2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Issues dealing with gameplay balance.
crog
Level 2
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon 05 Dec, 2016 12:30 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby crog » Tue 06 Feb, 2018 2:46 pm

I agree with lomors eldritch needs at least 75% of its old dmg.. this nerf was too much.
It can´t finish low hp units, even orbital could do that https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnzjqHAN4RA
User avatar
Oddnerd
Level 4
Posts: 628
Joined: Mon 27 Oct, 2014 1:50 am

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Oddnerd » Tue 06 Feb, 2018 3:20 pm

Can orbital snare vehicles for 14 seconds?
User avatar
Rostam
Level 3
Posts: 447
Joined: Wed 12 Oct, 2016 8:32 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Rostam » Tue 06 Feb, 2018 8:00 pm

crog wrote:I agree with lomors eldritch needs at least 75% of its old dmg.. this nerf was too much.
It can´t finish low hp units, even orbital could do that https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnzjqHAN4RA

agreed . the damage of the first 12 bolts were 200dmg before which was nerfed to 100dmg . while would be good to go for 150dmg instead
I think if it is buffed by 50dmg (50dmg * 12bolts = +600) it should fix it. (plus i think it does some damage aside those bolts and it has vehicle stun)

atm it does
100dmg * 12bolts = 1200dmg

if it is buffed by 25dps each
150dmg * 12bolts = 1800dmg

[before nerf it was: 200dmg * 12bolts = 2400 ; add the stun and the damage to it and it is horrific, but 1200 is a bit overnerf perhaps)]

PS:my understanding of this and my calculation might be completely wrong so let me know in case its all wrong or right or partial
Last edited by Rostam on Wed 07 Feb, 2018 12:25 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
lomors
Level 1
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue 18 Apr, 2017 1:31 am

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby lomors » Tue 06 Feb, 2018 9:09 pm

I don't say it should be completely reverted. I didn't even know you guys consider it. But I'm with Rostam or Crog to reverting just by a bit. I can agree about it being too powerful, what I question is making a huge change from 200 to 100 damage. Even if something like this was needed it'd be better to do it by steps by reducing damage to 150/130/100 for example. Making such a big change when clearly people don't agree on it seems kinda weird to me.

And seriously, someone start answering to this bug I mentioned instead of talking about nuke itself. xd
User avatar
Psycho
Level 3
Posts: 348
Joined: Thu 24 Dec, 2015 3:08 am

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Psycho » Wed 07 Feb, 2018 12:21 am

I don't think dps means what you think it means, Rostam. And eldritch is fine, that video up there had barely a pisspoor excuse for a setup with the subjugated banshees and zero followup, and it still nearly wiped a CSM while crippling the other, along with forcing every unit around it to retreat. This is not even taking into account the vehicle stun it has.
User avatar
Atlas
Moderator
Posts: 1950
Joined: Sun 02 Feb, 2014 5:23 pm
Location: Tarpon Springs, FL

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Atlas » Wed 07 Feb, 2018 7:35 pm

Psycho wrote:I don't think dps means what you think it means, Rostam. And eldritch is fine, that video up there had barely a pisspoor excuse for a setup with the subjugated banshees and zero followup, and it still nearly wiped a CSM while crippling the other, along with forcing every unit around it to retreat. This is not even taking into account the vehicle stun it has.


Of bigger note in that particular example was that, from what I could tell, only the first 3/9 of the center bolts even hit the target. No one is taken seriously when they complain about OB not being a massive wiper nuke or Abyss doing very little utility. What makes Storm so special that it needs to do both?
Atlas: Minister of Common Sense, Reasoning and Similar Sh*t
User avatar
Oddnerd
Level 4
Posts: 628
Joined: Mon 27 Oct, 2014 1:50 am

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Oddnerd » Wed 07 Feb, 2018 8:55 pm

Atlas wrote:What makes Storm so special that it needs to do both?


Because it always has had them so Eldar players are acting spoiled and entitled about it.
Tex
Level 4
Posts: 880
Joined: Sat 27 Jul, 2013 9:33 pm
Location: Canada

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Tex » Thu 08 Feb, 2018 5:24 pm

Eldritch does not need increased damage in any way. It is the ultimate AV ability. That is it's trait!

