Some high level OM feedback

Issues dealing with gameplay balance.
User avatar
Cyris
Level 4
Posts: 649
Joined: Fri 22 Mar, 2013 10:22 pm

Some high level OM feedback

Postby Cyris » Mon 03 Oct, 2016 6:23 pm

Gonna try to keep this high level, and avoid getting into too many details. After some rumors of 2.6 as an actual possibility and the fizzing out of the OM community thread, I dusted off OM and do some rounds. It reminded me why I stopped playing them, but figured I'd share my high level notes in the hopes that it helps for any future patch.

I'll just quote myself for summary:
Cyris wrote:Let's be honest with ourselves: factions in DoW2 (and many pvp games) work because they are mixes of various OP elements you leverage to win. You leverage IG's OP reinforcement ratios by forcing battles of attrition. You opponent attempts to work around this by leveraging their factions OP elements to try to avoid battles of attrition. The balancing act is to avoid toxicity and to make sure factions have weaknesses to go with these strengths.

OM are pretty much a faction left with only weaknesses. SS are OP in the first half of T1 (or into early T2 in some matchups), but that's pretty much it. Horrible map control, BC doesn't pull his weight, clunky AV, numerous useless upgrades, little wipe threat, mediocre aggressive options and mediocre turtle options.


So here's a non-ordered list of problems I see with OM. I don't think they all need "fixing" - it's good to have weaknesses in addition to strengths. I just honestly think (and believe I'm backed up by most of the players I respect) that OM have far too many weaknesses and not enough strengths.

1- OM are the weakest 1v1 faction in the game. Hands down, no question. The holes in their roster are glaring and easy to exploit. They require tons of micro, lack squad wiping potential until late game and present few "must respond" threats.
2- Early map control might be the worst of any faction. Imagine SM but their scouts are slower and more expensive, their tacs don't cap faster and their hero is slow. Ops can begin to make some headway here, but you're paying 30 power for a dedicated capper that can't reliable fend off other cappers. This isn't intrinsically bad - it's ok to be bad at things and some faction needs to be the worst at any particular thing. It's when this is added to the continued list below that it's just too much.
3- Setup team counters are far too weak. BC more of less needs sword and purge to counter a setup team, and emperor help you if their are two. Ops stun and IST nades can disrupt, but the faction lacks followup to capitalize on the opening, and both of those squads have a tendency of taking bad bleed when preforming these roles.
4- Ranged blob counters are similarly bad. Only SS can stand in meaningful ranged firefights (purgs/op have short range, IST bleed too bad) and getting 2 SS is a death sentence come T2. IST nades again almost cut it, but followup is lacking unless you spend a large amount of power and get out teched hard.
5- T2 AV remains poor and lacks snare. With my nids, I have wonderful map control, rushdown, infantry control, ranged and melee blob builds and territory control with towers and nests. My lack of snare is a weakness that is appropriate, as is my mediocre (not counting VC HT) AV capabilities. OM brings no big advantages that this glaring weakness cover for. This is massively compounded in T3, as a single battle tank will often spell gg, even if I'm at a lead.
6- T3 is insanely predictable. The counter to everything OM field is "stack plasma damage".

Some more specific complains then:
1- Purgs need to cover far too many holes in the faction, have unnecessarily high upkeep, never face where you want, turn too slow, and burn gens slower then a tac flamer.
2- Ops are terrible. Imagine scouts but remove fotm, a nade that kills things and reliable cc. You're left with.... what? A slightly cheaper scout that comes out after you needed map control, and doesn't scale past T1.
3- Las Rhino fires once a month, and prefers infantry no matter what the codex says.
4- There are a nunber of upgrades across the faction that are just terrible - ss flamer, ss psilencer, BC purified blades, BC mantle, Dread flamer.
5 - SS are OP in early T1, but their weapon upgrades are both still terrible.
6- BC is a weak commander. He can bully a bit in T1, but falls off real fast. Early T1 is also when OM are the strongest with front loaded IST and SS strength, so it's not as needed.
7- Losing Flamestrike was terrible. It allowed punishment of blobs/setup in T2 when chained with CC. Now, OM hurt in both T1 and T2 against those compositions.
8- Dark Excommunication is overpriced and niche.

