IG imbalances

Issues dealing with gameplay balance.
User avatar
HARRYY
Level 2
Posts: 141
Joined: Sat 25 Jan, 2014 3:17 pm

IG imbalances

Postby HARRYY » Fri 18 Mar, 2016 10:29 am

played some of the better players meanwhile and I really have had a hard time. I must say , I am purely disappointed with the state of IG.

everything about IG feels like a light-version, big power-hungry army of glascannons... even ogryns are a joke now.
One of the overall provblems with IG is that they have too many T1.5 units. They arre useful, but I cannot affort more than 1 or 2 or I get defeated due to being outteched.


Most opponents go mass suppression against IG (which I am not able to counter without spending lots of power). IG iss sooo DEPENDANT on syngergies all the time....



---- update incoming ----




I was thinking of various Options to improve IG-Options. This is just a collection of IDEAS to solve power-hungry IG-play and soften/equalize some imbalances of the big picture

Inquisitor
-crippling volley range from 30 to 35 (easier to apply) but duration from 6 to 4 seconds
-Holy Pyre duration from 30 to 20 seconds, remove detection
-Execrurators from 140/20 to 130/30
Lord Commisar
-inspire courage / executions of all kind: no-retreat duration cut from 10 seconds to 6 seconds.
Artillery Spotters
- entering stealthed-state if you don’t move them (as catachans) or at least they reinforce faster (from 5 seconds to 2 seconds per model)
-adding slight HP with their T2/T3 upgrade
-consider adding a grenade-launcher (per upgrade?) for the remaining two members. Aim is to make them useful, inflict some little splash damage when you can affort to reveal them
Guardsmen
-Plasma-Gun from 25 to 20 power
Sentinel
- additional T2 armor-upgrade for plus 100 HP (for adequate price)
- considering “extra-armor” from vanilla being re-introduced.
Banewolf
-Consider making him buildable for any Commander, making it possible to react.
-Consider changing damage-type for initial appearance, then revert to current state per upgrade (other variant)
Stormtroopers
-You can re-equip KITS for 100/15 (or for adequate price)
Ogryns
-power cost from 90 to 60 power (tweak reinforcement-costs)
-upkeep from 12.75 to 10
- “doing weapon knockback in radius 6 every 5 seconds” tweaked from every 5 seconds to 3 seconds to see actually happen at times (other variant)

Chimera
-limit chimera to 1
-power cost from 60 to 50
-Mobile base power cost from 25 to 20
-upkeep from 25.5 to 22
bunker
-if possible, decrease general SIZE of it.
Last edited by HARRYY on Sun 03 Apr, 2016 10:18 am, edited 8 times in total.
User avatar
Sturnn
Level 2
Posts: 185
Joined: Sun 08 Feb, 2015 1:06 pm

Re: IG imbalances

Postby Sturnn » Fri 18 Mar, 2016 10:49 am

HARRYY wrote: But I found out that since IG is extremely struggling against suppression (and people use it for their advantage) -> artillryspotters have a decent upkeep (like 9). Big problem: they are T1.5 unit and cost power.


Suppresion Teams are also T 1.5 squads and also cost power. To be honest, with spotters and catachans and LC especially IG counters setup teams pretty nice.

SM.... well.... beacon, offenmsively use.... must be more expensive, or dropped in a certain radius to the BASE.


I guess you are talking about TM but this is only 1 of 3 matchups which you face vs SM. Overall becon also cost a lot in T1...


I struggle very hard against like every race and I've played a lot of competent players (top20 very often); some even stated IG is in a bad spot in 1v1.
This gives me at least hope! so yeha, lets talk about hope! :D I hope IG gets some love in the next patch.. something is truly wrong here. I'd have a closer look at some power-costs in T1, since IG is heavily dependant on T1.5 units in tier 1 to stand firm.


Why you dont simply ask guyz to analize your gameplay and suggest sth what you can improve in your peformance? You started topic from point like IG was mastered by you, your gameplay is flawless and its only race fault that you are losing against other other race. Not sure if that is the right way...
User avatar
HARRYY
Level 2
Posts: 141
Joined: Sat 25 Jan, 2014 3:17 pm

Re: IG imbalances

Postby HARRYY » Fri 18 Mar, 2016 11:47 am

Sturnn wrote:Suppresion Teams are also T 1.5 squads and also cost power. To be honest, with spotters and catachans and LC especially IG counters setup teams pretty nice.

yes, with spotters and catas you counter nicely. but then lose the game (power-wise). and you cannot affort gear, flamer, nor sentinel stomp upgrade. And Generators can be dropped too late as well with such Initial investments.