(Here we go again with needing to lay out distinctions)

Roks is an all around damage dealer and disruptor

Orbital bombardment is the ultimate retreat killer, but is not effective without a knockback setup. Thankfully SM have tons of snares and knockbacks in their playbook.

Tyrannoformation is an instant building destroyer. Has moderate and predictable damage and disruption. Main perks are obviously the destructive power against buildings and the aura left afterwards.

Empyreal Abyss has super high AI potential and has those wonderful chains to pull units back within it's grasp. Very predictable heavy_melee damage output because it doens't have knockback.

Rocket Run has fantastic AI potential and has engagement winning levels of disruption.

They all have their pro's and cons

Eldritch shouldn't just flat out be the best damned nuke there is. Simple.
User avatar
Nurland
Moderator
Posts: 1187
Joined: Mon 04 Feb, 2013 5:25 pm
Location: Eye of Error
Contact:

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Nurland » Sat 10 Feb, 2018 7:01 am

Eldritch used to be the best AI wipe nuke with massive disruption while being on its own level against vehicles.

Not to mention it might be the easiest nuke to set up.
#noobcodex
TharxGamma
Level 2
Posts: 100
Joined: Wed 03 Jun, 2015 8:47 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby TharxGamma » Sat 10 Feb, 2018 9:29 am

Nurland wrote:Eldritch used to be the best AI wipe nuke with massive disruption while being on its own level against vehicles.

Not to mention it might be the easiest nuke to set up.


Every time I see Nurland posts I read it in his casting voice.
crog
Level 2
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon 05 Dec, 2016 12:30 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby crog » Sat 10 Feb, 2018 11:09 am

Tex wrote:Eldritch does not need increased damage in any way. It is the ultimate AV ability. That is it's trait!

(Here we go again with needing to lay out distinctions)

Roks is an all around damage dealer and disruptor

Orbital bombardment is the ultimate retreat killer, but is not effective without a knockback setup. Thankfully SM have tons of snares and knockbacks in their playbook.

Tyrannoformation is an instant building destroyer. Has moderate and predictable damage and disruption. Main perks are obviously the destructive power against buildings and the aura left afterwards.

Empyreal Abyss has super high AI potential and has those wonderful chains to pull units back within it's grasp. Very predictable heavy_melee damage output because it doens't have knockback.

Rocket Run has fantastic AI potential and has engagement winning levels of disruption.

They all have their pro's and cons

Eldritch shouldn't just flat out be the best damned nuke there is. Simple.

It gets on my nerves that a few EL MODS dont give a shit about what dozens of people who are playing are saying. Since I am playing faction wars, 2v2s and 3v3s mostly you are often confronted with big t3 tanks and the only solution and hope for eldar was a perfect placed nuke. Don´t tell me i should do fire dragons vs lrr and lrd shit coz everybody knows that eldar cant deal with t3 power armors and tanks properly. Iam not sure maybe you are ignoring team balance and just care about 1v1s balancing, which would be riciculous since most people play teams.


What about the rocks can wipe out vehicles and armys easily set up great combo with commandos etc...
Nobody is talking about Rocket Run or Rocks... lets cut it to the half of the dmg ffs!
Empyreal Abyss can wipe out armys easily on retreat, it doesnt need knockback.
Rocket run on retreat is also easy to put and very effective.

Yes eldritch was the best nuke in the game and it should be, since eldars t3 need at least one strength. Halfing it´s dmg was too radical, just because of a fking vehicle bugg.
User avatar
boss
Level 3
Posts: 283
Joined: Mon 22 Aug, 2016 11:48 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby boss » Sat 10 Feb, 2018 11:54 am

How to deal with tanks as eldar

Image
Image
Image Image Image

Just some of the ways eldar deal with tanks eldar don't need bullshit nuke to help it not like they are weak or anything
User avatar
Rostam
Level 3
Posts: 447
Joined: Wed 12 Oct, 2016 8:32 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Rostam » Sat 10 Feb, 2018 12:37 pm

what is the news on eldritch btw. is it gonna be buffed or untouched?
Imo a tiny bit of buff might be good, but that is just me i might be wrong
so what is the status of it? i mean so far atlas told me it would be reverted (it means heavy buff for eldritch I guess)
User avatar
Psycho
Level 3
Posts: 348
Joined: Thu 24 Dec, 2015 3:08 am

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Psycho » Sat 10 Feb, 2018 3:28 pm

Rostam wrote:Imo a tiny bit of buff might be good

Reasons being?
Tex
Level 4
Posts: 880
Joined: Sat 27 Jul, 2013 9:33 pm
Location: Canada

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Tex » Sat 10 Feb, 2018 5:18 pm

crog wrote:
Tex wrote:Eldritch does not need increased damage in any way. It is the ultimate AV ability. That is it's trait!

