The reduced cost of Faery elites is nice but why nerf their value? I'd rather see the same cost with a higher amount of defense or offense. Their elites are already crazy expensive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jazen
Printable View
The reduced cost of Faery elites is nice but why nerf their value? I'd rather see the same cost with a higher amount of defense or offense. Their elites are already crazy expensive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jazen
Keep Faery at 4/5, take away a general.
AgreedQuote:
Originally Posted by Meda
I would even be ok with that. Just seems lame to nerf them further. I played attacker this age and all I've been doing outside of wars is attacking Faeries for honor. They aren't hard to break already.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zantetsuken
I will also say I really do like the Cleric changes. Makes that a much more attractive personality to play as.
Sage needs to be nerfed to 40%. 50% is way to much.
overall the age-to-age tweaks havent changed much. Maybe makes halfer a bit more desirable, but unless your facing halfer v feary rogue core t/m's in or going much more of a hybrid wide kd setup feary will still be king. (nothing beats the ability for rogues to +40% damage NM wave early -> ToG later)
The only things i'd address are
1.Avain are a bit weak, needs either RM coupled with the BR bonus or needs a nw/acre buff on their leets to really compete in the war iter. As it stands now the only way they really work is to punish kds not as good as you since they can overwhelm the enemy if not prepared.
2. Dwarfs are on the weak side if <3k acres and on the strong side if >4k acres due simple to the way building costs scale. Would be nice to see this addressed somehow but i don't think its a "minor" change.
---i.e. making explore costs inversely related to size would address how stupid raze is in war right now and could balance dwarfs overall, but this is somewhat more "major"
Feary elite cost isn't as big an issue as it's made out to be. We get tog anyway. Halfers don't.
I love that all the small mechanic changes that have been suggested this age have been implemented so quickly by the devs. These can only improve the game.
Overall these are minor tweaks which is fine. I'm sure there will be a major shake up in an age or two.
Avian - minor buff, after seeing what they were doing this age they are okay, not top tier attacker but good support.
Dwarves - back to previous aged stats, will be used in many roles and make for good attackers and I'm okay with that.
Elf - meh back to is previous aged stats as well... I'll take less defensive losses but they are still locked into a hybrid role of poor thief and econ. Give them a better spell book.
Faery - I'm fine with the nerfs, they are still good.
Halfings - They are in a good spot with faery leet nerfs factored in.
Humans - nothing spectacular, might see more this age because of sage boost.
Orc - more gains yummy, they were fine before I'll take it.
UD - they are "okay" there are better options but the buffs to other attackers will hopefully entice a non 1/3 UD server.
Merchant - Immune income penalties, I keep asking for this :)
Sage - too strong 40% is ideal, it was knocked down from 50% for a reason.
Rogue - Fine, if sage gets 50% boost maybe boost their effectiveness then.
Mystic - same as what I said about rogue.
Warrior - good
Cleric - awesome
war Hero - better but still never going to pick one.
All mechanic changes are welcome except cheaper sciences. As some have mentioned before, going into war will be a penalty science wise.
Said mentioned bugs finally have been acknowledged of their existence and will be fixed? I approve.
Rather than list new changes I will just list some tweaks.
* Avian - 6/2 Elites and + 25% Birth Rates
* Dwarf - Change back +100% Food consumption and/or 25% Building Efficiency
* Human - Lower NW of Elites to 6 or 6.25
* Sage - 40% Science Effectiveness
* Tactician - Leave at 20% Attack Times
* War Hero - Forget Drought and Storms immunity - Add in -25% Honor loss (Sorry new change) or maybe -25% Building Time.
If you take ud/tact largest attacking race combo this age and consider its stats.
Then look at avain /cleric for this age is it just me or are this now basically the same thing, but avain maybe a little stronger if you consider build rooms ect.
Have to remember the no horses just means that undeads o spec match avains elite so maybe you have 6 epa which is 1 point stronger on the ud, which there.o.specs would be more subject to ns damage and they would have less build room
So why are avains so "bad" and ud so good, esp with plague being void?