Sturnn wrote:I guess you are talking about TM but this is only 1 of 3 matchups which you face vs SM. Overall becon also cost a lot in T1...
sorry, I meant the drop-pod. it has huge Impact for low cost.

Sturnn wrote:Why you dont simply ask guyz to analize your gameplay and suggest sth what you can improve in your peformance? You started topic from point like IG was mastered by you, your gameplay is flawless and its only race fault that you are losing against other other race. Not sure if that is the right way...
I perform well enough to stay top 30. I havent mastered IG, I see my mistakes in my play. As said, some even stated IG under-performing. So I take it as a go for making a thread, trying to discuss it.
Last edited by HARRYY on Fri 18 Mar, 2016 2:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Helios
Level 3
Posts: 220
Joined: Mon 18 Feb, 2013 1:37 am

Re: IG imbalances

Postby Helios » Fri 18 Mar, 2016 11:57 am

Sturnn wrote:To be honest, with spotters and catachans and LC especially IG counters setup teams pretty nice.

Is that a joke? Out of all the IG commanders Commissar has the HARDEST time fighting off multiple setups. If you're fighting warlock for example, he's MUCH faster, has a global to give ALL his units extra mobility as well, and has two Aoe abilities that used in tandem pretty much force off a squad from the fight. Catas and Spotters are both more expensive on the req side than shurikens are and the same power and they're not a straight up easy counter like a jump squad is either. Not to mention if you're foregoing a HWT you MUST get a sentinel and you MUST get stomp cause of that bouncy little douch-lock charging in from a mile away. So 30x2 + 25 versus 30x2 + 15 you have ten less power but for the cost difference the eldar get much better coverage of an area.
User avatar
The_Convertant
Level 1
Posts: 34
Joined: Sat 27 Feb, 2016 9:38 am

Re: IG imbalances

Postby The_Convertant » Fri 18 Mar, 2016 11:58 am

The biggest problem of imperial guards is that they are imperial guards. Everyone being fragile when no having tecnomagic like the eldars, but it's not unplayable. Catachan and sent are still good. They we're just toned down to normal. Rebuffing them to the Godzilla vanilla version isn't helping anything as all.

Maybe if they give the sentinel the bullshit stomp for 20 power... Seeing many t1 melee squadd are so strong now, but it's just my excuse for being bad.

For HWTs, I see you having troubles microing them in a 1v1 match. You are definitely not quite used to them now since they were bugged and not usable in retail. I suggest you to try some more.
I am the Convertant, one of the five remaining active members in Taiwan BAHA DOW2 community
saltychipmunk
Level 4
Posts: 787
Joined: Thu 01 Aug, 2013 3:22 pm

Re: IG imbalances

Postby saltychipmunk » Fri 18 Mar, 2016 12:08 pm

ig hwt are stupidly vulnerable to area of effect. they technically take 33% more aoe damage over any other set up team before damage type is factored in. despite not really having a particularly amazing hp pool or armor type.


cats are a soft counter to setups as their main purpose is to give ig some semblance of counter initiation against melee.

spotters should technically be the setup hard counter but they are rather unwieldy to use since nearly all of their cost is in their abilities. their hp, ranged damage , melee damage and over all field presence outside of their moderately long cool down abilities is pretty terrible .

makes both units really hard to use. i wouldn’t mind if their ranged dps at-least got over 30 pierce damage so that they are at-least some what useful in a firefight between abilities
User avatar
Soberson
Level 2
Posts: 81
Joined: Tue 23 Feb, 2016 10:18 am

Re: IG imbalances

Postby Soberson » Fri 18 Mar, 2016 12:24 pm

While we are on matter of Spotters

First and foremost: why in the WORLD does reinforcing Spotters cost nearly as much as Kasrkin - 47req/5pow and 43/6 respectively. You're paying 280/30 for a squad that cannot really fight in open because of dismal damage (6.18 piecing per, normal range of 38) AND because you are afraid to drop a model that admittedly has 200hp per but gets screwed by AoE anyway. I am not even saying anything about their atrocious sight range that also makes no sense.

On HWT: I guess I am a newbie alright but can someone explain how having a SQUISHY suppression squad helps to hold the line? HWT melts from nades, HWT melts from bolters, HWT melts from flamers, HWT MELTS. With that said I do appreciate the possibility to drop 28req/4pow down the drain by executing HWT member.

