|
|
seingeist
Promising
Adventuring Hero
|
posted February 15, 2012 04:28 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Personally, I don't mind Luck probability going up to 50 %, but I agree much higher than that makes it cheesy, unless it's some advanced effect that's hard to get. Personally, I'd like the distribution to be something like:
Skills (DC I/II/III): 20-25 % (I'd say 8 % for each skill level, but could be 6 % or 7 % also)
Creature inherent value: 5-10 %
Hero inherent value: 10-15 % at level 30
Artifacts: 5 % / 10 % / 15 % (minor/major/relic)
I would cap the probability at 50 %, meaning that any Luck beyond 50 is wasted (like previously). Obviously, that means maxing out Hero AND Skills and then furthermore equipping Relic will be pointless, but I don't see a problem in that, it was also this way in previous games, and there's a point in this - aquiring the Relic still lets you save the skillpoints you would otherwise have put into Luck.
With only minor tweaking here and there, your basic scheme above could be very realistically implemented with the 2% trigger/75% (or 77%) damage balancing route. (Not with 3%/50%, though, nor with 1%/150%).
Make each point of DC give 3 Luck points, for a total of 9 points yielding +2% each (6% each DC) and +18% total (and it would be balanced with the 8 Might points of Assailant tree).
Creatures are close to 5-10% currently (range is 3-12%), so the values would need to be roughly halved, but this shouldn't create any major problems.
Lvl 30 Heroes currently end with 5-10 Luck, which would give 10-20%, pretty close to your desired 10-15% already (and the Inferno is the only one that would go over that 15% anyway).
Artifacts are currently 2 Luck minor, 4 Luck major, 8 Luck Relic, which would be extremely close to your 5/10/15 (4/8/16).
It all works fairly well; really, my only complaint is that it would be pretty easy to hit the 50% ceiling, but that's probably only bothersome to me.  The level 30 Inferno hero would be sitting at a comfortable 30% before even taking the DC tree, finding an artifact, or using an active ability (but perhaps that's as it should be, given their racial).
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted February 15, 2012 04:42 PM |
|
|
While not exactly easy, yes 50 % would be managable. It wasn't hard to reach max Morale in old games either - expert Leadership would give you +3, if troops were of same kind you already had another +1, and then you just needed a minor artifact of sorts.
Here, you'd need to pick the skills to get really high Luck, which in my world makes sense. The Luck skill ought to be a major contributor in my optics. 6 % is a little low for my taste, but I could deffinitely live with that (and it's infinitely much better than the 2 % currently offered by DC I/II).
Considering that your Hero will not normally be level 30, but rather level 15 (as an average mid-game level), that will correspond to perhaps 8-10 % from Hero which combined with the 5-10 % from creatures would give a reasonable but not overwhelming level without skill as I see it.
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 15, 2012 04:44 PM |
|
|
|
I think that in H3 the probabilities weren't that high. wasn't it a bit above 10% for +3 luck?
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted February 15, 2012 05:06 PM |
|
|
Heroes 3 was 12.5 % with expert Luck. Personally, I didn't like Luck back then, as I found it triggered too rarely, but I guess that's a personal opinion where the balance between unpredictable and unreliable goes. I guess it doesn't make sense to compare the 12.5 % chance for 100 % damage to H6 values, as the other stats are no longer the same with the other skills.
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
seingeist
Promising
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted February 15, 2012 06:25 PM |
|
|
Quote:
6 % is a little low for my taste, but I could deffinitely live with that (and it's infinitely much better than the 2 % currently offered by DC I/II).
Well, you could certainly bump it up to 4 Luck per DC for total of 24% from the tree, but you'd need to buff the other passive stat-boosting skills accordingly to bring them into balance with it (which might in turn somewhat mess up the balance with other skills, but the whole skill tree is currently a completely unbalanced mess anyway).
In that case, a level 30 Inferno hero would max out Luck at 50% simply by taking the DC tree. I'm not saying that this is inappropriate (it might be perfect, actually), I'm just pointing it out.
Quote:
Heroes 3 was 12.5 % with expert Luck. Personally, I didn't like Luck back then, as I found it triggered too rarely, but I guess that's a personal opinion where the balance between unpredictable and unreliable goes.