Some good things real quick:
1- SS in early T1 are OP. No reason for them to have top piercing damage in addition to the 70 melee skill.
2- HB Rhino is too cheap.
3- Purifiers with the faster casting time have been fun to use, though still outclassed by most other dedicated melee and requiring significant upgrades (libby, BC wargear) to scale, all of which opens the OM vulnerability to vehicle play too wide.
4- Experiments with heavy IST investments were fun, but ROI on sarge nade and overall preformance remain low. Capping suffers, T2 delayed too far.

/end rant

I really don't have anything constructive to add right now. There are so many directions the faction could go in that I get crippled with indecisiveness (as mentioned in the OM thread). Tiny decisions like "bring back Rhino in T1?" or "add crusaders in T1?" have such massive impacts to what other changes I'd make that it's hard to stay focused. Without any tentspikes to design around it's just a big swirl.
User avatar
evilmario5
Level 2
Posts: 53
Joined: Mon 26 Oct, 2015 2:34 pm

Re: Some high level OM feedback

Postby evilmario5 » Tue 04 Oct, 2016 2:07 am

Great Rant 100% agree with you,
-flame strike was my bread and butter back in 2.4.2 used in on setup teams and blobs for days.
-(the purgation burning gens slower then strikes) was due to people going with the combo purg+rhino to bash gens (which I thort fine since ork could do the same, ig, elder) aka patch 2.5.1 hotfix
yes I play gk/om a bit no hate plz
User avatar
The Dragon Reborn
Level 1
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon 21 Mar, 2016 3:03 am

Re: Some high level OM feedback

Postby The Dragon Reborn » Tue 04 Oct, 2016 4:30 am

That was a good rant.

I had a game on the weekend as OM were a IG player completely shut me down with 2 x HWT (much salt after that game), so what if instead of adding the crusader squad or putting the rhino back to T1, the Psychic Lash ability gets moved to T1 (with a cost adjustment if needed) and pulls in the whole squad instead of 1 model (something akin to the WL warp throw). Then so the BC accessory's aren't all T1, get rid of Purified Blades and give him a teleporter for T2.

And maybe you could give the Vindicare Assassin a snare for his AV shots, or even just an ability that can snare.

And yeah it would help the if they had a AoE global, but maybe something like a psychic storm to go along with the fact they are mostly all psykers.

I am by no means a good OM player, but these were just some thoughts.....so feel free to shut me down :D
User avatar
Black Relic
Level 4
Posts: 844
Joined: Mon 29 Jul, 2013 3:05 am
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Some high level OM feedback

Postby Black Relic » Tue 04 Oct, 2016 9:48 am

The teleporter removal was a good choice.

SS range needs to be readjusted so it doesn't do so much burst like it does and offer the opponent to react to the damage rather than suffer sudden model losses. Which is not ok imo. I would also like to consider moving the SS leader to t1 so then you can have that as an option to be you snare vs melee squads and increases your range dominance in t1. Now I would only do that if the SS firing pattern did get change though to be constant.


IST need some help somehow. I think they should cap faster with the serg with the maybe acolyte removed. The cost for the serg goes down to 15 power but he loses keen sight.

The operatives keensight goes up to 30 but their cost goes to 280/30 and the stun grenade is automatically given and the fall back plan cost is reduced a decent amount maybe to 50/15?