The only thing that works most of the time currently is Cats.
#IGisFINE
Guy gamer.
Helios
Level 3
Posts: 220
Joined: Mon 18 Feb, 2013 1:37 am

Re: IG imbalances

Postby Helios » Fri 18 Mar, 2016 12:30 pm

I've always found it odd that for the next-to-nothing combat value of spotters you'd think they'd be allowed to use their abilities from a garrison. I mean they're "spotters" their job is to literally look at things and then say "shoot here". Why can't they do this from inside a building???
DandyFrontline
Level 3
Posts: 387
Joined: Fri 31 Jan, 2014 12:04 am

Re: IG imbalances

Postby DandyFrontline » Fri 18 Mar, 2016 12:38 pm

Helios wrote:I've always found it odd that for the next-to-nothing combat value of spotters you'd think they'd be allowed to use their abilities from a garrison. I mean they're "spotters" their job is to literally look at things and then say "shoot here". Why can't they do this from inside a building???


Bad connection ;d
User avatar
The_Convertant
Level 1
Posts: 34
Joined: Sat 27 Feb, 2016 9:38 am

Re: IG imbalances

Postby The_Convertant » Fri 18 Mar, 2016 1:07 pm

Stop right there or I call the police.



Back to the topic, I believe the imperial gurads have no direct counter to turrents too. Everytime my opponent PC or Tech dropped down a HB turrent I felt I had to abandon the push and wait for Spotters or go fast t2. Is there a better way?
I am the Convertant, one of the five remaining active members in Taiwan BAHA DOW2 community
User avatar
HARRYY
Level 2
Posts: 141
Joined: Sat 25 Jan, 2014 3:17 pm

Re: IG imbalances

Postby HARRYY » Fri 18 Mar, 2016 1:43 pm

Tarre wrote:While we are on matter of Spotters

First and foremost: why in the WORLD does reinforcing Spotters cost nearly as much as Kasrkin - 47req/5pow and 43/6 respectively. You're paying 280/30 for a squad that cannot really fight in open because of dismal damage (6.18 piecing per, normal range of 38) AND because you are afraid to drop a model that admittedly has 200hp per but gets screwed by AoE anyway. I am not even saying anything about their atrocious sight range that also makes no sense.

yep. this is really a fucking pain. especially the power cost after the Initial power cost.


the Problem with Catas is: after 1 Barrage use, they cannot come Close enough after and get supressed from the same Setup again. Not talking about enemies having 2 setup teams. Then everything becomes even more laughable. Then you say, use Barage in conjunction with Stomp. 2nd Setup Team, or rest of army can deal with 1sent pushing easily as it Comes straight Forward.
Sturnn wrote:Mate, I will find you 20 people that will say for example that SM is underperforming. Does it change anything?

OFC you would. SM is played by a huge ammount of Players.

Sturnn wrote:
Helios wrote:"I don't have a response so I'll just reply with a generic, vague comment that addresses no points"

Got it.


So I assume that you have replays to prove your point? Should we also create new topics about OP Chaos, Orks and Eldar as those races are top 5 in ladder at this moment?

Orks always been a joke. So People are more used to it , hahaha.

Helios wrote:I've always found it odd that for the next-to-nothing combat value of spotters you'd think they'd be allowed to use their abilities from a garrison. I mean they're "spotters" their job is to literally look at things and then say "shoot here". Why can't they do this from inside a building???

This would be a nice Feature, but definately NOT a solution to they Problem. Good Point tho!



---- Updated first post with suggestions ----
Last edited by HARRYY on Fri 18 Mar, 2016 2:15 pm, edited 8 times in total.
Deflaktor
Level 2
Posts: 121
Joined: Mon 20 Jul, 2015 7:03 pm

Re: IG imbalances

Postby Deflaktor » Fri 18 Mar, 2016 1:46 pm

The_Convertant wrote:Back to the topic, I believe the imperial gurads have no direct counter to turrents too. Everytime my opponent PC or Tech dropped down a HB turrent I felt I had to abandon the push and wait for Spotters or go fast t2. Is there a better way?