(Here we go again with needing to lay out distinctions)

Roks is an all around damage dealer and disruptor

Orbital bombardment is the ultimate retreat killer, but is not effective without a knockback setup. Thankfully SM have tons of snares and knockbacks in their playbook.

Tyrannoformation is an instant building destroyer. Has moderate and predictable damage and disruption. Main perks are obviously the destructive power against buildings and the aura left afterwards.

Empyreal Abyss has super high AI potential and has those wonderful chains to pull units back within it's grasp. Very predictable heavy_melee damage output because it doens't have knockback.

Rocket Run has fantastic AI potential and has engagement winning levels of disruption.

They all have their pro's and cons

Eldritch shouldn't just flat out be the best damned nuke there is. Simple.

It gets on my nerves that a few EL MODS dont give a shit about what dozens of people who are playing are saying. Since I am playing faction wars, 2v2s and 3v3s mostly you are often confronted with big t3 tanks and the only solution and hope for eldar was a perfect placed nuke. Don´t tell me i should do fire dragons vs lrr and lrd shit coz everybody knows that eldar cant deal with t3 power armors and tanks properly. Iam not sure maybe you are ignoring team balance and just care about 1v1s balancing, which would be riciculous since most people play teams.


What about the rocks can wipe out vehicles and armys easily set up great combo with commandos etc...
Nobody is talking about Rocket Run or Rocks... lets cut it to the half of the dmg ffs!
Empyreal Abyss can wipe out armys easily on retreat, it doesnt need knockback.
Rocket run on retreat is also easy to put and very effective.

Yes eldritch was the best nuke in the game and it should be, since eldars t3 need at least one strength. Halfing it´s dmg was too radical, just because of a fking vehicle bugg.


Crog, I'm disappointed that you think I don't "give a shit" about what "dozens" of people who are playing are saying. Well first off, I still play this game so if you are insinuating that I don't play this game, then that is flat out wrong. Secondly, as someone who plays mostly team games, I'm disappointed to find out that you don't seem to know how to counter tanks and super units, which you will have much more exposure to then I would because again, I play mostly 1v1 and you play mostly team games.

As we try to balance the game - and please keep in mind, I am but one of many voices in the conversation who continually try to stay objective and review decisions before they are made - some of the decisions end up being controversial.

The decision to nerf Eldritch storm was an obvious one, but that doesn't say that it now doesn't need a little fine tuning. My opinion is that it doesn't, but there are others who would see it increased in power. I'm going to make an assumption that Eldar is your main faction, and believe me, it always stings when your main faction takes a hit. But you have to be able to deal with that if the 'hit' you take leads to a greater state of balance. I for instance, have had to do so many times as blatantly OP things that Orkz have had in the past (that I had become accustomed to [ab]using) were taken away. A last note here, I also want to make mention of the fact that I play a lot of Eldar and will continue to do so when we get season 2 of Elite League fired up.

For the sake of picking through your post, I also want oppose the idea you have presented that "everybody knows that Eldar have no way to deal with t3 power armors and tanks properly". I'm blown away by this. (PLEASE READ THIS SECTION FOR STRATEGIC ADVICE)

You have dark reapers that can melt and suppress almost any HI squad before they even get a shot off. Try combining them with a cloak field so that you can start shooting from a position your opponent doesn't know about. In T3, guard them with a Seer Council squad or leveled banshees.

You have wraithguard. Wraithguard are infinitely better in team games than in a 1v1. You can even build more than one squad and see no downside whereas in 1v1 you will simply get out-maneuvered or butchered by melee. Wraithguard counter most HI and SHI ranged squads, and are great for standing up to the DPS of super units. Their resistance to knockback also allows them to stand in and fire when other units simply get pushed around by special abilities.

