Jump to content
World Warfare
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt

Unit Balance Changes(Feb.16th)


Guest Manson1975
 Share

Recommended Posts

I find it interesting that in all of the post above stating that "Gigs are easy to counter", not one person stated how to counter them. If the complaint is that the devs are changing things to accommodate people who don't know how to play, one step would be to put the information out there. In my experience, most leagues and experienced players don't want the tips, tricks, and tactics talked about because they would lose an advantage. 

"Educate the players...Save the Gigs"

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lowering gig health doesn't really negate their use as meat shields.   Gigs have no defensive or offensive measures and are slow.  Hp is about all they have.   Lowering hurts newer players far more then those of us with max gig tech also.  

 

Gigs may have 21% more hp over the crappy trans but it also hold a lot more units.   My issue isn't the meatshield issue it's that the only thing they have going for them is health.  Flying across the water they are sitting ducks many times I've seen gigs survive by very small amounts of hp. In the end you are correct.  The experiencened players will adapt.  But it will hurt those without high tech more then us anyways.     

 

HOW ABOUT FIXING THE REAL PROBLEM...... turrets target whatever you put on them.  Not the unit that can do the most damage.  Not the lowest hp or injured.   Only the unit you plop over top of it.   Gigs being the fastest meatshield.  But super tanks and Maus being far better lol.    Fix the real problem. 

 

Ill say say it again in case it wasn't understood.  Fix the real problem. Your turret targeting system blows big ole donkey d

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm on the same page here but player have to ask if they want help. I'm not just going to spill the tactic of my league. I will state it again for all YOU MADE A LEAGUE ARMAMENT EQUAL TO A CITY ARMAMENT!!!  League armaments take more resources and time, now add the drop in health and you have made EVERY troop that goes in it less valuable. You are gambling whether or not your troops will survive. 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bolt said:

Hey guys,

Thank you for all of your input on the unit changes, your feedback is very helpful! To give you some context into the changes, here are some thoughts to consider:

Experienced players always find the most efficient and optimal strategies on how to overcome obstacles or achieve an objective as efficiently as possible. Optimally, there are several good options to choose from and your choice is influenced by tactical considerations, play style and teamwork. However, if there are strategies that are overwhelmingly better than others (which can occur at times due to a flaw in the design), then players will naturally use that strategy repeatedly since other options are not as efficient. 

Before the change, the Gigant had 42% more hp than the C47 Skytrain. After the change, it has 21% more hp than the C47. It is still very efficient at being a "meat shield", just not as overwhelmingly so. The reason to test this balance change is not to kill a favored tactic, which is still valid; the change is meant to open up some "strategic space" so that other solutions can become just as viable as the Gigant "meat shield". If there is little or not benefit to this change then we can easily reverse it.

Now, some of you may be thinking "I figured out a long time ago how to deal with Gigants, why are you making such a big deal out of this?" You are correct that many players already make room in their army for the proper counters. I would venture to say most of the players who visit this forum understand the unit balance in the game and are not overwhelmed by Gigants buzzing overhead, or "Bomber Spam", or any other favored strategies. Veteran players can adapt very easily to a small change like this; what remains to be seen is if this change can in some small way improve the experience for newer players who are still learning the game. 

In conclusion, we hope you can keep an open mind and take time to experience the game and any subtle shifts that can come from a change like this. Then come back and tell us in your own words what your experience has been. Thank you for reading!

 

 

 

Not my problem that people don't want to learn strategys. Also the turrets targeting system is stupid as fuck they target scouts instead of ground lol.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/21/2017 at 5:38 PM, Getwrecked1127 said:

How does the motor carriage has the same range as a stug...i mean look at the size of the cannon even the regular arty outranges that its pretty weird.it deserves more attack range

Because it would be a bit op... think about it... no setup time but more range? I find people including my own league using 20+ arties in one army...

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol, there are a lot of Pasta players on this thread so I thought I would share my thoughts on the subject. As developers your success of the game depends on your ability to appeal to your gamers. This entire thread is negative! I know that isn't exactly representative of everyone in the game, but it should at least convey a singular agreement: no one likes the adjustment to the defense and hp of the gigs. The game is based off improvements and I agree that this adjustment isn't one of them. Yes the active and good players/leagues will find a way to counter these with ease, and we already have. It does feel like the players who had the tech maxed got "narfed on" though. 