I agree, it was too low. And that not just "conceptually," but also in terms of balance. I can't really envision a scenario, for example, in which the melee damage buff from Expert Offense would not have been clearly superior, and hence always a better skill choice than Expert Luck. 30% to melee vs 12.5% average to melee/ranged both is a no brainer for the former, given HOMM III's very favorable ratio of each faction's cumulative melee:ranged damage. Tower might get a bit closer to a 50:50 melee:ranged ratio with its master gremlins, mages, and titans, but in that case, there's another skill that's an INSANELY better choice than Luck: Expert archery for +50% ranged damage. 
|
|
Locksley
Promising
Famous Hero
Wielding a six-string
|
|
posted February 15, 2012 11:21 PM |
|
|
Some of my impressions of the balance
Hi,
and thanks for making this very interesting thread!
I played as Inferno Magic Blood some time ago and crushed a Necromancer in a duel. I boosted my destiny and magic power (in general and in fire) as much as possible, chose the army with two succubus stacks, and simply wiped out the liches in a turn or two while my pit lords dealt with the spiders through their mass fire retaliations, and my hero after a few damage boosting/reducing spells burned everything to the ground.
But I have been playing for some time since then and I agree that Inferno in reality has more problems than the others:
One problem is that in real games there are no double stacks of succubi.
The cerberi also really need to get their numbers increased. In the campaign there are several huge stack to pick up for free. This made reinforcements very powerful but even with life drain added it was still easy to lose a dog or two dogs in the easy battles.
I also miss the no retaliation but unlimited retaliations is fine for creeping with life drain. Another big problem is their large size, there are no ways to hide among your own units.
And as you say the elite units are too few as well, except for the breeder which is useless anyway.
Perhaps the low growth is a remainder from Heroes 5 where Inferno was blocked from high growth with an expensive and useless sacrifice building required for the castle to compensate for their massive gating. The also had extremely low defence.
In H6 gating is weak and Inferno needs a lot of creature growth to compensate (or stronger gating). All the healing and defence boosts in the other factions, especially Necropolis and Sanctuary, means that these factions have a larger creature bonus than Inferno, and therefore are overpowered.
Your discussion about luck is really enlightening, but perhaps one might add that Might Blood ability Demonic Luck actually compensate Inferno for their dependence on Luck, to some extent. But perhaps this is not enough, three classes are not compensated, and perhaps the damage bonus is too low.
Also, the probability for triggering luck is too low, especially since it is not as powerful as in H5.
But anything can happen, in my duel luck was never a problem and I could use instant level 4 gating several times.
Finally, the design of Inferno is really boring. Maniacs, ravagers and tormentors (and ghouls) are basically the same creature, breeders are too something, and the cerberi have lost a head. And none of these creatures are powerful, they are just ok fighters doing their job (well, not breeders). Other factions have powerful creatures that work well together in a well designed suit.
To make inferno balanced it should be more diversified. Heroes 5 had a much better variation and flexibility. There was several tanks, chargers, good special abilities that could be used according to the situation. Now we just let a generic demon hit someone in an uninspiring way.
|
|
DoubleDeck
Promising
Legendary Hero
Look into my eyes...
|
|
posted February 16, 2012 08:21 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Heroes 3 was 12.5 % with expert Luck. Personally, I didn't like Luck back then, as I found it triggered too rarely, but I guess that's a personal opinion where the balance between unpredictable and unreliable goes. I guess it doesn't make sense to compare the 12.5 % chance for 100 % damage to H6 values, as the other stats are no longer the same with the other skills.
Thanks for this, a little history reminder on luck:
H3 
- Dealt double damage with LOW triggering chance of 12,5% (with max luck ceiling of +3)
- There was no such thing as bad luck
H4
- Different mechanics with luck linked to defense so no explanation here
H5
- Dealt double damage with HIGH triggering chance of 50% (with max luck ceiling of +5)
- Bad luck introduced dealing only half damage (max of -5)
- The luck skill had certain ability benefits (swarming gate, warlock's luck, nature's luck)
So from all the heroes games up to H4, luck was not that important. But in H5, luck became game breaking and imbalanced.