You have wraithlords which can get a long range shoulder mounted brightlance that does not reduce its melee efficiency. This is a great source of provisional or opportunistic AV. You can read my thoughts on opportunistic AV here (viewtopic.php?f=11&t=3317). IMO the wraithlord is the best walker in the game because of the way it can be supported by the Eldar roster, and also the T3 upgrade it has allows it to very quickly heal VEHICLE ARMOR HP.

You have brightlances which can be used very effectively against vehicles and terminators alike, as well as using scorch beam against smaller infantry. Brightlances are WAY more cost effective than tanks or super units could ever hope to be.

You have warpspiders who offer fantastic periphery support (assuming you have the micro potential for it) and can also completely disable a vehicle with haywire grenades. I mean... try playing against heavy tanks and super units as orkz... gosh.

You have the T3 falcon which is just shy of immortal. This thing can draw an insane amount of fire from opposing tanks and can also pile up damage on them while simply backing off and regenerating its shields.

You have the D cannon which is dirt cheap and murders all targets. Cloak some rangers and move them forward so that it can always shoot at something.

You have Fire prisms that shoot at range 65. Good Lord... again, cloak some rangers and provide vision.

LOOK AT ALL OF THESE DAMNED OPTIONS AND YOU DON'T EVEN NEED TO GET INTO MELEE TO USE THEM!!!


So, after reading through this list, I'm hoping you are able to admit that your listed problems are at the very least exaggerated, and at the most, a personal deficiency stemming from a lack of imagination, knowledge, micro, or refusal to use "combined arms tactics" to solve your problems.

quick note: If you want reference to "combined arms tactics", play Space Marines in 1v1.
TharxGamma
Level 2
Posts: 100
Joined: Wed 03 Jun, 2015 8:47 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby TharxGamma » Sat 10 Feb, 2018 5:34 pm

I feel like a lot of peoples 'groans' are coming from their inability to play the faction, not balancing choices. On this note buff IG #kthx ;)
User avatar
Oddnerd
Level 4
Posts: 628
Joined: Mon 27 Oct, 2014 1:50 am

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Oddnerd » Sat 10 Feb, 2018 5:49 pm

It is easier to list the eldar units that can't be used against vehicles than the ones that can. So many options.

Every time I see people bitching about eldar AV I imagine someone trying to use a fire prism as a leman russ and then raging when it gets smoked.
User avatar
Atlas
Moderator
Posts: 1950
Joined: Sun 02 Feb, 2014 5:23 pm
Location: Tarpon Springs, FL

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Atlas » Sat 10 Feb, 2018 8:25 pm

Rostam wrote:what is the news on eldritch btw. is it gonna be buffed or untouched?
Imo a tiny bit of buff might be good, but that is just me i might be wrong
so what is the status of it? i mean so far atlas told me it would be reverted (it means heavy buff for eldritch I guess)


Well, the initial proposal was to just revert it. But it's pretty clear that such a suggestion is not agreeable. We'll either tone down the increase or just remove it altogether and leave as is. My personal opinion on this is to just leave it but we'll see. This might be a last second call as there's no real consensus outside of "It doesn't need to be 200".
Atlas: Minister of Common Sense, Reasoning and Similar Sh*t
User avatar
Rostam
Level 3
Posts: 447
Joined: Wed 12 Oct, 2016 8:32 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Rostam » Sat 10 Feb, 2018 11:30 pm

Atlas wrote:
Rostam wrote:what is the news on eldritch btw. is it gonna be buffed or untouched?
Imo a tiny bit of buff might be good, but that is just me i might be wrong
so what is the status of it? i mean so far atlas told me it would be reverted (it means heavy buff for eldritch I guess)


Well, the initial proposal was to just revert it. But it's pretty clear that such a suggestion is not agreeable. We'll either tone down the increase or just remove it altogether and leave as is. My personal opinion on this is to just leave it but we'll see. This might be a last second call as there's no real consensus outside of "It doesn't need to be 200".


