Unit Pricing

brayton · (This post was last modified: 07-09-2012 03:20 PM by brayton.)

Heavys used to be cheaper(if i recall correctly) and this was changed to allow a better balance between defence and attack. When they were cheap and had grater movement they would be for attack, and the soldier was left out often.
Remember the game has all ready been tested for months, and us beta's had sent some very long and detailed reports on units, maps, gameplay and pricing. That is why they had changed for the beta(beta instead of better, a reallly bad joke).

Yes i agree that runners being able to 1 hit snipers and medics a thing to think about. But medics can +1 and this is a big part of it. Medics have and satisfy the niché. No problem, and the runners movement may be reduced sooner or later or never.
What is more annoying, the game being debatedly slightly out or the bugs that stop you from playing.

I dont want to spitt out ideas about specials and make the game complex, but a unit that boosts attack by 1 would not just unbalance the game, but rather tip it upside down, and everything would die in record time.
So remember it is great at the moment, and changes have to be eased to not kill it.

yasw · 07-09-2012, 05:19 PM

In general, I am very impressed on how well balanced the game really is. Thumbs up for the betatesters. Many games could learn from this.

For me, the use of heavies mostly comes down to map size. On smaller maps, I prefer runners and soldiers for getting forward quickly. On larger maps, building a small army with some heavies is both fun and useful. Especially if you play as the adorables and can teleport your heavy units around Big Grin

Kirenx · 07-09-2012, 06:37 PM

Well, it sounds like overall the best solution would be to knock the Runners movement down by 1. I wonder if the Sniper's movement should be bumped up to 2 as well, to make them a bit more usable other than strictly for defense or transported. There are 6 units, it definitely would be nice to see less niche units and open up for a large variety in purchases. If Runners are going to comprise 70+% of the total units bought in every game it could get old pretty fast.

Fluffysox · (This post was last modified: 07-09-2012 08:56 PM by Fluffysox.)

(07-09-2012 06:37 PM)Kirenx Wrote: Well, it sounds like overall the best solution would be to knock the Runners movement down by 1. I wonder if the Sniper's movement should be bumped up to 2 as well, to make them a bit more usable other than strictly for defense or transported. There are 6 units, it definitely would be nice to see less niche units and open up for a large variety in purchases. If Runners are going to comprise 70+% of the total units bought in every game it could get old pretty fast.

Snipers with 2 movement speed means that it could basically attack units 5 tiles away. That's like, half of shark food island!!!!!!

Also if you did both of wat you said, runner and sniper would have same sight range. I think I like it the way it is with you relying on a weak source for information. Also if you build a runner to scout, you can't build something else from the same spawn but if you did this with sniper, it could outrange soldiers and always get the first hit off. This either kills them or brings them to 1 hp. So as you can see, OML have done a very good job of keeping the mechanics and units of this game very close together. Simply changing one thing could change so much more.

CombatEX · 07-10-2012, 12:18 AM

(07-09-2012 06:37 PM)Kirenx Wrote: If Runners are going to comprise 70+% of the total units bought in every game it could get old pretty fast.

Selective reading much? Scout's do not comprise 70%+ of the actual game. Once one player has gotten way ahead then the number of scouts made skyrockets, but for the actual part of the game before one person essentially has won, the fraction of scouts isn't that outrageous. The thing is, like in the supertitan game, the ratio of scouts to other units josue made was only 5-2 (keep in mind his opponent made 9 scouts so at least 1 or 2 of josue's scouts were made in retaliation. Really josue probably would have made something like 4-3 or 4-2 if not for his opponent overmaking NINE scouts). 4-3 or 4-2 doesn't seem like too many scouts to me. The thing is, after josue got really far ahead by turn 14 or so, then the number of scouts made from that point spirals. Why? Because scouts are too good? No. Because when you're way behind like Cani was you don't have many wits. So what can you make when your opponent is pressuring you with 2 or 3 units and you have no wits or units? You can make 2 scouts, move with them, and attack. You'll then only have 2 wits left. So you're stuck getting out what little you can to hold off your opponent and this usually means making scouts, not because you want to, but because you can't get out much else. As josue, you've already won the game so might as well throw scouts at different parts of the map to keep up that lead. For example, josue kept threatening the resource node with a scout because he's already way ahead and knows his opponent can't afford to deal with defending his resource node when he's already way behind with his main army comp.

You also have to consider that units produced =/= units being used on the map. Scouts die extremely fast whereas other units have much greater survivability. I'd imagine if you made a graph of scout to other unit ratio on the map during any given turn over the course of the game you'd find scouts weren't THAT over-prevalent. Also keep in mind that Cani used a very scout heavy strategy (which probably was what lost him the game since scouts are inefficient attackers in terms of wits, see szei's post). So in a more typical game where one person doesn't early scout rush (cani made 4 scouts in his first 2 turns), you'll see even fewer scouts.

The units on the field are more important than the units being made because that reflects what is actually being used.

ArtNJ · 07-10-2012, 12:46 AM

Runners with only 4 movement would essentially never get used by good players on the small one spawn maps. They would still be used on the larger two spawn maps, but in general, soldiers would become the new runners.