So in H6 they tried to nerf the affects of luck (deals extra 50% damage, not double ; bad luck is hardly available, very low triggering chance). The problem is Inferno relies on luck in their racial. We all know this yes, just stressing the point.
So luck should be in between H3 and H5, ie.:
- Deals extra 75% damage
- Max Triggering chance at 33%
- Maybe indroduce Bad luck skills I, II & III and make this a unique skill only to Inferno (I think all factions shold have unique skills only availalbe to them an dno other faction).
|
|
seingeist
Promising
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted February 16, 2012 08:52 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Hi,
and thanks for making this very interesting thread!
I played as Inferno Magic Blood some time ago and crushed a Necromancer in a duel. I boosted my destiny and magic power (in general and in fire) as much as possible, chose the army with two succubus stacks, and simply wiped out the liches in a turn or two while my pit lords dealt with the spiders through their mass fire retaliations, and my hero after a few damage boosting/reducing spells burned everything to the ground.
Very good to hear. The Pit Lords' fire retaliation is nasty indeed under a Magic hero. Nevertheless, player talent/tactical skill is still an extremely important factor, and I suspect that you have a good deal more of this than your opponent had. Necro should be able to handle the Inferno pretty easily, all things being equal. It's their best match-up.
Quote:
But I have been playing for some time since then and I agree that Inferno in reality has more problems than the others:
One problem is that in real games there are no double stacks of succubi.
The cerberi also really need to get their numbers increased. In the campaign there are several huge stack to pick up for free. This made reinforcements very powerful but even with life drain added it was still easy to lose a dog or two dogs in the easy battles.
I also miss the no retaliation but unlimited retaliations is fine for creeping with life drain. Another big problem is their large size, there are no ways to hide among your own units.
Yeah, I always thought that particular detail of the campaign was telling. It's as if the devs were perfectly aware that you actually need a lot more dogs than you can get from the towns, i.e. they knew how imbalanced the situation was. (Similar to the way that Mass Heroism gives a bonus to Luck/Morale that is WAY out of scale with similar buffs, if we pretend those stats are equal to Might/Magic as the devs do elsewhere).
Quote:
And as you say the elite units are too few as well, except for the breeder which is useless anyway.
Perhaps the low growth is a remainder from Heroes 5 where Inferno was blocked from high growth with an expensive and useless sacrifice building required for the castle to compensate for their massive gating. The also had extremely low defence.
In H6 gating is weak and Inferno needs a lot of creature growth to compensate (or stronger gating). All the healing and defence boosts in the other factions, especially Necropolis and Sanctuary, means that these factions have a larger creature bonus than Inferno, and therefore are overpowered.
Yeah, it's a very serious deficit. Better growth nearly across the board would help (and that just to make Inferno comparable in base numbers to the other factions).
Quote:
Your discussion about luck is really enlightening, but perhaps one might add that Might Blood ability Demonic Luck actually compensate Inferno for their dependence on Luck, to some extent. But perhaps this is not enough, three classes are not compensated, and perhaps the damage bonus is too low.
Also, the probability for triggering luck is too low, especially since it is not as powerful as in H5.
But anything can happen, in my duel luck was never a problem and I could use instant level 4 gating several times.
Demonic Luck helps a little bit, but it is actually still way too low and as you said, it only helps out one of the four Demonic heroes. And yeah, with 50% crits, Luck triggering is significantly too low as well.
Quote:
Finally, the design of Inferno is really boring. Maniacs, ravagers and tormentors (and ghouls) are basically the same creature, breeders are too something, and the cerberi have lost a head. And none of these creatures are powerful, they are just ok fighters doing their job (well, not breeders). Other factions have powerful creatures that work well together in a well designed suit.
I was going to respond to this, but I will do so in a new thread, because I had been wanting to discuss this issue. I agree with you completely (possibly excepting the final sentence - I think the other factions have some design issues as well).
Quote:
To make inferno balanced it should be more diversified. Heroes 5 had a much better variation and flexibility. There was several tanks, chargers, good special abilities that could be used according to the situation. Now we just let a generic demon hit someone in an uninspiring way.