Many races struggle against HB turrets. IMHO it is just the HB turret being bullshit, It's my least favorite mechanic in the game.
DandyFrontline
Level 3
Posts: 387
Joined: Fri 31 Jan, 2014 12:04 am

Re: IG imbalances

Postby DandyFrontline » Fri 18 Mar, 2016 1:51 pm

Every faction should have some weak sides - for IG it's AOE stuff and suppression. For me, best way to counter weapon teams is build one of your and go to t2. At t2 autocanon + refractor field punish enemy HWTs hard. Also, u can be aggressive and build spotters. Use mortar shell a little bit behind the enemy HWT so it will be pushed forward, then attack with LC (with power swords lead by example ability he is really fast) and push with sentinel with stomp. If the enemy got 2 HWT things become worse, so the best way is to keep ground with your HWT and go fast for t2 and get AC, or build additional to your HWT some spotters (same power investment as 2 enemies HWTs).
DandyFrontline
Level 3
Posts: 387
Joined: Fri 31 Jan, 2014 12:04 am

Re: IG imbalances

Postby DandyFrontline » Fri 18 Mar, 2016 2:21 pm

Helios wrote:
Sturnn wrote:
Helios wrote:Ok let me know when they post and give reasoning as to why like we're doing. Thanks.


Obviously you have some problems with understanding why I am trying to tell you so I will stop doing so. Cheers Mate.

"I couldn't deliver on what I said so I'll try and save face pretending to know what I'm talking about."

Glad we had this conversation, thanks for contributing.
DandyFrontline wrote: For me, best way to counter weapon teams is build one of your and go to t2.

By then there will be transports or walkers out to deal with. You plan on using an Autocannon on those AND setups? And why would you use an Autocannon when you have Manticores at t2 which are much safer? That makes no sense.


Well, hell yea, Autocanon wreck everything, sometimes u can get even second one. Just dont forget to use execution on them. Vehicles go down in seconds, while walkers get heavy damage. Also u can get mobile AV for 25 energy - Sentinel missile launcher. And yea, enemy HWTs will have hard times vs AC's. I mean, they just cant do stuff against it. And Mantis is not the best energy investment in my opinion.
Tex
Level 4
Posts: 909
Joined: Sat 27 Jul, 2013 9:33 pm
Location: Canada

Re: IG imbalances

Postby Tex » Fri 18 Mar, 2016 2:25 pm

ooookkkkkk.... this thread looks pretty dicey, but I'm going to dip my toes into the water a bit.

I have felt as well that IG are struggling a touch too, but I have also found that they have absolutely massive payoffs.

I'll just add my list of thoughts to this thread:

On the bad side:
-GM have received a sufficient nerf that I think sent stomp should be buffed slightly, a 5 power cost decrease should be suitable.
-IG HWT is ultra vulnerable to aoe in T1, the increase in squad members is a buff to LC, but a nerf to Inq and LG.
-Catachans are a not a strong transitional purchase. They become fairly obsolete for larger engagements at about T2.25. Increasing the strength of their melta gun would probably go a long way in making them more T2 viable
-Spotters flat out cost too much. Simple.
-T2 purchases will make or break the game every time. You have very little flexibility in your T2 purchases other than to buy stormtroopers and leave them vanilla.
-Sentinel rockets don't hit their target when elevation is at work. This is ultra frustrating and hard to account for on some maps.

On the good side:
-With proper micro, the combos between wargear and units are numerous and ridiculously strong!
-mobile base is a very nice tool
-HWT sargent is god mode essentially
-HWT autocannon...
-HWT las cannon is best in the game
-med bunkers are SUPER DUPER strong. The healing you get off the aura + reinforce is almost unbreakable, (before big AOE stuff)if you can squeeze one out right after you tech to T2 you will get a huge VP lead
-Catachan smoke grenade is a must use ability in large engagements, T1.5 to T2.5
-AKST's are soooooooooooooooooo good.
-multi las turrets provide fantastic damage output and resource recovery

And then obviously IG T3 is pretty awesome, but T3 isn't something I really focus on.

So basically, my thoughts state that for IG, there are few early game wins, but rather, a big push outward to grab map, a period of the game where you spend microing your sentinel and GM's like crazy to frustrate your opponents advances, and then you come to T2 where the world is literally your oyster, but you will lose outright if you spend your power on just 1 wrong thing.