My ID number is 16022 which means I'm the 16,022nd player to download and play this game. I've been playing for over a year now and we have seen sooooooooooooooooooo many changes in that period of time. Most of them are good and some, just make you scratch your head. Look, it's your game and you're gonna do what you're gonna do. However, if you want people to be long time players and spend more money, you need to listen to us. Especially if we are paying you money. That is a disservice in my opinion and it makes me feel cheated, unsupported, and not want to play the game anymore. I've put almost 3,000 hours of game time on here and paid somewhere between $500-1000 on this game. I know there are tons of other players who pay as well. I mean that is why you all made the game in the first place and offered diamonds for $$$. 

I think that you need to focus on more important issues like the chat system not working properly, not receiving notifications when you're being attacked, or when there is so much lag the game crashes and you can't log back in for hours.....and subsequently have to reinstall the game....and lost all your troops.

Personally, I love the game and will continue to push myself to be better than Cck at the moment lol. Just my two cents.

 

Sincerely, 

Schnack (paying customer)

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bolt said:

Hey guys,

Thank you for all of your input on the unit changes, your feedback is very helpful! To give you some context into the changes, here are some thoughts to consider:

Experienced players always find the most efficient and optimal strategies on how to overcome obstacles or achieve an objective as efficiently as possible. Optimally, there are several good options to choose from and your choice is influenced by tactical considerations, play style and teamwork. However, if there are strategies that are overwhelmingly better than others (which can occur at times due to a flaw in the design), then players will naturally use that strategy repeatedly since other options are not as efficient. 

Before the change, the Gigant had 42% more hp than the C47 Skytrain. After the change, it has 21% more hp than the C47. It is still very efficient at being a "meat shield", just not as overwhelmingly so. The reason to test this balance change is not to kill a favored tactic, which is still valid; the change is meant to open up some "strategic space" so that other solutions can become just as viable as the Gigant "meat shield". If there is little or no benefit to this change then we can easily reverse it.

Now, some of you may be thinking "I figured out a long time ago how to deal with Gigants, why are you making such a big deal out of this?" You are correct that many players already make room in their army for the proper counters. I would venture to say most of the players who visit this forum understand the unit balance in the game and are not overwhelmed by Gigants buzzing overhead, or "Bomber Spam", or any other favored strategies. Veteran players can adapt very easily to a small change like this; what remains to be seen is if this change can in some small way improve the experience for newer players who are still learning the game. 

In conclusion, we hope you can keep an open mind and take time to experience the game and any subtle shifts that can come from a change like this. Then come back and tell us in your own words what your experience has been. Thank you for reading!

 

 

 

Id hate to tell ya man but its not that its hurting other strategies... if i was being attacked and had troops to defend the city, I'd shoot down the gigs, then I'd beable to have a better defense... to be quite honest im one of those guys that doesnt want to have to rebuild a hundred times to keep a full army... the gigs aren't the problem... its the defenders that whine about getting their butts kicked and losing their city so they will say that some troops are overpowered... like i said if there was a problem when i was getting attack... id find and solve the problem not whine to the devs about some "problem" that really doesnt exist... it would just make us feel better if we could have our old gigs back or if the health is really the issue increase the defense or somethin... please take this into consideration and don't punish us...

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Hitgirl said:

I'm on the same page here but player have to ask if they want help. I'm not just going to spill the tactic of my league. I will state it again for all YOU MADE A LEAGUE ARMAMENT EQUAL TO A CITY ARMAMENT!!!  League armaments take more resources and time, now add the drop in health and you have made EVERY troop that goes in it less valuable. You are gambling whether or not your troops will survive. 

Exactly, change the gig health back NOW! We have all said it multiple times! The gig change was not needed once so ever. WE want it back the way it was. I will stop spending money in this game if this isn't back because why would I invest in a game that doesn't listen to my opinions!? Our opinions!