I'll agree with the sentiment of a few others on here with regards to War Hero...it needs some sort of Honor protection to make its Honor Effects bonus worthwhile. Add in a -25% Honor Losses and/or +25% Honor Gains buff, and then you have something people are going to want to play!
War Hero is sick good, but Sage is ape****. Giving it honor protection is a low concern anyway, if you're playing WH right your WH are either rarely getting hit or know they're accruing honor in the long term.
I don't understand why people are dismayed with Faery changes. I find it hard to call it a nerf.
They were buffed last age by gaining CS while most races were toned down.
Farther they receive cheaper elite and GP +5% def on top.
Considering that arguing that 3/5 elite is not well balanced is odd.
As for sage, lets examine the T/M department first, two ages ago sage was 40% sci, this is 50% sci so this is 150/140=7.1% increase in sci effect over that sage, and farther increase against others.
Lets review the Rogue changes in that time:
Age 62
The Rogue
+1 Stealth recovery per tick
Access to all thievery operations, including 3 unique to rogues: Greater Arson, Assassinate Wizards and Propaganda
+100% Thievery Science Effectivness
Access to Vermin
Starts with +400 thieves
Age 64
The Rogue
-50% thief cost
+1 Stealth recovery per tick
Access to all thievery operations, including 3 unique to rogues: Greater Arson, Assassinate Wizards and Propaganda
+75% Thievery Science Effectiveness
Access to Vermin
Starts with +400 thieves
What would you rather gain half thief cost? or 7% extra higher science effect? the tpa loss is non factor for halfers as their actually gained mtpa through double TD's and pretty marginal in comparison for faes.
Mystics were not buffed. and with this age easier MV perhaps they should be as that weakens MS. Still they remain a solid personality through their unique traits which remain strong, MS and double guilds.
Now comparing to attacker personalities:
Cleric received a slight buff from age 62 gaining plague immunity (cleric had the same -40% losses then).
warrior remained unchanged, and tactician received a slight nerf through slower attack time.
I understand it's late but I would like to see warrior changed a bit and tactician changed a bit more. these could be just minor changes because it's late, but having the personalities unchanged in their core for so long is becoming repetitive. With stronger sage they can accommodate slight buffs and stay balanced.
Couldn't agree more. Losing one point of offense on an elite that is rarely used for attack (by the vast majority of those playing the race) is not much of a nerf, and getting an extra 5% Def ME from GP vastly outdoes that small nerf. IMO, Faery got another boost this age, and along with getting CS last age, is the most resilient and versatile of the T/M.Quote:
Originally Posted by SlightlyOverdosed
Sage way too op. Way too op. So far Looks like dwarf sage cores again in top kds next age
But i dont play my faery as a T/M and i find the loss in 1point in offense a huge nerf.
My Thoughts...
Avian: They just feel like they're missing something...I like the buffs, not going to lie (including MP/GP stack) -- they keep getting better...but there's just something missing... EDIT: Thoughts...of that something extra => immunity to pitfalls, +50% honor gained from anything stealthy (sabotage, anonymity), 6/3 elite instead of dwarf?, -50% explore time?
Dwarves: Whoa..why so much buff to them? Keep the food at +100% at least since +30% BE and +50% Sci is more than enough to make up for their food consumption. Also 6/3 Elites...I guess I was under the impression no elite can be the same as another...so either dwarf would have to change or human
Elf: Solid! This is probably how they should always be -- of course I like my suggestions to them, if there aren't going to be too many crazy changes - this is certainly a very good balance for them
Faery: The MP/GP stack is cool...it gives them the highest potential defense in the game [5 elite, +5%, +5%, Town Watch] so that's pretty handy for a full blown TM. Those looking at anything other than TM are going to have it rough :S
Halfling: Not sure why they got dropped to 3/5 for last age...but this (4/5) is probably where they should be. I wish (for my own reasons) that the TD bonus was Rogue and Thief cost was Halfling...but this is probably more reasonable
Human: Their bonuses are so...meh. Their penalty is just weird being that Humans have always been the science race. I like the idea of them suffering more from Greed/Riots than a +sci cost. I'd ask for +25% Spell Duration or +33% cause it's fun.
Orcs: :O for some reason 30% gains sound like so much more than 25%...
Undead: They didn't change at all right?