I think harry, and others, that in T1 you just need to resign yourself to the fact that YOU WILL LOSE MAP CONTROL, SO DONT OVER INVEST TRYING TO COUNTER SETUP TEAMS WITH T1.5 STUFF. Frustrate it, shoot at it, and slowly move backwards. Make them pay for every inch of ground they take.
User avatar
Sturnn
Level 2
Posts: 185
Joined: Sun 08 Feb, 2015 1:06 pm

Re: IG imbalances

Postby Sturnn » Fri 18 Mar, 2016 2:30 pm

I think that IG commanders have plenty of ways to counter set up team, not only becasue of spotters and catachans. Inq was infiltration, LC has flare and LG has granate launcher which outranges set up and has pretty nice range. Still ,with spotter, properly used u can disrupt 2 squads with their 2 skills. Maps are quite big, there is always some way to outflank.

EDIT: Unfortunately I didn't have enough posts to complete my deleting song, but an impressive effort. Play nice. - Atlas
User avatar
HARRYY
Level 2
Posts: 141
Joined: Sat 25 Jan, 2014 3:17 pm

Re: IG imbalances

Postby HARRYY » Fri 18 Mar, 2016 2:39 pm

ok tex,
it might be enough you admit artillery spotters Need a Change. For which this Topic is mainly intended about.
the cats overall utility & performence is quite borderline (strong weakness/benefits)... for me it's ok as they are now. btw. smoke nade force demoman (20power! As you talked about dicey T2 power-investments). you're right on ECO and T2 Investments. Its a butt-hurt. It feels like I make a lot of important decisions, while the opponent can just toy around and stilll Keep on height (for example, doesnt matter what chaos does T2. all is butthurt)


---- Gerneally I've to say INQ is still freaking imbalanced with her gears (snares, AOE). She Needs nerfs on wargear-costs,while the army itself should receive SENSITIVE buffs ---
Thibix Magnus
Level 2
Posts: 118
Joined: Fri 20 Mar, 2015 7:10 pm

Re: IG imbalances

Postby Thibix Magnus » Fri 18 Mar, 2016 4:12 pm

Without being top-anything player and certainly not better than anyone in this thread... focusing on LC, execution should be an important part of the discussion. A LC who knows when to inspire courage has a crazy high skill ceiling, as the number of possible game situations increases a lot. That's why I'm not sure you want catas to have less models... with that + smoke there is a lot of tricks they can do out in addition to disruption. I would be against balancing the game for top5 players skill only (*eldar hidden agenda detected*) but still, there is maybe more to explore against suppression than just spotters (better for team games some would say) and cata ol' reliable.
User avatar
Psycho
Level 3
Posts: 367
Joined: Thu 24 Dec, 2015 3:08 am

Re: IG imbalances

Postby Psycho » Fri 18 Mar, 2016 5:26 pm

My main gripe with IG is that they're insanely weak to AoE that pretty much anyone can get, along with their high model count conflicting with the squad AI that refuses to put all of them in cover, contrary to squads like space marines that can all get behind something without issue. When both of those issues are not present, they shine, and can out-attrition pretty much anyone.

Thing is, in same situations and costs, there are many more reasons to get low model high hp squads over high model low hp squads than against due to the aforementioned cover issues, and the massive amount of AoE type damage over single-target damage abilities and attacks that punish low models over high models, IE a hypothetical sniper shot with infinite damage will cripple a TSM squad while barely tickling a fully ugpraded GM squad.

I wouldn't call this outright imbalance, more like unforeseen consequences of the engine itself and not many single-target abilities and weapons that do far better against low model high hp (apart from rangers, vindicare, and scout snipers, and others I might have forgotten). It feels as if AoE damage is oversaturated in the game, though that's 99% my bias due to maining IG talking. I still remember a plague champion cloud global killing half my army because of a cramped map forcing my retreating units through a corridor the plague champion was aware of, and that ability doing full damage to retreating units too.

Another unforeseen consequence of the engine is that if you have a GM squad with sergeant and commissar next to a chimera or medibunker, and you reinforce guardsmen faster than they're killed, you're usually paying far more than in theory. Say your guardsmen get one model killed and you reinforce it before the next model gets killed, that's 17 requisition for that single reinforced model while the other two 'bonus' guardsmen models are wasted due to full squad. I don't know what could be done about that, to be truthful.

obligatory rambling about guardsmen deployable cover and eldar deployable shield
Last edited by Psycho on Sat 19 Mar, 2016 3:03 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Forestradio
Level 5
Posts: 1157
Joined: Sun 13 Oct, 2013 5:09 pm

Re: IG imbalances

Postby Forestradio » Fri 18 Mar, 2016 5:32 pm

Thibix Magnus wrote:I would be against balancing the game for top5 players skill only
Why would that be exactly?
If a game wants to be competitive it means balancing around the highest level of play pure and simple, that does not mean that you only take the top 5 or 10 or 50 players seriously or anything, or that higher level players are automatically correct when disagreeing with someone who is not as good, or that you should just take the races in the top ten and nerf them, what it does mean is that high level play is where balance is determined, are we going to call grenade abilities op because low-skill players don't dodge them? ofc not... The problem is not a balance one, it lies somewhere between the player's keyboard and his chair.