Edited by Derrick321
Link to comment
Share on other sites

See this^^these are paying people that play your game, listen to US. Our opinions better be presented and put into effect. I won't spend money on a game that doesn't listen to me. We all play a major role in the success of your game in this gig change isn't to be taken lightly. If we don't like it then... Well... YOU HAD BEST BE CHANGING IT!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bolt, 

It would be helpful (at least for me) to have the issue clarified, because it seems that the problem the designers are trying to fix and the problem the players are complaining about aren't the same thing.

My understanding of the issues are:

From the developers side: Gigs are easily built in the early game, they are used as meatsheilds to prevent turrets from assisting the cities defense, newer players are suffering because they don't know how to counter this tactic. The fix: Nerf the Gigs

From the Players side: Gigs are the primary transport for player armies, and when shot down with troops the impact is significant. Any change to the vulnerability of the gigs is very threatening due to the time and resources invested in the armies.

I could be mistaken, but this is my understanding of the issues from both sides.

Having said that I will answer some of your questions.

How has this change impacted your strategy?

It hasn't, Turrets are useless defending cities past day 1-1.5 an I protect my loaded gigs like a mother hen already.

Have you made any adjustments to what units you build?

Not due to this issue.

Any anecdotes of battles lost or won due to the change?

No

Do you find Gigants significantly easier to shoot down? 

Not that I've noticed, but the sample size is too small imo, needs more time to analyze.

Have you noticed any significant changes in the way other players use this Unit?

No

The C47 is inferior in several ways compared to the Gigant. Do you think it should be buffed?

A C-47 is supposed to carry any troop but armored. Tank Destroyers are not armored, but cannot be carried by C-47. Id like to see that fixed

 

Regards,

MkV

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The actual adjustment to gigs isn't really the problem.  It's the fact that the turret targeting system isn't being addressed.    Might as well drop every troop a bunch more hp if that's how turrets are being addressed    Or just fix the turrets so they actually do something other then shoot at what's on top of them 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Bagregregg said:

What if a player could decide what the turret targets.  Turrets always seem to have an order to whast they target and will switch to something that is a preferred target over something it almost destroyed.  What if you could press the turrets and chose attack and select a target just like tanks and planes.

That is a popular request. I shudder to think of how difficult it will be to cap when people keep gemming the turrets and targeting the infantry that's trying to cap. Caps will need 3-4 infantry to go through with high level turrets

Edited by MkV
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

As seen in this pic of a level 17 turret.  A turrets damage is far greater against everything other than air.   I'm not saying we should have selective targeting with turrets but maybe the turret could shoot at something it can actually kill.   2000damage vs air.  Yeah let's shoot that when 6500 vs ground would crush stuff.   Targeting needs to not be what's right over turrets and should be what can both deal the. Let damage and be killed quickly (algorithm for this would be easy).  It's been stated for a long time and numerous "fixes" have been implemented but not one actually addressed the issue.   Was better when turrets targeted a single injured unit.   Circle gigs but all 3 turrets would shoot the same gig.   Then move on to the next one.   

 

 

 

 

 

 

IMG_3600.PNG

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I'm not sure being able to target your turrets manually would be a great idea.  Partly for the infantry thing.   But why is it that the turret only targets the object directly over it first.      Just so happens they are at their weakest vs air targets.   In isles my level 17s have 6500 vs armored and 2080 vs air.   Seems legit they shoot at air lol.  Even if their are a bunch of out of food stugs that are almost dead the turret still targets the troop on top of it.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bolt said:

Can you think of any other scenarios where there is a 'negative' effect if players could direct the targeting on the turret? 

All scenarios are negative for the attacker. The ability to target turrets would be a major game changer. In itself, maybe not a bad thing, but combine that with the ability to gem the turrets back to life, and it becomes a broken mechanic. We can target units now, it's not the targeting that would be bad, it's the combo of gemming and targeting that worries me. 

Turrets alone can not, and should not be expected to hold a city. When incorporated into a defense along with troops they can be a difference maker, especially in the early game. Later they are less of an issue. 

The issue as I see it is multilayered. First, turrets are not very strong vs air, second, air is available early in the game before any effective aa. The hp on gigs and transports, combine with low aa on turrets and you get an effective shutdown on turrets. 