Thanks for the feedback
yes, i think 200 per bolt is too much (12bolts) . and currently it is 100 dmg perbolt so i assume by turning it down (from the original) u mean bringing it over 120 or 140; am i right?
User avatar
Psycho
Level 3
Posts: 348
Joined: Thu 24 Dec, 2015 3:08 am

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Psycho » Sat 10 Feb, 2018 11:43 pm

If it was the damage and knockback alone, the suggestions to increase the damage back would be half sensible, but you still have to take into account that it completely disables vehicles caught in it. Not snare, not disable weapons, but completely immobilize AND leave it unable to even defend itself. It gets worse when the pathfinding system makes it think it has zero speed and decides to turn its rear towards the enemy figuring it'll be the fastest path to back off through, most noticeable in a baneblade on top of the MASSIVE amount of damage it'd also take due to being so big of a target that a great amount of bolts would hit, on top of the game engine possibly registering some of those bolts as rear armor hits too. God help you if there was enough setup to it that most of the army protecting the vehicle had to either back off or face the threat of getting wiped, and God help you further still if the units that weren't retreated start fucking about with the immobilized vehicle's pathfinding somehow conflicting with theirs.
User avatar
Broodwich
Level 3
Posts: 321
Joined: Fri 12 Apr, 2013 10:04 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Broodwich » Sun 11 Feb, 2018 5:38 am

why not just revert damage and reduce vehicle stun by an arbitrary amount? (50%)?

It is pretty lacking in damage and still super obnoxious on vehicles, seems an obvious solution
Fas est ab hoste doceri
User avatar
Adeptus Noobus
Level 4
Posts: 936
Joined: Sat 15 Feb, 2014 12:47 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Adeptus Noobus » Sun 11 Feb, 2018 6:36 pm

To add a few numbers from another thread to the Eldar AV discussion:

On the topic of Eldar AV: I think Eldar have enough sources of high dmg output to threaten a Landraider. First of all the Fire Prism outranges the/any LR and deals 160 plasma_cannon_pvp. You have brightlances as well. And many seem to forget that D-Cannons deal a lot of dmg to vehicles as well. Especially if they are not moved. Since the Landraider is a big vehicle with a huge hitbox, the chance of the LR taking the full dmg of the D-Cannon shot is very high (you can't see the aoe vfx of the D-Cannon hitting a LR). It deals 110 plasma_cannon_pvp on the initial hit and iirc another 108 as area-dot plasma_cannon_pvp in different radii. That is 218 plasma_cannon_pvp in total.


Compare that to the other factions capabilities and you will see that well-microed Eldar do not struggle at all (obviously map-dependant).

Adding to my quote: People really need to start exploring the synergies that exist in the Eldar army roster, especially that between Rangers and the rest of their long-range weaponry. It is simply mind-boggling how well Rangers synergize with D-Cannons, Fire Prisms, Dark Reapers, Brightlances, Seer Council, Banshees. Whenever I watch recent faction wars I notice a lack of that sweet sweet Eldar trickery, that they can pull on you.

I will repeat again: Play to the factions strength, not the way you want them to be played.

P.S: Just because many people claim something does not mean it is akin to truth/fact. Many people said Snipers were bad until they started experimenting with them more and realized that they are not bad at all. This is a similar case in my humble opinion. Thoroughly go through the Eldar roster, start experimenting with a few units and THEN make a detailed post about why you still believe Eldar AV is crap. I guarantee you that you will have come to realize that the opposite is true.
Twitch: http://twitch.tv/adeptus_noobus
Youtube: http://youtube.com/adeptusnoobus
Twitter: http://twitter.com/adeptusnoobus

"Ooooohhh fuck. Eat the fucking poison!" - BbBoS
"Extermination is the only cure for heresy!" - Apothecary
"my micro is superior so u think lord is op" - initialmink
User avatar
Rostam
Level 3
Posts: 447
Joined: Wed 12 Oct, 2016 8:32 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Rostam » Sun 11 Feb, 2018 6:46 pm

Adeptus Noobus wrote:To add a few numbers from another thread to the Eldar AV discussion:

On the topic of Eldar AV: I think Eldar have enough sources of high dmg output to threaten a Landraider. First of all the Fire Prism outranges the/any LR and deals 160 plasma_cannon_pvp. You have brightlances as well. And many seem to forget that D-Cannons deal a lot of dmg to vehicles as well. Especially if they are not moved. Since the Landraider is a big vehicle with a huge hitbox, the chance of the LR taking the full dmg of the D-Cannon shot is very high (you can't see the aoe vfx of the D-Cannon hitting a LR). It deals 110 plasma_cannon_pvp on the initial hit and iirc another 108 as area-dot plasma_cannon_pvp in different radii. That is 218 plasma_cannon_pvp in total.