If you want to get detailed feedback on say... the lord general vs apothecary matchup, you would consult Toilailee and Dark Riku, and their opinions would probably take precedence over two random lord general/apo players.

This is not me supporting elitism or inner circle or super secret illuminati balance discussions that force Caeltos into turning elite into a chaos/nid/sm/ig/om/eldar/ork mod, it's the simply the way it works.

And I don't want the balance of this mod to starting excusing shitty play, and that includes my own shitty play.
User avatar
HARRYY
Level 2
Posts: 141
Joined: Sat 25 Jan, 2014 3:17 pm

Re: IG imbalances

Postby HARRYY » Fri 18 Mar, 2016 7:02 pm

Tex wrote:-T2 purchases will make or break the game every time. You have very little flexibility in your T2 purchases other than to buy stormtroopers and leave them vanilla.
-Sentinel rockets don't hit their target when elevation is at work. This is ultra frustrating and hard to account for on some maps.

oh, yeah... T2 is actually the same butt-hurt as T1. challenging choices.
And hell, the sentinel rockets...sometimes even cant hit anything a alll with his rockets. or using attack ground on a squad capinng behind a VP. sometimes the rockets hit the VP-construction and thats all :D what if they're tweaked to grenade type damage?

or transiton to a autocannon with shorter range than the HWT-ones?
User avatar
Dark Riku
Level 5
Posts: 3082
Joined: Sun 03 Feb, 2013 10:48 pm
Location: Belgium

Re: IG imbalances

Postby Dark Riku » Fri 18 Mar, 2016 10:29 pm

@Harry

On suppression teams <--> IG:
Spotters are well worth their cost. Use their mortar shell slightly behind the enemy setupteam to fling them into your firing line. They will have to retreat.
The 2nd suppression team can be dealt with, with the smoke shell afterwards.
- I actually prefer to run around with 2 models on these guys, does not hurt their performance and lowers your upkeep.
A lone Catachan squad can deal with 1 lone supression team: old unreliable, move in, shotgunblast, tie up in melee.
Catachans with their smoke nade can also be used to hold your ground against a suppression team.
Versus 2 setupteams you can also always flank and or attack from multiple sides or use hero upgrades: GL LG, infiltrating INQ, etc.
Remember that setupteam aren't the greatest to push with either, so once you are already set up in a defensive position, setupteams won't help as much.

The sentinel does not need the stomp upgrade. The upgrade is their to deal with melee. Any race has to spend power for that.
The sentinel does also detect in a smaller radius (15 instead of 30).

HARRYY wrote:BTW: the IG HWT performs like shit T1. I have a closer look what it is... it gets suppressed REALLY fast from other supression teams when they have a shootout, even if the IG HWT was the first one which was setup :D like... really. wtf? (courage too low?) - HP often is also a problem, they melt like flies.....
Did you check the cover? Because that affects courage damage. Also Chaos havocs still suppress faster than other setupteams.
The HWT has more HP already with the extra man change. Great buff to the LC's execute. Less useful if they are all bunched up versus AoE.

Spotters should definitely not cost 0 power. They can counter 2 supressionteams for cheaper already...
Spotters should be able to use their abilities from garrisons (not transports :p), I totally agree on that one.



Sorcerer wrote:Another unforeseen consequence of the engine is that if you have a GM squad with sergeant and commissar next to a chimera or medibunker, and you reinforce guardsmen faster than they're killed, you're usually paying far more than in theory. Say your guardsmen get one model killed and you reinforce it before the next model gets killed, that's 17 requisition for that single reinforced model while the other two 'bonus' guardsmen models are wasted due to full squad. I don't know what could be done about that, to be truthful.
Don't use auto-reinforce and micro :)
I wouldn't mind it if they could make made it so that if you reinforce 2 models you pay 12req and 1 model you pay 6req. (It's 18req to reinforce btw.)
Edit: those number would be with 2 leader upgrades, as with 1 it's different.
Last edited by Dark Riku on Fri 18 Mar, 2016 11:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Aetherion
Level 2
Posts: 105
Joined: Tue 12 May, 2015 6:53 pm