I personally am not a fan of the lowering of the hp on gigs for many of the reason that others have already stated. It's degrading their primary role to try and fix an unintended role.

Some  thoughts on fixes;

add a low level, non-aoe aa unit (20mm flak) available at munitions 4 or LC munitions 1

give some units a small, non-aoe aa ability (.50 cal on the jeep for example)

raise the turrets aa

change the turret targeting to ignore what's on it and always hit the lowest health in range.

 

This is just off of the top of my head, I'm sure there are some other ideas out there.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Changing turrets damage will definitely help but sometimes at the begginings of a match you don't want a turret to be to good, you don't want a few low level turrets killing a bunch of your stugz. Basically don't make it to where someone can just gem turrets up to level 5 and be safe for the first couple of days. Still make it to where troops defending a city is the best way to defend your city and primarily better. Turrets can't be to powerful in the beginning. Maybe only have a serious change in stats or targeting when the city is a certain level and when the strats and gigs start rolling in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Derrick321 said:

Changing turrets damage will definitely help but sometimes at the begginings of a match you don't want a turret to be to good, you don't want a few low level turrets killing a bunch of your stugz. Basically don't make it to where someone can just gem turrets up to level 5 and be safe for the first couple of days. Still make it to where troops defending a city is the best way to defend your city and primarily better. Turrets can't be to powerful in the beginning. Maybe only have a serious change in stats or targeting when the city is a certain level and when the strats and gigs start rolling in.

The only change should be to the turrets aa rating. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Peter unfeatured this topic

First comment you changed the gigs to help new players. Defeats your own thought for the simple reason any new player can not win vs a vet league of players. Only thing that will help them that you majorly over looked is time spent playing and learning the game or getting lucky to join a decent league to learn faster. That's the only help a new player will ever have. If you don't see that then you need to start joining the major leagues that's out there and learn from us to see how the games played and what's most impactful to the game. Does the admin play at all. It's hard to make changes to something you don't play like the players do we learned things for a reason to become good players. 

 

Now next thing why did lucky use gigs over strat bombers as there health was so close to each other? First it's because the defense was 700 before. I know Jane said it was 600 before but the reason behind our tactic was the extra defense the gig had. Now both the strat bomber and gig have same defense and the trans has lower health now so what's the new meat shield the strat bomber because of its hp.. new players can get a gig trans faster than they can get a strat bomber all because you need a lc lvled with res sent. Lvl 1 lc makes a gig lvl 3 plus lvl 3 muni for strat bomber.

 

now over a year playing this game did the strat bomber loose health faster than the gig trans when they was close in health? Yes why because it had 600 defense and the gig had 700 I'm not looking at tech tree for extra d I'm talking about base stat can any player correcting me and say that the gig trans lost health the same as a strat bomber? I don't have screen shots to prove it because I didn't know that was going to be changed.

 

now you know why lucky used a trans and not a strat was because of the defense they last longer considering simuler health amount.

its easy to use a strat now instead of a gig tran over a turret. It has same d and more hit points now.

 

now before you go changing the turrets to help new players this is my feed back.

i like where some of you are going with the turret ideas but this is why I don't like the ideas.

1. First targeting what troops you want with a turret will hurt new players as they could never cap a city from a experience player.

2. City's are meant to be capped and lost. They are not meant to be undefeatable.

3. Giving turrets target control or hit lowest health target or not hit wants on top of them cause more draw back such as 

a. It's the thing mentioned a few times here it's time. What I mean is it take a lot of time and res to make full army then send them out to fight. If someone comes at me with 10 stugz I'm targeting all his stugz until there dead then he looses the rest of his troops lvled up turrets can take a beating as well as dish one out.

b. None of what I said above helps a new player but in return makes it pretty much impossible for them to take any city from a veteran player.

what do I think the game needs?

1. Resources where are they? In cup it's a 3 star rss what I mean is it has 3 logos meaning it gives more to own that one vs the one with 1 logo. Water map has the 3star in the middle. 

Global has crap rss it was improved by adding more to the map at one time, but what makes cup or water map or even golden more fun to the players vs boring global map? It's because more rss more troops faster and when you got more troops you can start wars faster I really think rss need to be more across the board.