Point well taken. There is still a little bit of that diversity in roles; Ravagers have good defense and HP, and special abilities that make them fairly decent tanks (Demented can also stand in as tanks, albeit to a much lesser extent); archers in the Lilim and Breeders, with some good tactical options from Lilim's Enthrall; chargers in the Pit Fiends and dogs, even though the latter will get chewed to pieces if they don't go up there with Ravagers or major defensive buffs; and Lacerators are your heavy damage AoE.
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 16, 2012 02:11 PM |
|
|
Quote:
So from all the heroes games up to H4, luck was not that important. But in H5, luck became game breaking and imbalanced.
lol, not important in H4? you could reach 100% luck / bad luck. mass missfortune basically increased all damage by 50%.
|
|
Miru
Supreme Hero
A leaf in the river of time
|
|
posted February 17, 2012 05:31 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
I can't even think of what to say. Did no one read my proposal of luck boosting both chance to crit, as well as damage done by crits?
I'm not sure I did, I think perhaps I might have misunderstood what you wrote, and ment a suggestion about increasing both Luck chance and damage?
Anyway, if you mean that Luck stat inherently should boost both of these in the game, I'm against it. Problem with that suggestion is that you'll end up with a system where Heroes with low Luck will have both low chance to trigger and low benefit, whereas Heroes with high Luck will have both high chance to trigger and high benefit. This will end up as a very polarized scenario, either Luck is completely useless, or you have to go all-in on it and it's very powerful. Personally, I prefer a more linear scenario, where even with low scores, there's something useful about it - be that either a reasonable chance to trigger (cf. JJ's proposal) or a reasonable benefit (current and previous versions).
You posted 10 min after me, so presumably you opened a tab and later posted, never seeing mine, so I'll repeat it;
Quote:
Ok, so how about this: we don't like that attack grows at x^2.5 while luck grows at x, but we do like the current chance to strike for luck rate -- the solution is obvious; keep lucks chance at x, and also make the damage done grow at x^1.5, such that when you multiply it out the average bonus given by luck grows at x^2.5.
So where attack is
{1 + (.01*A)}^2.5
Luck would be
[normal damage] + [chance to crit]*([base crit bonus] + [growing crit bonus]
or (on average)
{1 + (.01*L)*(5+.5L^1.5)}
or
{1 + .05L + .005L^2.5}
With the coefficients adjusted for balance. I'm too lazy to adjust them myself, and maybe hobo, JJ, or Alci will.
Yes, I just used a sentence with a commma, a colon, another comma, a hypen, a semicolon, and two more commas.
Also: You know, I never thought I'd say this but I am getting sick of people using numbers to argue.
Your point of luck points giving more at higher levels is actually wrong. Take for instance, a simple damage boost. If you do 100% damage, and you upgrade that to 150% damage, you now do half again more damage. However if your attack bonus is already giving you 500% and you upgrade to 550% you are only doing 11/10 more damage, you would need to upgrade to 750% to get half again more. Luck is the same way, if your bonus is the same each level then it is actually giving diminishing returns. In order for high levels to be useful it needs to be growing. In HoMM 6 might already grows like x^2.5, while luck grows like x. My proposal has the benefits of luck growing with a term that is x^2.5, but unlike might is also has a term growing as x, with coefficients which should make it slightly better early game, and slightly worse late game (as opposed to now where it is nearly always worse). The bold numbers can be changed such that luck is on par with might.
{1 + (.01*L)*(5+.5L^1.5)}
____________
I wish I were employed by a stupendous paragraph, with capitalized English words and expressions.
|
|
seingeist
Promising
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted February 18, 2012 10:37 PM |
bonus applied by Doomforge on 20 Feb 2012. |
|
Now that it seems we will be able to play around with the creature attributes in game.orc a bit, I'd like to get a bit more serious about looking closely at the way that factions compare to each other numbers-wise.
I've expanded on the damage*growth table I posted earlier in this thread, adding cumulative army HP, avg. defense, and avg. initiative in order to get a more complete picture.
The damage and HP both have min./max values based on base creature growth vs. growth w/ maximum fortifications (for 1 week). Only upgraded creatures are used for the sake of simplicity and for comparing complete army strength.