Merchant: They've been good since last age :) *Subliminal message -- +50% Income Sci Effect
Sage: I really want to go sage cause 50% is :O :O :O but...as you've probably gathered everyone seems to think it's too much.
Rogue: I liked that they were buffed last age...again, just wish they switched -thief cost with TD bonus from halfling...maybe increase crime to 100% to stay ahead of sages?
Mystic: Increase channeling to 75% to keep ahead of sages?
Warrior: Still good...*subliminal message -- +25% Mil Sci Effect
Tactician: They are perfect now. *Subliminal message +50% Tools Sci Effect
Cleric: PERFECT!!! *Subliminal message +100% Food Sci Effect
War Hero: ugh...immune to S and D is nothing to make up for what they lost...-75% training is a good start. I like Zantetsuken's suggestion of helping them gain/retain honor better rather than S/D immunity. *Subliminal Message +33% Pop Sci effect
Basically -- I think that if you're going to have sages at +50% effectiveness to science (I think that's an awesome change) rather than nerfing it back to 30 or 40% give the other personalities something they can use to keep up with sages but in their specific role (as indicated through the subliminal messages).
I love the mechanics changes!
Why are faery leets 1050 gc at 3/5 and 5,25 nw while halfling leets are 600 gc at 4/5 and 5.25 nw? Are these numbers correct or are the offense values of the races switched? If these numbers are correct, can anyone explain why having lower offense makes the leet more expensive?
Why are dwarf leets 800 gc at 6/3 and 5.25 nw while human leets are 1200 gc for 6/3 leets and 6.5 nw? What is the difference between a 6/3 leet and a 6/3 leet that makes 1 so expensive?
One race has ToG, the other one doesn't. Same for both examples.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spons
If dorf gets 6/3 elite in place of 6/2 it's NW cost should also be increased. To 5.75 i think.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zantetsuken
I agree - this is another good way of doing it. My experience with WH this age was that it was weak when it didn't have much honor, and overpowered when it had lots of honor. Your design would keep it statistically even-steven with other personalities throughout the age and regardless of honor level imo.
Faeries had great attacking potential this age especially during longer wars. Let's say your def is 150k and enemy attackers are down to below 100k or chained way below nw range.. why wouldn't you use the free troops for attacking? Lowering their offense to 3 from 4 is a huge nerf to their offensive potential which is good because they were monsters that could basically bottomfeed all war while having great protection from ops. Especially sages with 15-20% mil. science on top of all that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan4GS
what about giving Sage +40% sci effect and +25% sci protection, if they really need a big buff?
Sage not having sci protection still feels like Undead not being immune to plague.
Also, (new feature,) Thief op: steal books? Not sure at what rate though, and possible war-only, or just stronger in war.
Races:
Avian - dislike it please rework it totally or remove it.
Dwarfs - too strong, maybe remove + 30% Combat Instant Spell Damage since BB is buffed and increase the NW of the elite to 5.5 or 5.75.
Elf - strong in defending from attacks weaker in defending from super thieves. Wouldn't pick it over faery.
Faeries - keep CS and I think 3/5 elite is too good. Faery elite should be 2/5 or even 1/5 since they are too strong in magic(MS(magic shield) + RM + MF + MA), thievery(CS + INVIS) and defending(GB + MP + TW). Just kill their off but don't take generals. Let them be able to attack deep chained provs in wars but that should be expensive. Disagree elite is expensive. In fort/eowcf elite cost is 650-750 with 10% arms and access to tog. Also nerf their bonus dmg on both magic and thievery. They are strong in defending from magic/thievery/attacks shouldn't be strong in offense...
Half - same as this age. As f/m I didn't see anything special in this super thieves. Couldn't break 4-6 tpa + cs + 10% wt. Maybe they can destroy elves but faery is absolutely immune to them.
Human - same as this age. Just slide buff but I dont like its elite... 2 races with 6/3 but humans elite is with much higher NW. Make the elite 6/2 and give them +10% population.
Ork - elite should be 7/2 and the NW should be 6.25.
Und - why no change there? Nerf them to -50% loses and 7/1 elite 6 NW. Still will have the best building space...
