The "Mono Stacking" Problem

[Bootymcboots]

Give or take something like that, but imo it should stop at T3 max stats. We kinda have this with medals to some extent, it just need some extra oomph in a way of BST and Hero of the Meek.(or at least that is my take)

Not to be too pedantic, but would stopping it at T3 really be enough to address peoples' issues? For most units we're talking one extra tier. I'm not against allowing it as an option though. I just feel like for some people on this thread, it won't be 'right' until every unit can compete with the highest tiers on some level so that no unit is ever truly obsolete.

 

[Jolly Joker]

They don't have to become obsolete when different units provide different possibility for more varied strategies. With scouts example it is actually better to not have them at all in combat scenario in any significant numbers 'cause as soon as they will start dying in droves (and they will) it will trigger a mass rout. They are essentially a negative morale time bomb vs your own units that you brought and paid for.

I already gave that strategy: make enchantments useful on ly to tiers in relation to the tier the enchantments have. The way it actually is, there is no way a higher unit tier will not make a lower tier obsolete - it gets all the enchantments the lower tier has, and is therefore BY DEFINITION better - except for things like Mighty Meek, but there is only so much you can - and actually SHOULD - do here, because, let's repeat that, you invest ressources into researching a better unit - a SUBSTITUTION - which will cost more. The one thing that could save the current concept would be to let enchantments cost differently for different tiers, but it seems upkeep doesn't matter much with not many units being actually needed.

 

[GloatingSwine]

Hmmm... that really hasn't been the case for me in my experience? But I do tend to make sure I have a melee/ranged split in my army composition, and I don't know if that is correct or not?

But even then, having a duo-unit stack isn't exactly the biggest change as its still the same units used over and over again over anything else.

Mostly people don't do that because ranged units underperform. They're tragically easy to shut down, are less efficient with enchantments because of the mage/archer split, archers get less benefit from the enchantments that do hit them (+1 instead of +2), have to deal with the accuracy system, and don't get any significant bonus to compensate.

Plus there aren't really any good T4+ options.

If you want to have ranged you need to build around ranged and there are only really a couple of options (and one is a bit memey which is peacebringer/arrow of harmony spam).

 

[GloatingSwine]

Not to be too pedantic, but would stopping it at T3 really be enough to address peoples' issues? For most units we're talking one extra tier. I'm not against allowing it as an option though. I just feel like for some people on this thread, it won't be 'right' until every unit can compete with the highest tiers on some level so that no unit is ever truly obsolete.

The difference between base power/durability between T3 and T4 is as wide as between T1 and T3 right now.

Going back to a compressed power curve across 4 tiers where the T4s are, like they are in Planetfall, all the high power supports (eg. Calamity/Prosperity Dragon, Shrine of Smiting, stuff you inherently don't want to monostack anyway) would help because the higher tier researchables would be sidegrades not "does the same as everytihng you already have but so much better everything else is now irrelevant"

 

[Codyksp]

The difference between base power/durability between T3 and T4 is as wide as between T1 and T3 right now.

Going back to a compressed power curve across 4 tiers where the T4s are, like they are in Planetfall, all the high power supports (eg. Calamity/Prosperity Dragon, Shrine of Smiting, stuff you inherently don't want to monostack anyway) would help because the higher tier researchables would be sidegrades not "does the same as everytihng you already have but so much better everything else is now irrelevant"

Yep. The game would be much better with only 4 tiers and T4 units being "captains" that you don't want to stack.
That would force the core of your army to be T2 and T3 units (if unit counters actually tied with +1 unit tier).
Which would perhaps already happen if enchantments were limited (so you can't brute force beat the counter unit).

 

[aerothgow]

Yep. The game would be much better with only 4 tiers and T4 units being "captains" that you don't want to stack.
That would force the core of your army to be T2 and T3 units (if unit counters actually tied with +1 unit tier).
Which would perhaps already happen if enchantments were limited (so you can't brute force beat the counter unit).

No game would be better with less content.

 

[Codyksp]

No game would be better with less content.