Re: IG imbalances

Postby Aetherion » Fri 18 Mar, 2016 11:13 pm

Dark Riku wrote:

Sorcerer wrote:Another unforeseen consequence of the engine is that if you have a GM squad with sergeant and commissar next to a chimera or medibunker, and you reinforce guardsmen faster than they're killed, you're usually paying far more than in theory. Say your guardsmen get one model killed and you reinforce it before the next model gets killed, that's 17 requisition for that single reinforced model while the other two 'bonus' guardsmen models are wasted due to full squad. I don't know what could be done about that, to be truthful.
Don't use auto-reinforce and micro :)
I wouldn't mind it if they could make made it so that if you reinforce 2 models you pay 12req and 1 model you pay 6req. (It's 18req to reinforce btw.)



Would it be better to reduce the reinforce cost of guardsmen rather than this quirky 2 for 1 deal? Ofc it should'nt be reduced by half/a third with the sarge and commissar respectively, but with some math hammer, isn't it possible to readjust the reinforce cost to reflect the same situation as it is now, just with greater reliablity?
CREED FOR THE PLAN GOD
ELDRAD FOR THE DICK THRONE
just as planned
User avatar
Dark Riku
Level 5
Posts: 3082
Joined: Sun 03 Feb, 2013 10:48 pm
Location: Belgium

Re: IG imbalances

Postby Dark Riku » Fri 18 Mar, 2016 11:48 pm

I guess that would be possible? Would mean their reinforce time would also need to go down or they would reinforce slower.
With 1 leader to 1,2 secs per model and with 2 leaders to 0.8 secs per model.
With 1 leader it should cost 9 req per model and with 2 it should be 6 req per model.

Would be a buff to them and might be a pretty big deal I think?
You won't have that 2.4 sec window to wipe them with massive damage near a reinforce point any more.
And the IG Eco would improve ever so slightly due to the no loss on, lets call it, "over reinforcing."
User avatar
Oddnerd
Level 4
Posts: 727
Joined: Mon 27 Oct, 2014 1:50 am

Re: IG imbalances

Postby Oddnerd » Sat 19 Mar, 2016 1:05 am

Aetherion wrote:Would it be better to reduce the reinforce cost of guardsmen rather than this quirky 2 for 1 deal? Ofc it should'nt be reduced by half/a third with the sarge and commissar respectively, but with some math hammer, isn't it possible to readjust the reinforce cost to reflect the same situation as it is now, just with greater reliablity?


I think that would be a good idea, if it is within the ability of the mod team to do so.

I've always wondered how much I over-pay in an average game for GM models once I have my 1-2 squad leaders with their bonuses. I've had plenty of protracted firefights at a mobile base or med bunker where I probably over-pay quite a bit, given that GM reinforce is fast enough to finish before you lose 3 guys each time.
User avatar
Aetherion
Level 2
Posts: 105
Joined: Tue 12 May, 2015 6:53 pm

Re: IG imbalances

Postby Aetherion » Sat 19 Mar, 2016 2:13 am

Dark Riku wrote:I guess that would be possible? Would mean their reinforce time would also need to go down or they would reinforce slower.
With 1 leader to 1,2 secs per model and with 2 leaders to 0.8 secs per model.
With 1 leader it should cost 9 req per model and with 2 it should be 6 req per model.

Would be a buff to them and might be a pretty big deal I think?
You won't have that 2.4 sec window to wipe them with massive damage near a reinforce point any more.
And the IG Eco would improve ever so slightly due to the no loss on, lets call it, "over reinforcing."


I'm not too sure about the time, but I'm quite certain the costs should not be directly reduced to 9 and 6 respectively to take into account of the chances of over-reinforcing. The example I thought of is:
currently, with one leader, the probability of over-reinforcing once is 20% (by my estimates), so to reflect that, the cost of reinforcing one gm should be 1.2 X 9 = 11(ish) such that when added up across the long term, it balances out to remain around the values we currently have so will not be a buff to the IG eco. Any math experts out there able to comment whether this is true? And maybe work out the case for 3 models reinforce?
CREED FOR THE PLAN GOD
ELDRAD FOR THE DICK THRONE
just as planned
User avatar
Psycho
Level 3
Posts: 367
Joined: Thu 24 Dec, 2015 3:08 am

Re: IG imbalances

Postby Psycho » Sat 19 Mar, 2016 2:20 am

It should be doable if the scouts change reinforce cost through the sniper rifle upgrade. Having the reinforce cost lowered instead of increased through the upgrade should be within the engine's limitations.