Personalities:
Sages - +40% sci bonus should be ok just like everyone else said.
Cleric - finally plague immunity.
Tact - nerf is ok. Personally I think tact was one of the best personalities for the last few ages.
Warr - maybe some buff there but not in numbers. Something new. Like spell for 1 attack that increases the gains instead of bl. It will be more useable.
WH - seriously? I mean for real? WH is one of the least played personalities every age and now its been nerfed. Give them immunity to riots and greeds and we are talking...
Mechanic:
Kingdom page:
Sat provs will be highlighted to the monarch. - can you give it to steward as well? Also can steward change the steward.
War win:
As someone in warring KD I'm concern about the change. Can you give some more details? Now the reward is 5% honor/land what would be the small bonus - like 1% or something?
About the land cap - never played for land so I don't know how good this change is...
Bug Fixes: TBC, probably looking at fort to fort gains, remembering GA and some behind the scenes admin stuff. Maybe add spells do be sorted by duration not by cast order.
+5% from GP increases elite def from 5>5.25. That is hardly op compared to 6/7 elite offense from attackers.Quote:
Originally Posted by SlightlyOverdosed
Last age, Mystic's magic effectiveness was reduced from 75% to 50%. That was a big nerf to faery mystics. Clear sight did little benefit to faery rogues.
Now, all the cries about GP, MP, clear sight. Shall I remind you that they are spells that needs to be upkeep, spells that can be removed by a cheaper and much easier to cast MV? Spells that consume valuable mana during war? Remove all the spells if you think they are op, I wouldn't mind getting built in benefits like many other races. Simply making MV easier to cast is a nerf to faery.
A faery can play a hybrid mage/thief/attacker, pick 2 out of the 3. The fact is you can only excel in 2 of those 3 fields. You simply do not have enough resources to go high wpa, high tpa and high dpa/opa. Changing elites from 4/5 to 3/5 means that you are forcing all faeries to either go pure mage or hybrid mage/thief.
Those who only play faery as pure mage or hybrid mage/thief will not see the point. As I said earlier, leaving faery as it is is a nerf since all races are getting a buff, not to mention the buff to MV. Simply reducing the elite offense will only narrow the role of faeries.
Avian cleric is still much more vulnerable to being camp hit at home OR chained with troops home in war, being 1 pt def elites. You dont get risk of plague initiating hits into an avian, but you get plague risk initiating hits into an undead.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fire
Undeads ospecs do not get killed when hit at home, so their offense doesnt take a beat, avians do.
See the difference now?
Offense wise, at equal pump levels (troop per acre, sci etc), I can never foresee a case where avians actually have more offense than an undead as you stated. Sure you mentioned avians cant use stables but have 6 off elites, whereas undead is 5 pt with a horse = 6, so essentially equal. An undead on average runs about 30% elite army, then what about that 30% of his offensive troops? Its 8 points to 6 points, and thats a 33% difference. 33% of 30%, is 11% more MO.
The more important point still, is the earlier point where people can hit avian clerics with aplomb, but hitting into undead gives you plague. So no, they are not similar.
And yes, you guessed it. My conclusion is: avians are **** and undeads trump avians.
1 final point, avians in war cannot train defense with credits. Undeads can have flexibility of training offense, or defense, or a mixture of both. Flexibility.
I do not think +50 Science Effectiveness is overpowered at all on Sage. I think that is an appropriate strength. It is a *slight* indirect nerf to Mystics, which I am perfectly ok with considering how strong they have always been. And Mystic has better tools than Sage to be an effective caster.
On to my own thoughts about proposed changes, I understand there were previous comments that said why should the changes be molded to fit the top 10% of the playerbase and kingdoms.
My counter-statement is, you shouldnt make changes such that the top 10% ends up having no choice but running the same setup, same builds, same everything.
Everyone chasing land will revert to BB's setup last age, without a doubt. Dwarf sage core (powerful mods, good turtleability, resistant to razes which are so OP now), human sage/dwarf sage Cow/calf (even more so, with humans sciences getting cheaper). Only tweak, perhaps, just perhaps, looking into a couple halfers instead of faeries.