The key for the table is the following (bear in mind that my slashes are not division symbols, I am just using them to separate the terms):
Upg. Creature name: Avg. damage*min. growth/ Avg. damage*max. growth (sum HP min. growth/ sum HP max. growth) [Might defense, Magic defense] Initiative.
Please feel free to skip to the end of the table, where I have summed up the totals for all five factions for easier comparison (each creature is listed line-by-line primarily for the sake of reference). The statistics in blue are the highest of the five factions, those in red are the lowest.
I excluded Luck and Morale because it there is not much need to compare them closely across the factions; a few general remarks after the table will suffice to clarify the overall Luck/Morale situation among the factions. Finally, the table below takes no account of special abilities (such as the Crusher's double attack) or range/obstacle penalties for shooters, so that is worth bearing in mind.
COMPLETE ARMY STRENGTH TABLE
Haven
Praetorian: 52.5/ 63 (480/ 576 HP) [10 might defense, 5 magic defense] 25 initiative
Marksman: 48/ 60 (336/ 420) [5, 3] 35
Vestal: 66/ 84 (275/ 350) [4, 10] 25
Imp. Griffin: 68/ 119 (340/ 595) [15, 10] 40
Bl. Glory: 82.5/ 132 (350/ 560) [14, 16] 50
Sun Crusader: 75/ 120 (475/ 760) [20, 14] 40
Seraph: 108/ 270 (650/ 1625) [40, 32] 45
Sum Total avg. damage: 500/ 848
Sum Total HP: 2906/ 4886
Avg. Might defense: 15.4 (30%)
Avg. Magic defense: 12.9 (26%)
Avg. Initiative: 37.1
Inferno
Demented: 66/ 84 (308/ 392) [9, 5] 40
Cerberus: 60/ 82.5 (224/ 308) [6, 8] 40
Lilim: 66/ 84 (264/ 336) [7, 5] 30
Breeder Mo.: 82.5/ 132 (375/ 600) [13, 15] 45
Lacerator: 78/ 136.5 (340/ 595) [14, 9] 45
Ravager: 78/ 136.5 (400/ 700) [17, 13] 55
Pit Lord: 119/ 297.5 (560/ 1400) [31, 26] 50
Total avg. damage: 549.5/ 953
Total HP: 2471/ 4331
Avg. Might def.: 13.9 (28%)
Avg. Magic def.: 11.6 (24%)
Avg. Ini.: 43.6
Necropolis
Skelly Spearman: 77/ 93.5 (322/ 391) [6, 5] 25
R. Ghoul: 63/ 84 (288/ 384) [8, 2] 35
Specter: 60/ 78 (270/ 351) [6, 7] 35
Archlich: 100/ 160 (360/ 576) [15, 13] 30
P. Lamasu: 96/ 144 (480/ 720) [16, 13] 30
Vamp. Lord: 105/ 150 (665/ 950) [20, 15] 50
F. Weaver: 117/ 292.5 avg. 2 forms (600/ 1500) [30 avg., 27.5 avg.] 45
Total avg. damage: 618/ 1002
Total HP: 2985/ 4872
Avg. Might def.: 14.4 (28%)
Avg. Magic def.: 11.8 (25%)
Avg. Ini.: 35.7
Sanctuary
Wanizame: 60/ 75 (372/ 465) [7, 3] 35
P. Priestess: 60.5/ 77 (242/ 308) [4, 7] 45
Kappa S: 65/ 80 (325/ 400) [6, 9] 55
Mizu: 69/ 103.5 (456/ 684) [15, 20] 50
Yuki: 60/ 105 (288/ 504) [13, 18] 45
Kensei: 82/ 143.5 (360/ 630) [18, 17] 50
S. Kirin: 171/ 342 (795/ 1590) [31, 33] 60
Total avg. damage: 567.5/ 926
Total HP: 2838/ 4581
Avg. Might def.: 13.4 (27%)
Avg. Magic def.: 15.3 (30%)
Avg. Ini.: 48.6
Stronghold
Crusher: 48/ 66 (288/ 396) [5, 3] 30
Goblin H.: 52/ 64 (338/ 416) [1, 3] 40
Fury: 65/ 84.5 (330/ 429) [4, 2] 50
Dreamreaver: 102/ 153 (600/ 900) [11, 12] 35
Centaur M: 64/ 112 (320/ 560) [8, 11] 50
P. Warrior: 100/ 160 (450/ 720) [11, 11] 55
E. Cyclops: 122/ 305 (700/ 1750) [26, 24] 40
Total avg. damage: 553/ 944.5
Total HP: 3026/ 5171
Avg. Might def.: 9.4 (20%)
Avg. Magic def.: 9.4 (20%)
Avg. Ini.: 42.9
OVERALL FACTION SUMMARY
HAVEN
Sum Total avg. damage: 500/ 848
Sum Total HP: 2906/ 4886
Avg. Might defense: 15.4 (30%)
Avg. Magic defense: 12.9 (26%)