How? The units wouldn't be deleted from the game you know. They would just be reworked into T1-T4.
Stacking enchantments is not "content". You can still unlock and play the enchantments, even with a limit.
It creates more "content" by allowing unit counters to not be beaten in brute force through enchantments.

 

[aerothgow]

How? The units wouldn't be deleted from the game you know. They would just be reworked into T1-T4.
Stacking enchantments is not "content". You can still unlock and play the enchantments, even with a limit.
It creates more "content" by allowing unit counters to not be beaten in brute force through enchantments.

So less strategic depth in a strategy game just because you can't balance high tier units....

 

[aerothgow]

So many complicated solutions for a simple fix.

Give cultures t4 units and make buffs don't stack. There solved.

 

[Arcantos_the_Storyteller]

Mostly people don't do that because ranged units underperform. They're tragically easy to shut down, are less efficient with enchantments because of the mage/archer split, archers get less benefit from the enchantments that do hit them (+1 instead of +2), have to deal with the accuracy system, and don't get any significant bonus to compensate.

Plus there aren't really any good T4+ options.

If you want to have ranged you need to build around ranged and there are only really a couple of options (and one is a bit memey which is peacebringer/arrow of harmony spam).

People say that, but in my recent game, that wasn't the case? At all?

Like, I played the School of Summoning, my armies were mostly made out of Wyverns and Fire Elementals. I had some Phase Beasts, and they were powerful, often one-shot enemies to my delight. But the Wyverns did a decent job soaking up damage, while the Fire Elementals were the main damage dealers of my army. But that might make them the exception not the norm, and it was their AoE ability which made them so strong, not their direct attacks.

I don't have the greatest experience with Aow4, so I can't say for certain. But everyone is talking about T4s like they are the only ones that matter in the end, but in my recent experience... honestly, I mostly summoned T1s, then swiftly ranked them up to T3, and they were undoubtedly the backbone of my army in that game. Could just be School of Summoning exclusive though, so maybe we should look more at the cultures to help fix some of the issues we are having with AoW4's lack of unit diversity?

Still I do see where you are coming from about split enchantments. Honestly, its fascinating to see that previously, archers were the strongest unit in the game, with the rainbow arrows being quite popular (at least in my experience), and now they are considered to be among the weaker units.

 

[Codyksp]

People say that, but in my recent game, that wasn't the case? At all?

Like, I played the School of Summoning, my armies were mostly made out of Wyverns and Fire Elementals. I had some Phase Beasts, and they were powerful, often one-shot enemies to my delight. But the Wyverns did a decent job soaking up damage, while the Fire Elementals were the main damage dealers of my army. But that might make them the exception not the norm, and it was their AoE ability which made them so strong, not their direct attacks.

The thing here is that you are playing the game in single player vs an AI who already plays sub-optimally.
It's an entirely different beast than the competitive multiplayer games that I am personally a part of.

We pit the powerful against the powerful and making small mistakes or sub-optimal choices means you lose.
So the difference in power between things is a lot more pronounced and felt by our community of players.

I don't have the greatest experience with Aow4, so I can't say for certain. But everyone is talking about T4s like they are the only ones that matter in the end, but in my recent experience... honestly, I mostly summoned T1s, then swiftly ranked them up to T3, and they were undoubtedly the backbone of my army in that game. Could just be School of Summoning exclusive though, so maybe we should look more at the cultures to help fix some of the issues we are having with AoW4's lack of unit diversity?

Most definitely a Mystic Summoning thing. Playing them with T1 Elementals (especially Lesser Snow Spirits) + Shepherd is very strong.
You dominate games with all of their bonuses due to higher stats and easy access to Legend rank T3 units (or T4 and T5 of course).
They were so oppressive in multiplayer that I had to completely change Master Summoner to only affect Combat Summon units now.

Lack of unit diversity is a thing, but solving that by itself will not be enough to promote actual diverse armies of units.
The reason being that the class counter system doesn't function beyond the Polearm unit class vs the Shock unit class.
All others get cut down for various reasons. But enchantments having no limit is one of them. Damage channels is another.

Still I do see where you are coming from about split enchantments. Honestly, its fascinating to see that previously, archers were the strongest unit in the game, with the rainbow arrows being quite popular (at least in my experience), and now they are considered to be among the weaker units.

The Ranged unit class is still so dangerous that Triumph has refused to add a T4 unit for them. Ironclad was purposely made Mythic.

 

[Thiend]

The thing here is that you are playing the game in single player vs an AI who already plays sub-optimally.
It's an entirely different beast than the competitive multiplayer games that I am personally a part of.

We pit the powerful against the powerful and making small mistakes or sub-optimal choices means you lose.
So the difference in power between things is a lot more pronounced and felt by our community of players.

It seems to me like it's a similar situation to Stellaris. Don't know if you play that so I'll describe the issue briefly - there are many possible choices that I would say are extremely underpowered, but a lot of people argue when you tell them that because, on most settings, you're basically going seal clubbing regardless of how suboptimal you play.

My own experience is that I'm a REALLY suboptimal AoW player, but I can still see some things and know that on an "attempting to win" level they're literally unplayable. It seems like ranged units in general are great, because as damage becomes high enough to invalidate durability they hit first. This seems to me to be due to enchantments and transformations, and in any case I would prefer it if stacking all of them wasn't optimal/possible because I find it thematically disappointing. This also seems to track with how polearms actually do function, because they hit first on a counter so they still work (at least against melee units).

 

[aerothgow]

After a few games with this patch i feel they are going backwards with balance.

t5 feels bad, except the reaper + flash freeze (please make flash freeze and blizzard same damage type so they dont stack status res sunder -8 is too much)

the racial t4 like war breed and in particular templars rule
battle mages are uber strong now

How to fix? Limit the number of enchantments and remove the mythic tag.
I don't know what the magic number of enchantments per unit should be 3,4,5,... but they cannot be all.
Also don't try to fix multistacking with nerfing the coolest units the t5 with that mythic tag. t5 should always be the end goal. right now they are not.
right now it's all about racial t4's with race transformation+enchants. let racial t4 have racial + enchant to keep them competitive and buff the non racial t4 like the dreadnaught but bring back t5. they are not worth it atm.

Or start including mythic in some of the enchantments. The golden golem had 1 day of maybe he's good because of that damage buff that you fixed ))) again feels balance of units is going backwards. instead of increasing the pool of viable units you are bottlenecking it more.

Also i'm not sure but i think the giant clense is glitched or it is not it's super strong. Too many cleanses...

And another thing so many morale buffs these days morale damage builds are 100% dead.

p.s.
the fire templar also needs his fire resistance lowered maybe to 1 or 2.

edit: it's impossible to balance a unit that can get all minor transformation and all enchantments vs others that don't get squat. limiting the nr of enchantments would make it more managable to balance units and including the mythic in the enchanment buffs would allow them to be what they should be the apex predators of the battlefield.


edit2: before i forget crucible fortification is a straight downgrade. you lose accuracy for some bad damage and thouse things explode with your walls and burn your units...they are awful.

 

[aerothgow]

Oh and good job with feudal you can now rush people with them getting knights and liege guards early you can really roll up on others in the early game. We really need t4 on all factions.

 

[Kitschy]

Oh and good job with feudal you can now rush people with them getting knights and liege guards early you can really roll up on others in the early game. We really need t4 on all factions.

Ehhh, no.

Seriously tho, T4 are way too dominant, you yourself see the problem now. So first things first - T4s need to be reined in, when T3s has some breathing room and T1/T2s getting some form of parity to T3 when it comes to EHP. After that every T4 could have a T4 for their T4 in any shape or form, otherwise it will cause more issues than it will solve.
Mythics just need some form of an aura for all friendly units and/or make their abilities scale from other units like it works with Smiting Prayer.

 

[seperamos]

Perhaps mythic units should have the best tag for enchantments and transformations in the game?

 

[aerothgow]

Ehhh, no.