You sir, cannot be more wrong. Both on sage +50% sci being OKAY, and Mystics being strong as usual. As what was mentioned above, MV's made cheaper and easier to cast represents a nerf to mystics.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zantetsuken
None of the personalities are truly strong, except maybe Cleric. But relative to each other, Mystic and Sage are fine as they are. The changes to MV and Sage will precipitate a change in the metagame, and I'm fine with that. Just let it happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by 13nesta13
Mystic is one of the weakest pers.. they get MS - Strongest spell by far, but by far weakest.. take away MS from em, and you end it with nothing. That spell does it all.
WH is borderlines useless, only reason to use it is IF you know your kingdom gona have honor, so if anything a noob trab, and a huge one. however I am perfectly fine with that - just find is a shame that so many fall into it.
They are all weak. But Mystic is definitely not the weakest. You're forgetting the WPA boost through science, extra mana, and double wizard training, which makes for a functional toolkit. Not a great one, but it gets the job done and does it better than Sage would.Quote:
Originally Posted by chalsdk
Use 1 day longer i fort, end of story! ITs the inwar that matters, not all the fancy outside!Quote:
Originally Posted by Zantetsuken
You can get a stronger bost with sage!
Some pers are nto weak--- be a WH in a kingdom that knows it will have honor - jerks - or whatever, and once you get higher then count, BOOM
Mystic guild bonus is a land efficiency bonus for the entire age, and not just for wizard training.
By the same parallels, in your own words, clerics are not buffed, they're nerfed. They lost extra 10% less losses from 50% to 40%. All that change (war heros have plague immunity) does is drive a change in metagame, being that the game will see less undeads in the server. Undeads were only used this age because they were strong and contagious and cheap and efficient. Now they lost the contagious part, which obviously impacts the part where they're "strong", and then you see that orcs got buffed with more gains, then why use undeads after all?Quote:
Originally Posted by Zantetsuken
So by the same logic, clerics got nerfed no? Plague immunity is imbued, but at a cost of 10% more troop losses. But there arent really that many undeads around, so which is more useful?
Get real. Sage should never have same magic science buff as a mystic.
Sage bonus should be maximum 50% of whatever the sci bonuses given to mystics and rogues. Give them some other boost. So if you want mystics at 50% sci bonus, then sages get 25%. give them back their book protection if you want to buff then a bit....
Dropping faery offense.... really? Why? Because we want them to turtle MORE? Really? That just makes no sense at all.if you are going to do that, then increase their defense to 6 again and give them 50 more gc/elite. I wish you all would decide what you think you want faes to be. Its getting annoying.
I can't decide how I feel about capping war rewards. It disincentivises warring in the top..... do we want that? I know the rewards have come to be very large sometimes but a hard cap.... I don't know how I feel about that. It means that its better to just whore again and avoid wars all together right?
As far as tactician goes I think it should remain 20% reduced attack time. Nerfing it makes it about as playable as Warrior. Just a matter of flipping buildings. to make up for whatever lose you choose to deal with. At least 20% made tact more appealing.
Totally agree with this. If they are going to be forced to turtle at least give them that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
Selecting land as a bonus will also result in a smaller honor bonus and vice versa.
Can someone explain?
You're quoting me, but you must have intended to reply to someone else.Quote:
Originally Posted by Meda
Times I've claimed fae change is "op" = 0.
Times you are explaining to me why fae changes are not "op" = 2.
Times I've cried about MP,GP, CS = 0.
Times you've brought it up = 1.
Or am I not allowed to mention changes that benefit the fae, but only those that hurt it? otherwise I am labeled as crying?
Orc cannot T/M either. it's locked into attacking, why does faery has to have the options to attack better than 3 point elite? Because you want it to is not a valid argument.Quote:
Those who only play faery as pure mage or hybrid mage/thief will not see the point. As I said earlier, leaving faery as it is is a nerf since all races are getting a buff, not to mention the buff to MV. Simply reducing the elite offense will only narrow the role of faeries.
You should be adjusting your play style to the changes, not vice verse.
Fae is not left as it is. please read again the paragraph you've quoted in your previous message.Quote:
As I said earlier, leaving faery as it is is a nerf since all races are getting a buff