior in ranged damage to the sm counterpart.

sounds to me like you are using damage between scouts and ist as well as sm in general vs gk to say that scouts deserve a more cost effective leader upgrade.

wasnt there a thread recently where a bunch of people were claiming that looking at scouts strictly by their damage potential is a bad idea anyway?

[Codex]

To be honest the thing I would be sad about losing isn't grenade spiking, it's the strength of the implied threat of a grenade moving forward cf my guide.

Before you'd have to be on your toes if someone was approaching with a grenade and you're entrenched in cover... But if he can't grenade spike you you don't really have to abandon cover until he throws it. I quite like that having the potential to point blank a grenade makes the implied threat of grenades stronger.

[saltychipmunk]

But that kind of makes sense though. Why would you jump out of cover for an explosive object that hasn't even been thrown yet? Ideally I would prefer if the grenades blew the cover up 100% of the time since it seems in that case cover denial is the bigger intended result of that example.

[lolzarz]

But that kind of makes sense though. Why would you jump out of cover for an explosive object that hasn't even been thrown yet? Ideally I would prefer if the grenades blew the cover up 100% of the time since it seems in that case cover denial is the bigger intended result of that example.

For the same reason you would leave cover and move backwards when you see the other guy holding a flamethrower.

[saltychipmunk]

Perhaps i did not word it properly, would you jump out of cover for a guy who has an unused grenade attached to their chest?
It is one thing to see a dude stop , arm a bomb and start to throw it. yeah then id run too. but if there are no indications that a bomb would be thrown.. then why would you give up good cover?

As for the flame thrower guy, would you give up your cover if he had his flame thrower slung around his back instead of in hand?

active threat , vs potential threat. if all it took to dislodge someone was to carry a grenade around, then no one would need to actually use the grenades....

[Black Relic]

To be honest the thing I would be sad about losing isn't grenade spiking, it's the strength of the implied threat of a grenade moving forward cf my guide.

Before you'd have to be on your toes if someone was approaching with a grenade and you're entrenched in cover... But if he can't grenade spike you you don't really have to abandon cover until he throws it. I quite like that having the potential to point blank a grenade makes the implied threat of grenades stronger.

The minimum cast range of the grenade of 3 (which i provided a screenshot of) wouldn't really harm the threat of an approaching grenade at all. Member who are closest to the target location will throw the grenade. So grenade spiking will still be a legitimate option and the threat of a approaching grenade not really harmed.

The only thing that is intended is to give a bit of safety to units that are already in melee combat without having to worry about losing a melee squad to a grenade that is dropped at their target's feet. Now this change doesn't mean melee squads are completely safe. Since some members will be outside of the minimum cast range the member will still be able to drop it at their feet. But instead of wiping the squad the melee squad suffers some bleed rather than a full wipe.

Although there will be cases when the squad is wiped but that means the player that threw the nade positioned it well and noticed the formation of the melee squad was tight at a specific area and threw it there. The skill cap goes up a bit but that is only when it is going to be used when the squad is already engaged.

[Cyris]

What Black Relic said. Min range increase won't remove play and counter play, it just changes it from being a point blank shot to something you must hit on an enemy as they close.

Again, IST have a working and valid test of this. Min range + Reduced fuse + Reduced damage. They end up being more proactive, still require timing to hit or dodge, wipe squads less (which I think is good) and still dislodge cover/setup teams. I think the damage could still stand to go up a bit and/or the cast time/throw speed speed up a bit, but those are balance nit-picking points (as is the overall value of the Sarge upgrade as Salty and Riku so politely got into).

[Crewfinity]

how would that work with DA's, since there's no designated leader to throw the grenades? would it be a bunch of different radii around each model? or just an irregularly shaped one around the whole squad?

on that matter, how does it work now if the squad is split up weirdly?
#eldarnoob

[Asmon]

It's always the closest member of the squad that throws the grenade, no matter how weirdly the squad formation is.