Age 71 Proposed Changes Suggestions

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DM_Benjamin

G'day everyone,

A new episode of Triggered is now out featuring Dave and Jeff discussing age 71 potential changes.

Here is the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rocnOWslW5Q

Ben

---

Dave and Jeff says they want Attackers relying a little more on defense and Races having more uniqueness to them and yet suggested changes suggests the absolute opposite direction. Shared bonuses/penalties/spells on both races and personalities does not generate uniqueness. Increasing offense across the board does not generate a more defensive mindset. I really hope they listen to the community, not just their top tier friends.

A Human should have more losses because maybe they are generally a bit more squishier, but at the same time Heretic/Rogue/Mystic are able to generate Scientists faster than a Sage? How about you bring them back and let them respond to criticism, and let us hear how they think about the feedback they are getting

The proposed changes are good.
A tweak or two (slight) could help but in general they could go with them like this and do very well.

TMs actually got a buff.
Orc and Undead stayed the same relative to them.

Dwarf is pretty much unchanged relative to the rest
Human is pretty much unchanged relative to the rest

Halfling has always been brutal and that continues.

Good to see WH get some love, its been poop for so long.

I do wish WH got a bonus other than conversion such as immune prop and abduct.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bart of Sparta

Hell, if I had a friendly KD also running Ud WH

---

Says the one guy with confirmed "friendly" KDs.

Not that I disagree . . .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tiggis

The proposed changes are good.
A tweak or two (slight) could help but in general they could go with them like this and do very well.

TMs actually got a buff.
Orc and Undead stayed the same relative to them.

Dwarf is pretty much unchanged relative to the rest
Human is pretty much unchanged relative to the rest

Halfling has always been brutal and that continues.

Good to see WH get some love, its been poop for so long.

I do wish WH got a bonus other than conversion such as immune prop and abduct.

---

I disagree that T/M's got a buff. I think they are in an OK place relatively, and I'm definitely not on the bandwagon of "OMG NOTING BUT TM NERFSS" but at the same time.. I look at the new bloodlust (and though i love the idea of it mechanically) it is going to hurt. It's like on demand T/M breaker spell. Hitting core you prolly won't need it, but when you need the little extra to hit a T/M BAM it's there. I think 10% OME on it is a bit too much.

I think undead should be 14/1 leet and orc should be 12/2 leet. I think that is fine.

I really hope they make some unique change to human/avian that makes them both viable and appealing, because they are currently neither of those things (for warring kingdoms) +income provs will always have a spot as a bank.. but prov shouldn't be balanced completely on that mindset.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minty

Dave and Jeff says they want Attackers relying a little more on defense and Races having more uniqueness to them and yet suggested changes suggests the absolute opposite direction. Shared bonuses/penalties/spells on both races and personalities does not generate uniqueness. Increasing offense across the board does not generate a more defensive mindset. I really hope they listen to the community, not just their top tier friends.

A Human should have more losses because maybe they are generally a bit more squishier, but at the same time Heretic/Rogue/Mystic are able to generate Scientists faster than a Sage? How about you bring them back and let them respond to criticism, and let us hear how they think about the feedback they are getting

---

I think they mean to make the "tanky attacker" role more appealing.

Yes orcs/ud are still non-tanky heavy hitting offenses, but they do have some rather large drawbacks to them too. It's ok to have big heavy hitters if you ALSO make the tankier attackers or hybrids more appealing. Elf and halfer and dwarf are all looking pretty good.

I think with some extra love to avian/human there will be some pretty good strategic decisions to be made with these changes.

Of course UD and Orc offense could be toned down slightly and I would be OK with that.

Please note that the proposed changes have been revised at roughly 14:00 GMT. There has been a new post in the linked thread with a summary of the changes.

For convenience you can visit the revised changes here

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DavidC

Please note that the proposed changes have been revised at roughly 14:00 GMT. There has been a new post in the linked thread with a summary of the changes.

For convenience you can visit the revised changes here

---

Those changes look more balanced. Cheers for being part of the community and not just the 'evil' devs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DavidC

Please note that the proposed changes have been revised at roughly 14:00 GMT. There has been a new post in the linked thread with a summary of the changes.

For convenience you can visit the revised changes here

---

I think all these updated changes are steps in the right direction. I still hope for more number-tweaking for attackers but we're atleast moving in the right direction

Can someone explain to me how a 8/8 0/7 dwarf is gonna compete with 14.3/2 0/6 orc? Assuming 60 dpa army-out, orc will have like 60% more sendable off.

How is a 10/4 0/6.3 (GP) human gonna compete with 12,7 (fana/BL)/4 0/6.3 avian that is also faster and doesn't need to cast QF to get that buff?

Sure, dwarf has better turtling but should that go at the cost of that much offense? Dwarves aren't gonna break in-range TMs and can be chained easily even when turtled.

And well, WH is just retardedly strong, not sure how anything is gonna compete with those bonusses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bart of Sparta

Can someone explain to me how a 8/8 0/7 dwarf is gonna compete with 14.3/2 0/6 orc? Assuming 60 dpa army-out, orc will have like 60% more sendable off.

How is a 10/4 0/6.3 (GP) human gonna compete with 12,7 (fana/BL)/4 0/6.3 avian that is also faster and doesn't need to cast QF to get that buff?

Sure, dwarf has better turtling but should that go at the cost of that much offense? Dwarves aren't gonna break in-range TMs and can be chained easily even when turtled.

And well, WH is just retardedly strong, not sure how anything is gonna compete with those bonusses.

---

Based on initial community feedback I would like to amend the proposed changes as follows(I will edit the above post to include these but for easier reference as to what changed I will summarize here):

Avian will remove increased military casualties and replace with lower gains and allow credits to train elites
Dwarf will have elite power increased
Human will remove increased military casualties and replace with +100% rune costs and adjust elite power
Faery will remove lower birth rate and replace with lower income
Orc will remove lower science effectiveness and replace with increase resource losses when attacked and increase military casualties

Also, WH looks good on paper, but has its drawbacks.

New changes are now in changelist. Leet values look pretty good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bart of Sparta

Can someone explain to me how a 8/8 0/7 dwarf is gonna compete with 14.3/2 0/6 orc? Assuming 60 dpa army-out, orc will have like 60% more sendable off.

How is a 10/4 0/6.3 (GP) human gonna compete with 12,7 (fana/BL)/4 0/6.3 avian that is also faster and doesn't need to cast QF to get that buff?

Sure, dwarf has better turtling but should that go at the cost of that much offense? Dwarves aren't gonna break in-range TMs and can be chained easily even when turtled.

And well, WH is just retardedly strong, not sure how anything is gonna compete with those bonusses.

---

i took changes that they just made with buff to dwarf/human but
At 300k nw
20% homes, 20% TG, Max stables
3 wpa
2 tpa
4 ppa

Race ......acres............off.............def army out
orc..........892.............263,992......53,197
dwarf......1,013...........245,633......60,403
Human....1,074...........275,065......64,087

Feary T/M Same tpa/ppa and homes but, 7 raw wpa, 20% forts.
Acres 1075..... max Def 241,334

Just wondering Jeff/David in terms of Change notes, "+20% Resource Losses when attacked" refers to what as a resource? Everything that Guard Stations do? So land/honour/massacres/razes all hit 20% harder? I assume scientists not included in that as a resource.

1. Why not leave Bloodlust on Warrior? Warrior is kind of piddling with these changes, and Bloodlust is enhanced. I understand it would be redundant for Avians and Orcs, but it might make Warrior more appealing to, say, Dwarf, Human, or even Elf.

2. Rogue losing the Dens bonus really nerfs it. The extra science bonus is nice, and CS will obviously be less prevalent, but Rogue is still lagging. Even a small boost to sabotage damage or the like would be welcome. Or take Revelation off of Heretic?

3. Faery is weird. It is schizophrenic. It's tooled for a defensive damage inflicting TM tanky type, but its penalties directly undercut that. It would be like giving Orc a penalty to OME %.

4. Defense values. Reiterate that Elf defense should not be so far below Faery (and on par with Halfling and Dwarf!). Consider making Elf +3 def spec (putting it still below Faery), and possibly even adding a point to Human and/or Avian elite.

5. Double rune cost on Human is kind of bananas. Maybe we can start with +50%?

So what are WHs drawbacks?

Orc/War with emerald will hit for about 104% gains, UD/WH will hit for 132% on Orcs. UD will have -75% off casualties, orc will have +50% (with BL on).

Another Q to devs: Do WH + UD conversion stack?

instead of doing increased losses on def, and increased res losses on attacks, why not just remove the gains and additional kills from Orc. At the very least net out the Res gains.

Orc
Bonuses
+25% Battle Gains
Free draft
+20% Enemy casualties when attacking

Penalties
+20% Resource Losses when attacked
+15% Military Casualties
-10% Thievery Effectiveness (TPA)

Spell book: Reflect Magic, Blood Lust
Elite: 13/2, 1000gc, 11NW


So instead just give orc +5% Resource gains on attacks, the penalty with the bonus seems redundant...
Is the +15% Military Casualties on attacks and def, or only on attacks? This seems a bit steep as Orc offense already falls fairly quick during war, I would suggest the same as the resources and net it out to +5% enemy casualties on attacks, and remove the penalty.