I would stop there as see what goes on.
"...With every strike of his sword, with every word of his speech, does he reaffirm the ideals of our honored master..." -From the Teachings of Roboute Guilliman as laid down in the Apocrypha of Skaros. Space Marines Codex pg. 54
hiveminion
Level 3
Posts: 267
Joined: Fri 09 Aug, 2013 1:02 pm

Re: Some high level OM feedback

Postby hiveminion » Tue 04 Oct, 2016 4:38 pm

Cyris wrote:3- Setup team counters are far too weak. BC more of less needs sword and purge to counter a setup team, and emperor help you if their are two. Ops stun and IST nades can disrupt, but the faction lacks followup to capitalize on the opening, and both of those squads have a tendency of taking bad bleed when preforming these roles.
4- Ranged blob counters are similarly bad. Only SS can stand in meaningful ranged firefights (purgs/op have short range, IST bleed too bad) and getting 2 SS is a death sentence come T2. IST nades again almost cut it, but followup is lacking unless you spend a large amount of power and get out teched hard.


Without wanting to engage the rest of this post...

I think ISTs with nade launchers are excellent anti-set up team units. They have good range so they don't bleed as much, the nades move really fast and the damage of the default shot is very good. I'm not sure why you think GK lack any follow-up, SS do amazing dps to focus down Dev models before they can set up again, and they can move in on melee stance. With support of a Power Sword Bro-Cap you should be able to deal with double set ups with SS, double nade IST and Bro-Cap. Same tactics work on ranged blobs.

To better control IST bleeding, I recommend NOT getting the Acolyte leader, which most people seem to consider a default purchase. That health regen aura looks impressive until you realise it adds a pitiful +0.25hp/sec. In addition, because this idiotic upgrade is purely melee, he always walks out way in front of his squad but is last to die, meaning every bullet he bites probably bleeds off a model. The damage buff is nice but the nades don't need it. I prefer the sergeant for the additional knockback, if you have resources to spare.

Keep in mind I played GK in 2v2/3v3.
User avatar
Aetherion
Level 2
Posts: 105
Joined: Tue 12 May, 2015 6:53 pm

Re: Some high level OM feedback

Postby Aetherion » Tue 04 Oct, 2016 9:51 pm

Wall of text/rant:

Units
ISTs are horribly squishy, having the same health/model as Guardsmen and having only more hp than scouts as a full squad. They also cost 2.5 times as much as GM to reinforce. And have equal dps as sentinels, without heavy armour and the ability to be repaired. So the idea that they can jump into cover, volley and repeat is severely limited by their fragility. As hiveminion mentioned, the acolyte takes as much as he gives.

The range of the grenade launcher is also a little limited by them having a greater range than their vision, something that typically happens to snipers and artillery which have far more consistent prodding ability compared to the inaccurate GLs. Why is it fine for Heretics? Because they have worship and other stuff to do whilst not on the frontlines. Also, laugh all you want at the pathetic autoguns they get, but hey free dps while ISTs become totally incapable of hitting single models.

Black Relic's idea of giving the IST sarge faster capping sounds great for maintaining map control, but then you get Eldar w/o FoF capping at tac speeds. So that might be a bit scary.

I completely agree with many of Cyris' views, but I think he missed commenting on interceptors. I've been trying to take them for a spin and they are in a similar position to Kasrkin. Outperformed by a lower tier unit (purgation w psycannons), too costly to reinforce and squishy for their tier. Oh and they retain the retarted turn rates of purgation which is horrible on a teleporting unit. I believe they would be better placed in T2 instead of 1 or 3, so that OM have an answer to fast vehicles other than purgation or the malfunctioning las rhino. This also gives them the opportunity to level up and be a mainstay of the army (gaining more health/dmg), instead of tickling T3 enemy tanks and being deleted once said tanks shoot at them.

Of course teleporting psycannons are bound to induce much frustration especially in T2 if combined with the spike damage of VA to nearly instagib vehicles so some sort of nerf to their ability to teleport, the cost of doing so (economically or energy or cooldown idk) is needed. I feel players should be rewarded for bringing them in just at the right time (i.e intercepting the enemy XD)and punished for using them as a spearhead. But on how to actually do it, I leave it to the modders and others more experienced than me.

Globals
Regarding their globals, which are core to the faction? Meaning which ones are a core mechanic of the faction (e.g gates for eldar, bunkers for IG, drop pods for SM) rather than playstyle choices? Those are the ones that help stabilize a faction, rewarding the player for good performance and a recovery mechanic if one is failing. Paladins are probably core, offering an option for a melee bulwark against enemy walkers and an immense threat against other vehicles that OM otherwise would not have.

The remainder.....are in a strange place. Mindblades is always good, who can say no to more damage and melee skill? But it is no more defining for the faction than FTE or UYC is for SM and Orks respectively. LRCs are more like Baneblades, an expensive piece to drive home an advantage, but also likely to offer the enemy a chance at oneshotting your 800 req, 200 power, 250 red. Personally, I never really approved of the LRC being a global (except for the cool factor where it drops in guns blazing in all directions, until it gets nuked by an eldritch and every skillshot that hurts vehicles and well emplaced set up teams due to the 10 second delay). Also did I mention how bloody expensive it is? 250 red is far more expensive than 200 req comparing to the BB and is not adequately justified by the army support it offers, which LRRs, beacons and chimeras get at no red cost

Sidetrack: Arguably, they moved the red cost for getting Terminators (a lynchpin unit) w/o red to their support unit so this is theoretically justified. However, as we know, key performers have to be supported, even if they're excellent by their lonesome on paper since the enemy's key performers can readily be supported by the rest of the army. E.g librarian + SM termis, Chaos termis and nobs by their heroes, Baneblades and Guardsmen, Avatars and Swarmlord which buff their army instead while still having devestating abilities.

Sidetrack 2: I suppose this is why the BC has been pushed into a support role since the OM libby, whilst great as melee deterrent and providing an excellent damage and somewhat situational stealth buff, is a rather one dimensional support character. Support afforded by strikes and purifiers for energy are situational and not very game changing.

Thus, terminators are surprisingly fragile and one-dimensional.

/sidetrack adventure of random ramblings

So my point is this, is Dark Excommunication really going to be the unchanged global if hypothetically, we have a second OM hero? A 15 second ability stop in an area with radius in between bolter and bolt pistol range. No damage done to the enemy, merely a cessation of enemy abilities while they still fight on with no penalty and once they move out of it, little to mark the field except a patch of Inquisitiorial icons.

TLDR: we need at least one more global (in T1 or 2) that makes a difference to the faction, helping OM anchor itself on the field, which all factions have.

Evidence

SM: Drop pods
Nids: Capillary towers, without number
Eldar: Gates
IG: Bunkers

Iffy ones are Orks and Chaos that rely on pure damage to sweep all before them. In terms of holding down the fort, they have Waaagh banners and Shrines respectively. But if we're still talking purely globals

Orks: Call da boyz, Waaagh in general
Chaos: Bloodletter call ins/Mini nukes to lay waste to any concerted push
PC is an exception since he doesn't need any bloody help holding the line by virtue of his playstyle.

/evidence

So as Cyris mentioned, the lack of Flamestrike hit OM hard in removing its blob counter (Nemesis vortex doesn't really count). How to address this? I don't really know. Just...something less situational than the current state of Dark Excom.

/wall that won't make GK great again since it's OM now, deal with it.
CREED FOR THE PLAN GOD
ELDRAD FOR THE DICK THRONE
just as planned
User avatar
Cyris
Level 4
Posts: 649
Joined: Fri 22 Mar, 2013 10:22 pm

Re: Some high level OM feedback

Postby Cyris » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 8:44 pm

hiveminion wrote:I'm not sure why you think GK lack any follow-up, SS do amazing dps to focus down Dev models before they can set up again, and they can move in on melee stance. With support of a Power Sword Bro-Cap you should be able to deal with double set ups with SS, double nade IST and Bro-Cap. Same tactics work on ranged blobs.

Keep in mind I played GK in 2v2/3v3.

My experience is primarily in 1v1. While OM absolutely have the tools to "deal" with ranged blobs and setup teams on paper, the problem is that these tools are bad / inefficient. Getting 2 GL, SS and the sword/purge combo on the BC will allow you to break through double setup team - maybe, if your whole army is attacking at once, and you've scouted. However you will bleed IST, you will be losing map control, and you will be getting out teched, and you won't have transitional AV. And then you will lose ;) (you also lose a LOT of focus fire by putting GL on the IST, which make certain commanders all but impossible to force off, compounding problems in certain matchups)

As mentioned in my OP, it's not like every faction needs to be good at everything. It's not bad that OM's anti-setup tools are inefficient, it's bad that in conjunction with this they have so many other weaknesses.

I respect your play a lot hiveminion. I'd super love to play against your OM some time and show you the misery of fighting against setup teams. It gets even worse when you don't know they are going double setup early - since it's easy to get locked into build orders that handle it badly. Knowing you're going to fight it is one thing, but needing to keep your builds ready to counter properly (and still have some AV come T2) is real hard.

Black Relic wrote:SS range needs to be readjusted so it doesn't do so much burst like it does and offer the opponent to react to the damage rather than suffer sudden model losses. Which is not ok imo. Now I would only do that if the SS firing pattern did get change though to be constant.

What is wrong with the SS firing pattern? It appears to be exactly the same as tac/csm in the codex.
User avatar
Black Relic
Level 4
Posts: 844
Joined: Mon 29 Jul, 2013 3:05 am
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Some high level OM feedback

Postby Black Relic » Tue 11 Oct, 2016 6:05 am

In my experience that SS shoot one shot in their burst duration so that one shot does all of the damage giving it a burst type of feel.

The Tacs and CSm shoot more than one shoot in their burst duration. I think its like 3 in their burst duration so their damage is spread out between all of this shots. Or at least that is what i am lead to believe since their damage is quite constant and can be judged well enough during their burst duration rather than having to judge on whether to retreat a squad after the burst duration.

But wise will have to step in to tell me i am wrong though.
"...With every strike of his sword, with every word of his speech, does he reaffirm the ideals of our honored master..." -From the Teachings of Roboute Guilliman as laid down in the Apocrypha of Skaros. Space Marines Codex pg. 54
User avatar
Crewfinity
Level 4
Posts: 712
Joined: Tue 03 Dec, 2013 2:06 am

Re: Some high level OM feedback

Postby Crewfinity » Tue 11 Oct, 2016 11:58 am

yeah plz remove some of the frontloaded damage that OM have in T1 and add some sustain as well as better control abilities vs both melee and AV.
OM blows right now in 1v1.

lack of snare really hurts in t2 against fast vehicles. right now their only hope is double purgation psycannons which is kinda toxic as well. in t1 its frustrating to play vs them because they kill models almost immediately with their burst, but they're wayyyyy too weak to single target tanks (warboss etc) as well as against setup teams. lot of weaknesses without enough upsides to compensate. now that 2 of their T3 units are call-ins that require red their late game has suffered as well :/
User avatar
Cyris
Level 4
Posts: 649
Joined: Fri 22 Mar, 2013 10:22 pm

Re: Some high level OM feedback

Postby Cyris » Tue 11 Oct, 2016 4:50 pm

Maybe it's an animation or projectile thing? The weapon profiles are literally the exact same in the codex - 2s burst, 1s CD, occasional reload.

Though TBH I've never noticed them doing anything strange, so I dunno.
User avatar
Crewfinity
Level 4
Posts: 712
Joined: Tue 03 Dec, 2013 2:06 am

Re: Some high level OM feedback

Postby Crewfinity » Wed 12 Oct, 2016 12:24 am

I don't think it's the firing pattern so much as all the high burst that OM has. It makes them really powerful at early game skirmishes, especially since they have the extra damage reduction and speed from WATH available. For example, in skirmishing situations you're moving in an out of max range, trying to find good cover to take and punish approaching enemies, and dance around and draw them into advantageous positions for you. You're not getting the sustained dps, so OM has a huge advantage due to their high burst potential:

SS puts out 168 damage in 2 seconds of burst.
IST put out 160 damage in 2 seconds of burst.
A starting build of 2 IST and 1 SS have 486 damage of burst potential.
A starting build of 2 SS and 1 IST have 496 damage of burst potential.