Seriously tho, T4 are way too dominant, you yourself see the problem now. So first things first - T4s need to be reined in, when T3s has some breathing room and T1/T2s getting some form of parity to T3 when it comes to EHP. After that every T4 could have a T4 for their T4 in any shape or form, otherwise it will cause more issues than it will solve.
Mythics just need some form of an aura for all friendly units and/or make their abilities scale from other units like it works with Smiting Prayer.

And then you got all tiers at the same power. Why not make t1 the best and don't even bother with leveling up or progress? This is exactly the backward way of doing things in a stategy game.

To progress means you must always get something better at the end of the line. I don't want t4 to be nerfed across the board for t3 to shine. I want t5 to be buffed so they can shine. T4 should be better then t3.

t1<t2<t3<t4<T5

This is how it should be in any basic strategy game. Progress should be reworded.
To build to research to aquire to conquer is the point of a strategy game.

Rewording people that pay the upkeep of a t5 with the ultimate power. If i bring t5 dragon stack i wanna feel like the big dog not getting spanked by templars because they can stack a billion enchantments and racial transformations....

 

[GloatingSwine]

Ehhh, no.

Seriously tho, T4 are way too dominant, you yourself see the problem now. So first things first - T4s need to be reined in, when T3s has some breathing room and T1/T2s getting some form of parity to T3 when it comes to EHP. After that every T4 could have a T4 for their T4 in any shape or form, otherwise it will cause more issues than it will solve.
Mythics just need some form of an aura for all friendly units and/or make their abilities scale from other units like it works with Smiting Prayer.

Why not both?

T4s need reining in and faction T4s need to join the tome ones to increase the unit pool.

There should probably be a cost to bump the Aspirant Knight up to full blown T4 because it is super convenient to have them come out on the front lines.

 

[Kitschy]

And then you got all tiers at the same power. Why not make t1 the best and don't even bother with leveling up or progress? This is exactly the backward way of doing things in a stategy game.

To progress means you must always get something better at the end of the line. I don't want t4 to be nerfed across the board for t3 to shine. I want t5 to be buffed so they can shine. T4 should be better then t3.

t1<t2<t3<t4<T5

This is how it should be in any basic strategy game. Progress should be reworded.
To build to research to aquire to conquer is the point of a strategy game.

Rewording people that pay the upkeep of a t5 with the ultimate power. If i bring t5 dragon stack i wanna feel like the big dog not getting spanked by templars because they can stack a billion enchantments and racial transformations....

Don't be ridiculous, no one is talking about making low tiers "the best". Low tiers will still have low Status Res, meaning they are still highly susceptible to every type of debuff with little to no setup; won't have any specialized skills; won't have best damage.

What this will give you is different tools and opportunities based on economic, strategic and availability situations or goals. From needing a specific class at a certain time and having low tiers as a fallback or just simply having a choice based on situation at hand. Like for example having a choice between Dark Warrior T1 and Dark Knight T3, both have different uses even tho they are Shock units. (in that particular example even if both would have identical EHP/Status Res and damage there will still be strategic niches for both and I am not even advocating for this only for EHP parity)
Or needing an influx of new units that are baseline good enough after loosing a fight.

What you are talking about in your last paragraph is not a strategy game, but something else. If you are bringing whole stack with nothing but big monsters vs a counter to said big monsters, you should most definitely lose the whole stack of your big monsters.

Why not both?

T4s need reining in and faction T4s need to join the tome ones to increase the unit pool.

There should probably be a cost to bump the Aspirant Knight up to full blown T4 because it is super convenient to have them come out on the front lines.

Depends. If we are talking about more T4s that bring unique things to the table that can shine in specific and narrow niches then absolutely. If we are talking just adding more T4s for the sake of adding more T4s then ... please no.

 

[GloatingSwine]

Depends. If we are talking about more T4s that bring unique things to the table that can shine in specific and narrow niches then absolutely. If we are talking just adding more T4s for the sake of adding more T4s then ... please no.

It's more about letting the culture you picked at the start of the game continue to mean something to your army comp instead of being totally blown out by tome units.