Compare that to the other factions capabilities and you will see that well-microed Eldar do not struggle at all (obviously map-dependant).

Adding to my quote: People really need to start exploring the synergies that exist in the Eldar army roster, especially that between Rangers and the rest of their long-range weaponry. It is simply mind-boggling how well Rangers synergize with D-Cannons, Fire Prisms, Dark Reapers, Brightlances, Seer Council, Banshees. Whenever I watch recent faction wars I notice a lack of that sweet sweet Eldar trickery, that they can pull on you.

I will repeat again: Play to the factions strength, not the way you want them to be played.

P.S: Just because many people claim something does not mean it is akin to truth/fact. Many people said Snipers were bad until they started experimenting with them more and realized that they are not bad at all. This is a similar case in my humble opinion. Thoroughly go through the Eldar roster, start experimenting with a few units and THEN make a detailed post about why you still believe Eldar AV is crap. I guarantee you that you will have come to realize that the opposite is true.

Agreed with morgan
good post
actually we had a 3v3 recently in refinery vs morgan and freeman he went 2x rangers and d-canon and i saw first hand how double rangers could be working out pretty well with prism, and seer and and WraithGuard is solid vs blobs and heavy vehichles with FS support as well . the time field,doom, forune. globals and all.
all and I think going less blobby eldar could be a good solution's like mixing as he did in that game, like rangers+shees+WG+prism+dcanon+FS stuff
I dont play eldar or anything but just saying from what i have seen, that this is a good point. they can work out pretty well.
Eldar blobs are also high dps but squishy so high utility and versatile/fast eldar is actually a nice approach
User avatar
Batpimp
Level 4
Posts: 654
Joined: Wed 10 Jul, 2013 7:06 pm
Location: Washington State
Contact:

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Batpimp » Tue 13 Feb, 2018 12:52 am

c)Grants the “Infernal Gaze” ability, a channeled ability which slows the targeted model by 40% and deals 40 heavy melee damage for 6 seconds. 40 energy, Range 30, 40 second cooldown.

is there a way to make this ability increase in potency up until say a max %?

1sec 33% move speed reduction - decaying over 2 seconds
2sec 66% move speed reduction - decaying over 4 seconds
3sec 80% move speed reduction - decaying over 6 seconds
Eternal Crusade code 4 extra points FOR YOU!:
EC-ULA1Q6C1USBP0
twitch.tv/batpimp/
twitter: @Batpimpn
Starter guide viewtopic.php?f=11&t=877
Advanced strategy viewtopic.php?f=2&t=718
User avatar
Batpimp
Level 4
Posts: 654
Joined: Wed 10 Jul, 2013 7:06 pm
Location: Washington State
Contact:

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Batpimp » Tue 13 Feb, 2018 1:28 am

Rostam wrote:1-About the eldrich pls change it to 150 (from 100) and not 200 (also give Fireprisms 600 hp instead of 500 pls for 5 more power from 450-135 to 450-140 and remove Wraith lord Hp Regen)
2-T1 staff for sorcerer not the best idea,but I think option C sounds good (Basically giving sorc mindwar which is nice)
3-Apothecary Default Hp buff would be good (650 mb) also deafault chainsword mb buffed (from 25 to 30)
4-Apothecary combat steams can get a bit of love by some energy regen (like 1 e/s and +20 energy)
5-Apothecary bolter a little bit of nerf on it (weapon range and dps mb a tiny bit) also pls fix the multiple stun
6-PLEASE dont buff the warboss,Hammer is good as it is at least make it 30 for what u give it to him
7-Terminator FC REVERT COST CHANGE to pre-heresy
8-pls nerf stern guard vengeance rounds
9-good change on lower upkeep of little nids,



i agree on everything except warboss hammer. Is it really used in 1v1? to good effect? i nly see it worth it vs tyr and other orks..

i much rather have the gun on him for control. it could use a buff but maybe not so much. its original status was too strong.
Eternal Crusade code 4 extra points FOR YOU!:
EC-ULA1Q6C1USBP0
twitch.tv/batpimp/
twitter: @Batpimpn
Starter guide viewtopic.php?f=11&t=877
Advanced strategy viewtopic.php?f=2&t=718
User avatar
Atlas
Moderator
Posts: 1950
Joined: Sun 02 Feb, 2014 5:23 pm
Location: Tarpon Springs, FL

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Atlas » Tue 13 Feb, 2018 2:04 am

@Pimp

I would imagine you could make such a change to the Mindwar ability, but for what reason?