Avg. Initiative: 37.1
INFERNO
Total avg. damage: 549.5/ 953
Total HP: 2471/ 4331
Avg. Might def.: 13.9 (28%)
Avg. Magic def.: 11.6 (24%)
Avg. Ini.: 43.6
NECROPOLIS
Total avg. damage: 618/ 1002
Total HP: 2985/ 4872
Avg. Might def.: 14.4 (28%)
Avg. Magic def.: 11.8 (25%)
Avg. Ini.: 35.7
SANCTUARY
Total avg. damage: 567.5/ 926
Total HP: 2838/ 4581
Avg. Might def.: 13.4 (27%)
Avg. Magic def.: 15.3 (30%)
Avg. Ini.: 48.6
STRONGHOLD
Total avg. damage: 553/ 944.5
Total HP: 3026/ 5171
Avg. Might def.: 9.4 (20%)
Avg. Magic def.: 9.4 (20%)
Avg. Ini.: 42.9
OK, creature Luck/Morale:
All that really needs to be said is that Inferno has higher than average Luck (~10 per unit), Haven has higher than average Morale (~10 per unit), and Necropolis has NO morale. All other factions average out to about 5-7 Luck/Morale per unit; there's not too much variation at all, so it's not really much of a factor.
As far as analysis of this data goes, I don't have too much to say right now because I'd like to take a break.
As has been pointed out many times already, Necropolis is clearly OP. With its excellent troop recovery potential and useful immunities, one would expect Necropolis to lag behind a little in the stats to balance out. NOPE. Highest damage, very solid HP, medium defense, bad initiative. They need some serious attribute nerfing: I'd target damage and defense. As I see it, Necropolis should have middling to low damage and lower-than-average defense, not the highest damage and on-par defense they have now. I can tolerate them having decent HP since their high growth is conceptually sound.
And, as has also been obvious to all, Inferno is the most underpowered by a country mile and in need of some buffing TLC. Their HP is abysmally low, due primarily to having the worst growth of all the factions. Defense is slightly lower-than-average (Stronghold is the only faction that's worse); these statistical factors as well as Inferno's lack of recovery options combine to make them the squishiest faction in the game. One would expect high damage to compensate for this weakness, but alas, Inferno's damage is basically right in the middle with everything that isn't Haven (low) or Necropolis (high). Buffing growth seems like the perfect solution to me; Inferno would end up having higher-than-average damage (as they should) and medium or medium-low HP (as opposed to atrociously low as it is now).
Sanctuary seems fine as it is, but I haven't played with them enough to make a very good judgment, so I would love to hear people's opinions.
Haven units seem about where they should be to me, stat-wise. Nerfs to Haven should probably be more in the realm of OP abilities (like Praetorian's Shieldguard, Sisters Heal, Blazing Glory dispel, and the strength of Haven's Racial).
Stronghold isn't as underpowered as the Inferno, but they could use a bit of love as well. Obviously, their defense is hilariously low, but that's somewhat offset by their high HP. Cyclops, Centaur, and Dreamweaver could probably use a damage boost (I think Cyclops should be highest in game).
|
|
seingeist
Promising
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted February 19, 2012 04:44 PM |
|
|
I've made a list of recommended attribute changes based on the data in my post above, mostly involving the points that I mentioned in the comments following the table.