Tacs put out 150 damage in 2 seconds of burst.
Scouts put out 78 damage in 2 seconds of burst.
A normal starting build of 2 scouts and tacs have 306 damage of burst potential.
A starting build of 2 tacs and scouts have 378 damage of burst potential.

This advantage is very much removed in late T1 when IST start bleeding and the lack of control mechanisms cause OM to not be able to pull off the game plan they want to. I'd much prefer a reduction in pure dps and some better crowd control and disruption. It would feel more fair to play against in the early game, since you aren't taking 328 damage to your squad for simply spotting the enemy, and it would reduce a lot of OM''s weaknesses in late T1/early T2. Right now it really feels like they rely on a big blob of high ranged burst with WATH and then hope to transition with rhino/purg psycannons. It's very one dimensional and their control capabilities are just awful for the cost.

Scouts scale much better than ISTsince for just 15 power (can be a first purchase) they get good CC ability with shotguns. IST have to pay 25 for a much less consistent ability, and their hero has no supporting abilities comparable to the SM roster (battlecry, rites/vials, bionics). SS are good in melee to start but again this drops off very quickly once melee squads get upgraded, and OM have to rely on overpriced crowd control and high burst rather than SS specials against burna sluggas, aspect shees, or jump squads.
User avatar
Cyris
Level 4
Posts: 649
Joined: Fri 22 Mar, 2013 10:22 pm

Re: Some high level OM feedback

Postby Cyris » Wed 12 Oct, 2016 4:16 pm

Nice post Crew, that makes a lot more sense. I got the impression Relic was talking about an actual firing pattern problem. This is just the simple fact that SS deal 28 damage per hit, while tacs deal 25. This 12% damage boost is pretty strong early game, but as mentioned its impact falls off quickly due to both bad internal scaling issues, and problems with the faction overall.

IST also have a very unique firing pattern, focused on burst. To translate and contextualize some of the things Crew was saying some more, lets compare Shootas to IST:
Shootas: 7 dps, 2 second burst, 1 second cooldown, infrequent reload (6-8 bursts) - net result: 2 seconds of fire, 1 second of reload.
IST: 6.4 dps, 2 second burst, 1 second cooldown, consistent 2s reload - net result: 2 seconds of fire, 3 seconds of reload.

Put another way, shootas (and most ranged squads) deal damage fairly consistently. IST are more like a sniper, unloading their damage in 2s, then having 3s of no firing. To use IST to the best of their abilities, you need to unload, then move back during reload, then move up to fire again. This is very rewarding micro for the first few engagements of the game, but again fall off in value very quickly as squads get upgraded. IST drop models too quickly to function in ranged fire fights, and don't deal enough damage to split kite stronger melee squads and lack consistent disruption to dissuade them.


In a lot of ways IST are still a unit that wants to cost 260 req like it initially did. 5.5 speed, long vision, good burst fire on weapon. A deep problem I still see in OM is that SS still feel like they should cost 500 for their starting stats and IST should cost 260 for their starting stats... but their current upgrades and most of the other tools OM have access too are just too weak. This is why IST price increase, while fair when considering only the units starting stats, has served to gut the faction in 2.5.

I'm very comfortable saying that SS and IST are front loaded and strong early T1 while also claiming OM as a whole are weak. I'm happy to see SS get their ranged damage nerfed, or IST get a damage nerf in exchange for a price decrease back to 210. But these things need to happen in the context of some significant changes to other areas of the faction.


EDIT: Let me be even more explicit here. If we ignore all upgrades, commanders, globals, the rest of the units in the faction and the realities of early game eco/capping power, I'm comfortable saying this: SS are the 2nd strongest starting unit in the game, and IST are pretty close (vanilla DA are still best). With the stats they have, SS should easily cost 500 req and IST would be fair at 260.

However, it turns out that upgrades, commanders, globals, faction units and eco/capping power matter a lot.

Return to “Balance Discussion”



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 43 guests