As for the Hammer, what would you like to see with it?
Atlas: Minister of Common Sense, Reasoning and Similar Sh*t
LOCALgHOST
Level 2
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon 15 Jan, 2018 2:48 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby LOCALgHOST » Tue 13 Feb, 2018 6:58 am

Rostam wrote:1-About the eldrich pls change it to 150 (from 100) and not 200 (also give Fireprisms 600 hp instead of 500 pls for 5 more power from 450-135 to 450-140 and remove Wraith lord Hp Regen)
2-T1 staff for sorcerer not the best idea,but I think option C sounds good (Basically giving sorc mindwar which is nice)
3-Apothecary Default Hp buff would be good (650 mb) also deafault chainsword mb buffed (from 25 to 30)
4-Apothecary combat steams can get a bit of love by some energy regen (like 1 e/s and +20 energy)
5-Apothecary bolter a little bit of nerf on it (weapon range and dps mb a tiny bit) also pls fix the multiple stun
6-PLEASE dont buff the warboss,Hammer is good as it is at least make it 30 for what u give it to him
7-Terminator FC REVERT COST CHANGE to pre-heresy
8-pls nerf stern guard vengeance rounds
9-good change on lower upkeep of little nids,


apo hp/dmg buff no need - he can kill tics 1v1 now with micro, if he will be buffed - he will be OP :)
combat stims maybe need some buff on energy regen
bolter stun fix is ok, but range and dmg is fine now.
I've seen hammer in game - don't think it needs to be buffed.
FC termie cost increase ++, i'm comin' T3 now with FC and initial scouts in 3v3 very fast.
What's the problem with stern guard vengeance rounds? How SM have to kill SHInf if it will be nerfed?
Stern guard can't kill vechicles alone - it's one of SM's combined synergy strengths.

BTW maybe TM need some love? He has no support wargear on T1. Maybe rework Artificer Armor to get it +HP regen, and move mines to separate wargear upgrade? For example I never get Artificer, because I love Bionics, because of it's crippled regen (I miss retail +5HP, I know it's impossible today :)). But I could use some mines if it could be bought separately.

and I don't remember I've seen Whirlwinds in this game ever. Is anyone use it besides me? :) maybe it needs some rework too?
for me it's fine and need some brain to use, but the AV ability is too slow. And it's often bugged when the target leaves vision. Like other ability, don't remember which one, fixed in this patch.
User avatar
Adeptus Noobus
Level 4
Posts: 936
Joined: Sat 15 Feb, 2014 12:47 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Adeptus Noobus » Tue 13 Feb, 2018 1:59 pm

LOCALgHOST wrote:BTW maybe TM need some love? He has no support wargear on T1. Maybe rework Artificer Armor to get it +HP regen, and move mines to separate wargear upgrade? For example I never get Artificer, because I love Bionics, because of it's crippled regen (I miss retail +5HP, I know it's impossible today :)). But I could use some mines if it could be bought separately.


The Artificer Armor already has the highest regen among his armor choices. The mines closing off approach vectors and dealing very high damage combined with the fire power of the TM and his durability make him a great support hero. It is a nightmare to approach him once he starts planting mines everywhere. Bionics e.g. is not that great of a support wargear because it gives barely anything to the surrounding units apart from the ability. Nothing else. Artificer Armor is the way to go in 1v1s (not always) but even more so in teamgames.
Twitch: http://twitch.tv/adeptus_noobus
Youtube: http://youtube.com/adeptusnoobus
Twitter: http://twitter.com/adeptusnoobus

"Ooooohhh fuck. Eat the fucking poison!" - BbBoS
"Extermination is the only cure for heresy!" - Apothecary
"my micro is superior so u think lord is op" - initialmink
crog
Level 2
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon 05 Dec, 2016 12:30 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby crog » Tue 13 Feb, 2018 6:54 pm

Adeptus Noobus wrote:To add a few numbers from another thread to the Eldar AV discussion:

On the topic of Eldar AV: I think Eldar have enough sources of high dmg output to threaten a Landraider. First of all the Fire Prism outranges the/any LR and deals 160 plasma_cannon_pvp. You have brightlances as well. And many seem to forget that D-Cannons deal a lot of dmg to vehicles as well. Especially if they are not moved. Since the Landraider is a big vehicle with a huge hitbox, the chance of the LR taking the full dmg of the D-Cannon shot is very high (you can't see the aoe vfx of the D-Cannon hitting a LR). It deals 110 plasma_cannon_pvp on the initial hit and iirc another 108 as area-dot plasma_cannon_pvp in different radii. That is 218 plasma_cannon_pvp in total.