At high levels of play, runners really become like pawns in chess. They are used to scout, to provide cover, and support your heavy pieces. Its generally the heavy pieces that do the major work, regardless of how many runners get built and deployed.

aaronINdayton · 07-10-2012, 02:20 AM

Sure, Runners get used a lot, because they're super good! But soldiers are the counter, soldiers destroy runners. The reason I personally build so many Runners is for map vision, I have to have vision of the majority of the map at all times, or else I build another runner. They're also great for medic/sniper diving, equally great when buffed and killing other Runners, taking wit spaces, covering enemy spawns, all kinds of amazing utility!

But, if you only build runners, you should lose. I rarely build runners for combat, only when I can spawn one and reach the conflict and do that 1 last point of damage to a heavy or soldier. Combat wise I roll the other units and compliment the fight based on the circumstance.

About the Super Units costing 7, I'd like to see how it'd work if they only cost 5 or 6, and I'd even be curious how the game worked if Runners were only 4 move/sight. But I'm sure all of this was hammered out in Beta. That's what the Beta was for, right? It's way too early to be asking for a Runner nerf, a Super Unit price drop, or anything else for that matter.

Kirenx · (This post was last modified: 07-10-2012 02:45 AM by Kirenx.)

(07-10-2012 12:18 AM)CombatEX Wrote: Selective reading much?

Apparently not as you just proved my point.

(07-10-2012 12:18 AM)CombatEX Wrote: The units on the field are more important than the units being made because that reflects what is actually being used.

What???

(07-10-2012 12:46 AM)ArtNJ Wrote: Runners with only 4 movement would essentially never get used by good players on the small one spawn maps. They would still be used on the larger two spawn maps, but in general, soldiers would become the new runners.

At high levels of play, runners really become like pawns in chess. They are used to scout, to provide cover, and support your heavy pieces. Its generally the heavy pieces that do the major work, regardless of how many runners get built and deployed.

Would it really be a bad thing if they didn't get used on smaller maps? It seems to me that would vary the viable strategies per map more as soldiers will never fully be the new runners with their movement.

ArtNJ · 07-10-2012, 02:47 AM

(07-10-2012 02:42 AM)Kirenx Wrote:
(07-10-2012 12:18 AM)CombatEX Wrote: Selective reading much?

Apparently not as you just proved my point.

(07-10-2012 12:18 AM)CombatEX Wrote: The units on the field are more important than the units being made because that reflects what is actually being used.

What???

CombatEX is saying that you start with a variety of heavy units, and how you move and use those is they key to the game. Because you start with the good stuff, to some degree what you need is support, scouting and flexibility to accompany the power that you have. So yes, runners are purchased and important, but as CombatEX is saying, the purchases dont reflect the as used on the battlefield importance.

Kirenx · (This post was last modified: 07-10-2012 02:51 AM by Kirenx.)

(07-10-2012 02:20 AM)aaronINdayton Wrote: Sure, Runners get used a lot, because they're super good! But soldiers are the counter, soldiers destroy runners. The reason I personally build so many Runners is for map vision, I have to have vision of the majority of the map at all times, or else I build another runner. They're also great for medic/sniper diving, equally great when buffed and killing other Runners, taking wit spaces, covering enemy spawns, all kinds of amazing utility!

But, if you only build runners, you should lose. I rarely build runners for combat, only when I can spawn one and reach the conflict and do that 1 last point of damage to a heavy or soldier. Combat wise I roll the other units and compliment the fight based on the circumstance.

About the Super Units costing 7, I'd like to see how it'd work if they only cost 5 or 6, and I'd even be curious how the game worked if Runners were only 4 move/sight. But I'm sure all of this was hammered out in Beta. That's what the Beta was for, right? It's way too early to be asking for a Runner nerf, a Super Unit price drop, or anything else for that matter.

Soldiers do not completely counter Runners as it is fairly simple to just keep the Runner out of the Soldiers range, but I do understand what you are trying to say. I definitely would like to see the super at a cheapier cost too, just to see if they get more play. As for Beta's, while I always think a game is better post-beta testing, I have beta tested enough games to know they rarely come close to perfecting a game, in fact usually games improve more after release due to input from a larger playerbase.

(07-10-2012 02:47 AM)ArtNJ Wrote:
(07-10-2012 02:42 AM)Kirenx Wrote:
(07-10-2012 12:18 AM)CombatEX Wrote: Selective reading much?

Apparently not as you just proved my point.

(07-10-2012 12:18 AM)CombatEX Wrote: The units on the field are more important than the units being made because that reflects what is actually being used.

What???

CombatEX is saying that you start with a variety of heavy units, and how you move and use those is they key to the game. Because you start with the good stuff, to some degree what you need is support, scouting and flexibility to accompany the power that you have. So yes, runners are purchased and important, but as CombatEX is saying, the purchases dont reflect the as used on the battlefield importance.

Well I guess we will see over time. I tend to agree with others though that Runners with less movement would open up the game more.