To summarize the following, I have buffed the Inferno growth widely, nerfed the Necropolis damage and defense, and buffed the Stronghold damage and growth. At the end of the table, I have recalculated the faction summaries according to my recommended changes. Growth changes are in bold inasmuch as they are generally a bit more dramatic than small attribute changes.
MMH6 Attribute Balancing Suggestions
HAVEN
Praetorian: -1/Week
INFERNO
Demented: +1/Week
Hell Hound/Cerberus: +2/Week, +1 HP
Breeder/Breeder Mother: No Melee Penalty
Lacerator: +1/Week
Ravager: +1/Week
Pit Fiend: +5 HP, +3 min/max damage
Pit Lord: +10 HP, +2 min/max damage
NECROPOLIS
Skeleton: -1 Magic def.,
Skeletal Spearman: -1 Might/-2 Magic def., -1 max damage
Ghoul: +1/week, -2 HP, -1 Might def., -1 min/max damage
R. Ghoul: +1/week, -2 HP, -2 Might def, -1 min/max damage
Ghost: -1 Might/Magic def., -2 max damage
Specter: -1 Might/Magic def., -1 min/max damage
Lich: -2 min/ -3 max damage
Archlich: -1 Might /Magic def., -3 min/ -4 max damage
Vampire: -2 Might/ -1 Magic def.
Vampire Lord: -1/Week, -3 Might/ -2 Magic def.
Fate Spinner(h): -3 Might/Magic def.
Fate Spinner(s): +2 Magic def., -10 min/max damage (!)
Fate Weaver(h): -5 Might/ -4 Magic def., -1 min/max damage
Fate Weaver(s): -1 Might/+2 Magic def., -10 min/ -12 max damage (!)
SANCTUARY
Yuki-Onna: +1/Week
STRONGHOLD
Crusher: +1 min damage
Goblin: +1 max damage
Goblin Hunter: +2/week, +1 max damage
Harpy: +1 max damage
Fury: +1/Week.
Dreamwalker/Dreamreaver: +1 min/max damage
Centaur M.: +1/Week, +1 min damage
Cyclops/Enraged Cyclops: +3 min/max damage
REVISED BALANCE AFTER PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS:
HAVEN
Sum Total avg. damage: 496.5/ 844.5
Sum Total HP: 2874/ 4854
Avg. Might defense: 15.4 (30%)
Avg. Magic defense: 12.9 (26%)
Avg. Initiative: 37.1
INFERNO
Total avg. damage: 613.5/ 1023
Total HP: 2770/ 4663
Avg. Might def.: 13.9 (28%)
Avg. Magic def.: 11.6 (24%)
Avg. Ini.: 43.6
NECROPOLIS
Total avg. damage: 553.5/ 901.5
Total HP: 2902/ 4783
Avg. Might def.: 12.9 (26%)
Avg. Magic def.: 10.8 (23%)
Avg. Ini.: 35.7
SANCTUARY
Total avg. damage: 582.5/ 941
Total HP: 2910/ 4653
Avg. Might def.: 13.4 (27%)
Avg. Magic def.: 15.3 (30%)
Avg. Ini.: 48.6
STRONGHOLD
Total avg. damage: 609.5/ 1017.5
Total HP: 3191/ 5336
Avg. Might def.: 9.4 (20%)
Avg. Magic def.: 9.4 (20%)
Avg. Ini.: 42.9
As you can see, Necropolis now has the second-lowest damage and defense of the five factions (without being TOO low). Their HP basically remains tied with Haven for 2nd highest after Stronghold.
Stronghold and Inferno have both gotten a serious damage buff (primarily through growth) and are now more-or-less tied for top damage above the other factions. Inferno still has the lowest HP, but it is much closer to the other factions than it was before. Stronghold's HP is even higher than it was before, but this helps it compensate a bit more for its terrible defense.
The most dramatic change to any one unit was the nerfing of the Fate Weaver's ranged damage. I brought it down to the level of her melee damage (similar to the Cyclops in that regard).
No significant changes were made to Haven or Sanctuary.
Please let me know what you think of these recommended changes. What would you add or detract for the sake of better balance between the factions (attribute-wise)? Where was I too extreme or not extreme enough?
Please consult the Creature Table in the excellent fan-manual for reference to their current attributes if you want to get an idea of what their final values would be after changes.
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted February 19, 2012 07:32 PM |
|
|
A few comments, I don't know the game well enough to say that what I suggest is balanced (or even possible), but:
- I think shooters in general should have range penalty. The ability to shoot at full range with full damage should be limited to a few creatures like previously.
- I think the ranged ability should be moved from Fate Weavers Spider to Human form. The Human form should do less damage but be ranged, the Spider form does the more damage but is melee. I'm not sure of what other abilities it has, in general I think the Human form should have the magic oriented abilities, whereas the Spider form should have the might oriented abilities (poison, web, etc.).
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
Falconian
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted February 19, 2012 08:51 PM |
|
|
I think luck shouldn't be a game-deciding factor.
Luck is like a lucky hit in the well-hidden weak spot of an armor, it just doesn't happen 50% of the times.
Makes sense to happen 10%, max 15%.
In H3 luck used to be something you'd be somewhat surprised to see, either happy if it happened to you or "NAAAAW!!!" when it happened to your enemy.
Now I don't even blink when luck happens.
Morale is another story, it makes sense that your units have high morale under certain conditions.
|
|
DoubleDeck
Promising
Legendary Hero
Look into my eyes...
|
|
posted February 20, 2012 06:59 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
So from all the heroes games up to H4, luck was not that important. But in H5, luck became game breaking and imbalanced.
lol, not important in H4? you could reach 100% luck / bad luck. mass missfortune basically increased all damage by 50%.
But luck wasn't based on damage, it was based on defense in H4....
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 20, 2012 02:48 PM |
|
|
|
which means that misfortune increased the damage received.
|
|
DoubleDeck
Promising
Legendary Hero
Look into my eyes...
|
|
posted February 21, 2012 11:02 AM |
|
|
Quote:
which means that misfortune increased the damage received.
Indirectly yes, but misfortune decreased the defense from damage/attacks. I am talking about luck here as a damage modifier, not defense modifier which was H4, that's why I left out H4 on this discussion....
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 21, 2012 11:31 AM |
|
|
Actually, this might solve the problem!
"Luck" is something that may occur not only in the damage-DOING department, but also in the damage-AVOIDING department, and considering how useless the concept of BAD Luck is, simply allowing Luck in DEFENSE would
1) DOUBLE the trigger possibilities
2) DOUBLE Luck's effectiveness.
Currently, if I'm not wrong, Luck may trigger in attack (additional 50% damage) and in retaliation (additional 50% retaliation damage)
What if we would add a "Luck in defense" function - a second Luck check for the DEFENDER, that would SUBTRACT 33 1/3% of the suffered damage (and the same for the initial attacker in case of a retaliation).
This would allow a better fine-tuning of Inferno racial (double as many trigger chances) and would trim Luck into shape.
That might be a rather smooth solution for the problem, actually.
|
|
seingeist
Promising
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted February 21, 2012 02:10 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Actually, this might solve the problem!
"Luck" is something that may occur not only in the damage-DOING department, but also in the damage-AVOIDING department, and considering how useless the concept of BAD Luck is, simply allowing Luck in DEFENSE would
1) DOUBLE the trigger possibilities
2) DOUBLE Luck's effectiveness.
Currently, if I'm not wrong, Luck may trigger in attack (additional 50% damage) and in retaliation (additional 50% retaliation damage)
What if we would add a "Luck in defense" function - a second Luck check for the DEFENDER, that would SUBTRACT 33 1/3% of the suffered damage (and the same for the initial attacker in case of a retaliation).
This would allow a better fine-tuning of Inferno racial (double as many trigger chances) and would trim Luck into shape.
That might be a rather smooth solution for the problem, actually.
Love it.
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted February 21, 2012 04:23 PM |
|
|
Personally, I would rather see a separate "bad luck" and "bad morale" counter, with additional skills to influence those, like I suggested previously. That would also increase the triggers, and it would also make something meaningful out of bad luck/morale. But I guess it's a matter of taste which one you prefer.
____________
What will happen now?
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