Compare that to the other factions capabilities and you will see that well-microed Eldar do not struggle at all (obviously map-dependant).

Adding to my quote: People really need to start exploring the synergies that exist in the Eldar army roster, especially that between Rangers and the rest of their long-range weaponry. It is simply mind-boggling how well Rangers synergize with D-Cannons, Fire Prisms, Dark Reapers, Brightlances, Seer Council, Banshees. Whenever I watch recent faction wars I notice a lack of that sweet sweet Eldar trickery, that they can pull on you.

I will repeat again: Play to the factions strength, not the way you want them to be played.

P.S: Just because many people claim something does not mean it is akin to truth/fact. Many people said Snipers were bad until they started experimenting with them more and realized that they are not bad at all. This is a similar case in my humble opinion. Thoroughly go through the Eldar roster, start experimenting with a few units and THEN make a detailed post about why you still believe Eldar AV is crap. I guarantee you that you will have come to realize that the opposite is true.

To add my opinion on this.
Snipers are not bad, they are good like they are now I agree with you on this point.

Ofc it is possible to counter big tanks , but what I personally thought not fair was how much resources & units mixes you need to do that miracle.

Like you said Fire Prism deals 160 plasma cannon dmg per HIT, thats 29,8 dmg per second. Now tell me how long does a 2750 hp baneblade or a leman rus have to stay idle on the same place without getting repaired to get killed by 1 prism? Even an AI on Easy will move it back and outrepair it. Obviously it is not a great counter, the dmg is too low.
Alright so you need a snare, haywire grenade like suggested. After the big nerf it snares only 7 sec, instead of 15 sec.
In the end you need a dmg dealer, wraithguards are the way to go since they cant be disrupted easily & the only av unit with more hps and HI.
With great micro, perfect timing you might be able to take a leman rus down.

Not taking setups in account which are easily countered with spotters catachans , brightlances dont snare you can easily move back.
fire dragons with their current hp and DMG NERF Reduction are a joke / Considering you meet good IG players like yz, freeman, panzer, e1 and more who know how to counter setups at least.

Lets take a look at the resources invested:

Fire prism : 450 req 135power
WS : 440 r, 40 power + 50 r , 20power for the grenade upgrade
Wg: 400 r 50 power

Almost 1300 req and 245 power. ( not counting other heros abilitys like doom and timefield, which you properly need to secure a kill )

How eldars AV option got nerfed with the last few patches :

Wraithguards, haywire grenade, Fire Dragons dmg, Falcon shield, speed, accuracy and dmg. Eldritch´s dmg got even halfed to pieces of crap, autarchs fusion gun, even the fs´ doom ability enjoyed a nerf.
Just think about it.


Eldar was once great and fun to play, now if you meet some t3 IG stuff you need to outplay them so much or finish it before t3.
User avatar
Adeptus Noobus
Level 4
Posts: 936
Joined: Sat 15 Feb, 2014 12:47 pm

Re: 2.8 Non-Consensus Thread (Part 2 of 2)

Postby Adeptus Noobus » Tue 13 Feb, 2018 7:22 pm

First of all that has nothing to do with Eldar T3 and everything with IG T3 which being looked into. Next, a Prism alone should never counter a Baneblade....
Also, you pretend that all these units lose their worth once the Baneblade is dead but they will still shit on IG. Eldar habe so much trickery up their sleeves...
Twitch: http://twitch.tv/adeptus_noobus
Youtube: http://youtube.com/adeptusnoobus
Twitter: http://twitter.com/adeptusnoobus

"Ooooohhh fuck. Eat the fucking poison!" - BbBoS
"Extermination is the only cure for heresy!" - Apothecary
"my micro is superior so u think lord is op" - initialmink

Return to “Balance discussion”



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests