IG imbalances

[Thibix Magnus]

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.

the internet took my first answer -.-

sorter version... I mostly agree, and my post was mainly about highlighting that the LC has other tools available to deal with multi suppression through inspire courage, but it does require more experience to time it. But hey I did drop that fateful sentence (should have kept it for a specific post), so let's derail the thread

So ya, this is a question that has been lurking for a while for me, if a faction demands more micro and skill to match others, does it mean that, with infinite amounts of concentration or zero mental processing time, said factions would win more often? Or should all factions be balanced around the hypothesis that micro and decision making processes is not a factor in the MU? If that is a definition of competitive (and if competitive is really the goal) then it means micro intensive factions are at a disadvantage until you are that top player ? That might well be a legitimate approach, but I also read Caeltos musing about expanding the playability beyond the top 1% or something like that, and some changes do aknowledge the micro gap (the skill required to get to similar results). Typically when I get stomped by 3 Ops squads, 2.4 style, I start thinking: "well, in theory Ops could be very vulnerable to kinetic pulse into nade as they have to get close, so they might be balanced, but I'm terribly bad at this sort of combos, so I'm stuck". Until other people call them OP

That was a bunch of far fetched exaggerations to illustrate my thoughts, which might well be utterly flawed too. So yep, I'm fully in favour of a very challenging game, I don't ask it to be easier, and would not question the experience of, well, experienced players, I just wonder what sort of impacts the level of expectations have on balance tweaks. But the "balanced skill interval" is maybe wide enough already, thus my precautionary "not only" in the first place

[HARRYY]

The LC problem with suppression acually only persists in T1. And you can maybe use flare once.

I need to check how catas Barrage was tweaked, but it's definately for worse


Nice Post thibix!:>

[Forestradio]

if a faction demands more micro and skill to match others, does it mean that, with infinite amounts of concentration or zero mental processing time, said factions would win more often?

Depends on what you mean by skill, what kind of skill are we discussing? Pure micro? Map awareness? Knowledge of timing windows in certain matchups? Managing economy and map control? Global ability use? Buying the correct units in the right situation (oh wait some factions don't even have to do this, my bad)?

All of those are involved, just saying that a faction demands more micro and skill doesn't really cut it, all of them have their strengths and weaknesses, you might need a higher apm to play some heroes but other heroes might require much more knowledge about how when/how their wargear needs to be purchased and used.

Or should all factions be balanced around the hypothesis that micro and decision making processes is not a factor in the MU? If that is a definition of competitive (and if competitive is really the goal) then it means micro intensive factions are at a disadvantage until you are that top player ?

Factions should be balanced around high level play where players know how to utilize and manage all the stuff I mentioned above, plain and simple, balance can be adjusted for lower level play as long as it doesn't fuck up what happens at a higher level.

Typically when I get stomped by 3 Ops squads, 2.4 style, I start thinking: "well, in theory Ops could be very vulnerable to kinetic pulse into nade as they have to get close, so they might be balanced, but I'm terribly bad at this sort of combos, so I'm stuck". Until other people call them OP

But that was just a case of complete and utter bullshit, everyone who had a decent knowledge of the game could see that 2.4.2 operatives were completely and utterly broken across a bunch of matchups, same with most new units, I'm sure that plenty of people still remember when hormas/termas had warrior squad leaders that gave them hard AV? Or the original doom of malantai that cost like 400/50, could level to four, had an energy shield, and all its AoE powers did double their current damage? Or the original vindicare which snared passively on AV shots, did more damage, had enough sight range to spot for itself, and could swap between AV and AI rounds for a sniper shot every ~3 s?

That was a bunch of far fetched exaggerations to illustrate my thoughts, which might well be utterly flawed too. So yep, I'm fully in favour of a very challenging game, I don't ask it to be easier, and would not question the experience of, well, experienced players, I just wonder what sort of impacts the level of expectations have on balance tweaks. But the "balanced skill interval" is maybe wide enough already, thus my precautionary "not only" in the first place

If anything the game is not current challenging enough when it comes to unit purchases, too many units fulfill too many roles in a game of hard counters which promotes cookie-cutter play, but that's a topic for another time and not everyone agrees on that ofc

Also, talking about "balanced skill interval" well plain and simple if the game is balanced at the high level then there should be a trickle down effect through all skill levels, not to mention that any imbas on a lower level can be overcome simply by playing a bit better, but when you have players like Tex vs Holyhammer or Noisy vs Dark Riku, well they aren't perfect but there is not much room for improvement, so the imbalances will have a much bigger impact on their games.

edit: sorry for the off-topic if a mod wants they can make this into a new thread or send it to the shadow realm

[Soberson]

Okay.