Problem is I don't know how the reinforcement price change through upgrade formula works, so I can't even suggest anything. If it works by plainly adding/reducing a number, then to obtain the same result as the current method has, and assuming the sergeant is bought first, the sergeant would need to reduce reinforcement cost by 9 and the commissar by merely 3. On the other hand though it'd give far more weight to the sergeant as an upgrade rather than just adding three more models and an additional reinforced model (he even has less dps than a guardsman!), since the commissar's utility comes through its dps and retreat interruption.

If reinforccement time isn't changeable, it should be trading a buff for a nerf. Less efficient in combat with a reinforcement point next to you but easier on the economy, which is how I had imagined IG would be. Doesn't matter if you lose an engagement or become less efficient as long as the attrition game is in your favor and can return with reinforcements. Avoids the thing in DoW1 where two units fighting eachother can just eternally reinforce and the fight lasts until one side runs out of resources, since with this you can theoretically kill them faster than they're reinforced.

Aetherion wrote:I'm not too sure about the time, but I'm quite certain the costs should not be directly reduced to 9 and 6 respectively to take into account of the chances of over-reinforcing. The example I thought of is:
currently, with one leader, the probability of over-reinforcing once is 20% (by my estimates), so to reflect that, the cost of reinforcing one gm should be 1.2 X 9 = 11(ish) such that when added up across the long term, it balances out to remain around the values we currently have so will not be a buff to the IG eco. Any math experts out there able to comment whether this is true? And maybe work out the case for 3 models reinforce?


Wouldn't that just beat the point of the change? Too much effort on the mod team's part for too little effect, if any at all if the end result is aimed to be the same.
User avatar
Aetherion
Level 2
Posts: 105
Joined: Tue 12 May, 2015 6:53 pm

Re: IG imbalances

Postby Aetherion » Sat 19 Mar, 2016 2:39 am

Sorcerer wrote:
Aetherion wrote:I'm not too sure about the time, but I'm quite certain the costs should not be directly reduced to 9 and 6 respectively to take into account of the chances of over-reinforcing. The example I thought of is:
currently, with one leader, the probability of over-reinforcing once is 20% (by my estimates), so to reflect that, the cost of reinforcing one gm should be 1.2 X 9 = 11(ish) such that when added up across the long term, it balances out to remain around the values we currently have so will not be a buff to the IG eco. Any math experts out there able to comment whether this is true? And maybe work out the case for 3 models reinforce?


Wouldn't that just beat the point of the change? Too much effort on the mod team's part for too little effect, if any at all if the end result is aimed to be the same.


That is true. I thought there was a complaint that people feel like they are overpaying for guardsmen due to the times where they lose one model and pay 18 req, so I thought of this to standardize guardsmen with other units. Of course if the 3/2 for 1 mechanic is found to be a largely good thing for IG players, then I'm confused what the issue is (or if there is any) regarding guardsmen and IG economy. My apologies, i'm not an IG player.
CREED FOR THE PLAN GOD
ELDRAD FOR THE DICK THRONE
just as planned
User avatar
Psycho
Level 3
Posts: 367
Joined: Thu 24 Dec, 2015 3:08 am

Re: IG imbalances

Postby Psycho » Sat 19 Mar, 2016 2:52 am

Aetherion wrote:That is true. I thought there was a complaint that people feel like they are overpaying for guardsmen due to the times where they lose one model and pay 18 req, so I thought of this to standardize guardsmen with other units. Of course if the 3/2 for 1 mechanic is found to be a largely good thing for IG players, then I'm confused what the issue is (or if there is any) regarding guardsmen and IG economy. My apologies, i'm not an IG player.


Well that wouldn't be solving the issue being complained about if you're paying more per guardsmen to compensate for not overbuying. It might even be an outright nerf against high skill IG since you're removing their ability to micro the squads and deaths to prevent overbuying, as Dark Riku said.
Tex
Level 4
Posts: 909
Joined: Sat 27 Jul, 2013 9:33 pm
Location: Canada

Re: IG imbalances

Postby Tex » Sat 19 Mar, 2016 2:08 pm

I prefer to be rewarded for manually reinforcing thank you very much.

Return to “Balance Discussion”



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 41 guests