2. Cups league turny Asian pockets call it what you will, need more balance the recent change to give out so many free troops from missions takes all the skill and work effort out of the map. It's over by the first team that spawns earlyer or over when first team gets all those free bombers and fighters and aa. Once made first no team can defend while they just started making them or still havnt got them yet. Once a good battle breaks out and one side takes a lose to there bomber unit the map has its winner by then which is day 1. 

How long does cup last omg you said longer than 1 day well your wrong it won't even see day 3 or 4 because of all the free troops.

if you changed it and got rid of them all together does it hurt lucky yes because it helps us to be on top with out much competition because we expand faster than most. So I'm not asking for a favorable change.

Silver by the season

Season 1 had 24 teams

Season 2 had 19 because a lot of teams boycotted because our voices wasn't heard they still havnt and a 10k limit got twisted to the purple gems which no one likes if so show me one person that likes them

Season 3 22 teams went

Season 4 20 teams went

Season 5 ?

look at those numbers by season 4 when you figure up 5 beast leagues from bronze cup moving to silver cup that means season one had 24 go in season 4 could have had 39 leagues to go in because 5 best league of bronze got moved up but since the first season it's went down in numbers not up since season one. Is the extra troops the only issue no it need alof of balance and that's a starter it should be played with more of what ya earned to get going and the final days like a year ago Was deciding who won the match not day one.

last how many times you seen people saying they wish golden was back? I have seen it a lot it was lacking more water but reason it was more fun was because of the good mines. ATM it takes a full week to get enough gold to lvl one troop one lvl is the upgrade system balanced? no it's far off do a avg of a good player of 100k gold per week and tell me how long in weeks or the 8 days a map last will it take to lvl up all troops can you do that for me and post it here. Is it 5 years need to be played before a avg player can lvl up all his troops? Where is the balance in that. One of the largest games that's been going over 10 years is world of Warcraft did it take them 5 years to get there toons to max with max professions there is a reason why it's been around as a monthly membership fee for more than 10 years and it hasn't went free to play for that reason. Everything takes time to make it fun and not get board from doing things too fast. But the same boardness comes from taking 2 long to get to a goal as well so balance the gold system is a must it need to be reach by the avg player not just someone willing to buy 7 lvls of a troops for 100 usd for the 700,000

game is mission balance but it's not in the troops changes that your making. 

Buffing jeeps and other small troops did nothing to impact the beginner player it actually helped the vet grow faster right off the bat there is some troops that willl never be used long term passed day one. Was time and effort spent on making this jeeps change that the time could have been spent to really balance the game where it's needed. Did it take away time from the chat system issue that players are upset about? Did it help moral? 

My last comment is the gig transport change wasn't a positive effect on the game when will all the upset players that posted here see it changed back? That's the concern that I'm seeing I havnt seen one person new or old say it was a good change.

in the end we play a game that needs to be fun for a lot of people as it won't be for everyone. It is to a lot. The focus over the past year hasn't always went the players way but some has. But one thing I have seen in the past year is taking time away from a issue to make changes and fixes or realease a android version when the Apple version had more bugs that my league had oil lol. What I mean is if it was me I would focus only chat issue as I think it relates to the announcement issue and I have helped explain this on the forums and in my support help ticket. Once everyone focused on one thing finds the fix I release it ASAP to keep players seeing action and things getting done. Then I move to the next big issue and the next. Waiting for someone to reprogram troops health and make changes to the map or any other thing so you can realease 10 changes at once has hurt the game more ways than help this is why. For the past year I have seen a big update come and there was so many changes it broke a lot of stuff. By doing so ran away a lot of good players. But if the changes was kept small and no more than 2-3 at a time, it becomes easier to fix because one of those 2-3 things cause the new issue so on the drawing board you change one back to original see if it's still a problem if not change the next then the last then I found out which of the changes caused the isssue faster and I can release a fix faster. I try to give the best input I can and have always gave as much explanation as I felt needed. 

It might be long and it might be harder to read but its input that's posted to give you all the help I can.  

Ps: please tell us total number of weeks it will take us to max all troops thanks we want to see if it's balanced 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Guest unpinned this topic

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...