Is Spotters reinforce cost going to get lowered?

[HARRYY]

Okay.

Is Spotters reinforce cost going to get lowered?

this would be great.

But I'd say they need even more. another initial cost maybe (280 req/0 power). For example they get the mortar for 10 power, and smoke for 10 power as well.
The reinforce cost would be only req then. Another "tweak" possibilty would be to increase their model count by 1 and accordingly their HP/DPS.
Well actually a lot is imaginable, but the power cost must shrink under the bottom line.

Still, to make IG balanced, INQ must be softenend in performence, especially T1.. xbow is extreme, also holy pyre is such a doominator. execrurators are incredible for cost and performance.

[Dark Riku]

Spotters can already counter 2 setupteams if played right. They should at least cost 30 power. A power cost in their reinforce is fine. These guys should not lose models in the first place and if they do, you probably want to keep them running around with max 2 models any way.

[Soberson]

Spotters can already counter 2 setupteams if played right. They should at least cost 30 power. A power cost in their reinforce is fine. These guys should not lose models in the first place and if they do, you probably want to keep them running around with max 2 models any way.

I am still learning the game, mind providing any replays or videos of Spotters countering 2 setupteams in practice, not in theory? That would really help

[HARRYY]

Spotters can already counter 2 setupteams if played right. They should at least cost 30 power. A power cost in their reinforce is fine. These guys should not lose models in the first place and if they do, you probably want to keep them running around with max 2 models any way.

"countered" is definately the wrong term here.

If anything, you can use 1x KB for Profit,.. but stilll, it can resetup with Support (and Support is mostly natural). Smoke only "disables" the setup Team for 8 or 10 seconds, then you're on cooldown. smoke "counters" temporarily with this...

Riku, Play some IG vs. top 20 Players , im curious to witness proper LC or LG-Play. with INQ its easy-mode

[Mindmaker]

I'm so pissed off at IG turrets. In that 3v3 maps with those narrow lanes whatever it's called you're basically forced to sit on your ass for half the tier until you get an answer to it, since you can't walk around.

[_4ut_]

Good discussion. I sit down to read. But there is a question.

ig_guardsmen_leader_sword
melee damage
4 damage per hit
4 damage per second

This is a joke?

[Helios]

Good discussion. I sit down to read. But there is a question.

ig_guardsmen_leader_sword
melee damage
4 damage per hit
4 damage per second

This is a joke?

Yeah it's kinda lame that even when one guy has a chainsword and a 3 man advantage, they can't outmelee Dire Avengers without an exarch.

[_4ut_]

Yeah it's kinda lame that even when one guy has a chainsword and a 3 man advantage, they can't outmelee Dire Avengers without an exarch.

Chainsword with 4 damage? Dire Avenger fists with 8! WTF2

[Caeltos]

It has to do with the upgrade cost and what he offers as a result. If his melee damage was upped to make them more on-par with Dire Avengers in the early-game, we would have abit of a problem on our hands. The Sergeant stats are more of a bonus, considering most of the cost is meant to reflect the guardsmen model additions, and reinforce mechanics.

[Atlas]

Honestly, just change the Spotters from a squad into a Master of Ordnance subcommander and that would just get rid of the whole upkeep/reinf cost discussion. Problem solved

[Toilailee]

Yeah it's kinda lame that even when one guy has a chainsword and a 3 man advantage, they can't outmelee Dire Avengers without an exarch.

Chainsword with 4 damage? Dire Avenger fists with 8! WTF2

I've been cool with that since retri beta.

[Cyris]

Honestly, just change the Spotters from a squad into a Master of Ordnance subcommander and that would just get rid of the whole upkeep/reinf cost discussion. Problem solved

That would actually be really cool. As is, you optimally want to have only 2 Spotter models (or 1 if you feeling confident) a lot like setup teams, but even moreso considering Spotters long ability range. A T1 subcommander is also very interesting and fun on orks. I really like this idea.

[Oddnerd]

Good discussion. I sit down to read. But there is a question.

ig_guardsmen_leader_sword
melee damage
4 damage per hit
4 damage per second

This is a joke?

Yeah it's kinda lame that even when one guy has a chainsword and a 3 man advantage, they can't outmelee Dire Avengers without an exarch.

I agree that GM melee dmg is so low that it basically is a joke, but they shouldn't be easily out-meleeing Dire Avengers. Dire Avengers are essentially eldar storm troopers - Eldar reflexes, centuries of training, and better equipment.

[_4ut_]

I agree that GM melee dmg is so low that it basically is a joke, but they shouldn't be easily out-meleeing Dire Avengers. Dire Avengers are essentially eldar storm troopers - Eldar reflexes, centuries of training, and better equipment.

Yes it is. But why would they write that this is sword? Suppose there were sergeants fist. But the sword 4 damage, it is not funny . And if they give him a REAL chainsword it's automatically make IG OP ?

[Dark Riku]

Giving the sergeant "real" chainsword damage would be extremely OP.
The LC leader for GM already has this amount of damage, with him in melee GM are no joke...

[_4ut_]

Giving the sergeant "real" chainsword damage would be extremely OP.
The LC leader for GM already has this amount of damage, with him in melee GM are no joke...

It's ok to. But why not just change the sergeant male weapon on his fists, then?
Sword with 4 damage, just like a mockery.

[saltychipmunk]

Being weak in melee is an explicit downside for gm they should never be good in melee in relation to the tier they are in. Thus even with a sarge they suck in melee and even with a commissar they suck in melee (in relation to t2 units...)

And you have to think that dire avengers are all technically trained eldar. and a single eldar is most certainly going be better than a single normal human in pretty much every way. they area genetically engineered race of warriors after all.

thats the fluff reason.

the balance reason would probably also have to do with the fact that the sarge is a power free upgrade. on a squad that is already much cheaper than direavengers or heck any other standard ranged squad excluding ist and scouts .

guardsman do have one of the highest squad hp to unit cost ratio in the game currently at over 3 hp per req point spent on them... and their ranged damage is on par with a non upgraded shootaboy squad .. despite being only about 25 req more expensive with their upgrade

[HARRYY]

Dudes, IG has really more important Problems. IG T2 is fuxjing awful. Banewolf could be non-inq-exclusive whixh would solve several flaws. Just 1 further example

[saltychipmunk]

Ehh, the issue with bane wolves is that it is a drop in gen basher / light infantry hard counter. and i know at the very least the lord general does not need that kind of perk when he already has such an idiotic amount of perks as is.

Ig t2 is not that weak at all, you just have to love the quirks of a few of its units. if you love them , it is one of the stronger t2s , if you hate them.. then you will suffer.

that is why i tend to avoid playing them. i hate sentinels , i hate chimeras , i hate manticores and i hate ogryns , heck i even hate spotters. but i have seen other ig players totally crush people with those very things

[Dark Riku]

Dudes, IG has really more important Problems. IG T2 is fuxjing awful. Banewolf could be non-inq-exclusive whixh would solve several flaws. Just 1 further example

Banewulf for every hero would make a ton of problems, not solve them.

[Oddnerd]

Banewolf could be non-inq-exclusive whixh would solve several flaws. Just 1 further example

I have an even better idea - you could make the banewolf available for no commanders and replace it with something less cheesy. I don't play INQ much anymore, but I only use that thing when someone was being a real dick in T1.

[HARRYY]

Dudes, IG has really more important Problems. IG T2 is fuxjing awful. Banewolf could be non-inq-exclusive whixh would solve several flaws. Just 1 further example

Banewulf for every hero would make a ton of problems, not solve them.

Xou could at least notice the banewolf before hes sitting on your Farm. You could also add an Upgrade to him which also introduce time to react. Hes actually more in a anti-infantry role then

I wonder how he would be more broken with another IG commander.... Inq already is the most capable.

Oddnerd, what would you introduce?

[Oddnerd]

Oddnerd, what would you introduce?

I don't have a thematic replacement at the moment, for a place-filler they could make it a chimera. Still allows for vehicle rushing, which is still a tactic for assholes, but a chimera can't wipe a gen farm in 30 seconds.

[Dark Riku]

New damage type for bane wolf that does almost nothing to gens.

[Lost Son of Nikhel]

New damage type for bane wolf that does almost nothing to gens.

I think it could be a great idea, and it would resolve a tons of problems trying to balance this little guy.

Chaos Lord's Inmolate damage type, for example? It still does damage to gens, but a lot less than the current damage type.

[_4ut_]

Dudes, IG has really more important Problems. IG T2 is fuxjing awful. Banewolf could be non-inq-exclusive whixh would solve several flaws. Just 1 further example

Noup. Sergeant toy sword it's important thing to. In my opinion this is the root of the problems. Indicator fact that nobody cares, that there at the IG.

Banewulf for every hero would make a ton of problems, not solve them.

Maybe just upgrade to Chimera?