Wolf Update Open Beta

[P5552]

AI did get nerfed probably unintentionally with AI Hero Recruitment Cooldown change, players have no such restriction.


Not at all, there is a lot of questions that can be raised now.

For example how Wonders should be balanced (especially gold ones) for multiple heroes or not; what is an average desirable hero number per standard game; should there be hero maintenance costs; what about previous balance vision when heroes were restricted by city cap shouldn't city creation imperium costs be lowered now; etc.
All of this is as important for SP as it is for MP.

Balance the wonders as normal - for a stack of 6 units. I don't see how bringing two or more heroes is supposed to turn the balance upside down, especially early on, when the heroes aren't all that strong. What's the difference between bringing a level 3 hero or a tier III unit? At that point, a T3 unit will be even stronger than a hero. What's the difference between bringing a level 7 hero or a Tier IV such as phoenix? I read a reply saying that people are hero stacking. With the current system, to recruit 6 heroes, you need to wait 100 turns (excluding hurrying up with Imperium). By that time, you can mass spam any T5 unit of your choice and do any wonder with 1 hero + 5 golden golems.

If you believe heroes are OP I would rather work on the actual cause such as restoration giving free resurrection or summon abilities giving free Tier 3 animal/elemental as early on as on level 4 (imo they should be only accessible on level 12 and higher).

But the elephant in the room is that heroes are supposedly disturbing the balance whereas that's only valid for maybe 5% of the playerbase playing hardcore PvP multiplayer, because they can farm exp so proficiently that they end up with several leaders on level 15 or so by turn 50. I fail to believe that's the case for 95% of the playerbase and they are more likely to have level 5 - 8 heroes by that time. And I fail to see how a low level hero is significantly stronger than a Glade Runner, Awakener, Bronze Golem or any other strong Tier III unit - especially when 33% of hero skill tree focuses on buffing units in stack, which already excludes other heroes.

 

[Kitschy]

Balance the wonders as normal - for a stack of 6 units. I don't see how bringing two or more heroes is supposed to turn the balance upside down, especially early on, when the heroes aren't all that strong. What's the difference between bringing a level 3 hero or a tier III unit? At that point, a T3 unit will be even stronger than a hero. What's the difference between bringing a level 7 hero or a Tier IV such as phoenix? I read a reply saying that people are hero stacking. With the current system, to recruit 6 heroes, you need to wait 100 turns (excluding hurrying up with Imperium). By that time, you can mass spam any T5 unit of your choice and do any wonder with 1 hero + 5 golden golems.

If you believe heroes are OP I would rather work on the actual cause such as restoration giving free resurrection or summon abilities giving free Tier 3 animal/elemental as early on as on level 4 (imo they should be only accessible on level 12 and higher).

But the elephant in the room is that heroes are supposedly disturbing the balance whereas that's only valid for maybe 5% of the playerbase playing hardcore PvP multiplayer, because they can farm exp so proficiently that they end up with several leaders on level 15 or so by turn 50. I fail to believe that's the case for 95% of the playerbase and they are more likely to have level 5 - 8 heroes by that time. And I fail to see how a low level hero is significantly stronger than a Glade Runner, Awakener, Bronze Golem or any other strong Tier III unit - especially when 33% of hero skill tree focuses on buffing units in stack, which already excludes other heroes.

Heroes don't only scale on their level it is more complex than that.
It is level + special skills + items and on top progression isn't linear. If we are comparing lvl 7 hero to T4 such as phoenix as you suggested then the difference is nigh and day. That hero will eat any phoenix for breakfast and again that if we are comparing hero vs any given unit in a vacuum when in reality there are spells and other units that will be thrown in to the mix that in turn will boost hero potential even further.

When it comes to hero slot numbers then you should be able to get 4th at around turn 40 and 5th at around turn 70 for free without putting any thought or effort in to it. When before we had hero slot locked behind city cap that needed to be paid no matter what and don't forget about Chosen Destroyers max hero cap of 4. So I don't know about you, but I am interested to know devs position on this, were heroes underutilized from their point of view or something.

Also I am intrigued with your phoenix vs lvl 7 hero comparison, how your heroes look at lvl 6 to 7?

 

[The Numi]

I suggested this on discord but I'm unsure it'd help much cause it may just become a choice of "heroes over X then", and that's giving them upkeep. Currently heroes are a free T3 at worst and a free T4/5/beyond as you invest in them, and ontop of that they're free. It kinda feels weird when you think about it, if there's no limit to heroes, why shouldn't you have one when they at worst a free unit that cost no imperium, but then later they can be compared to units that do cost imperium and that becomes an easy question to answer when considering your limited slots.

Now I don't know how you'd balance it, if you'd give them imperium upkeep and if that upkeep increases with levels. Probably not for the latter as you got no choice. Obviously your ruler would be free as you don't pay what's essentially yourself that runs the empire.

As said I doubt it's a solution but better minds can argue on that one.

Another when it comes to wonders cause leadership clash did affect that if nothing else, is to perhaps add something like leadership clash but only when it comes to wonders, but rather than a morale penalty it can just be XP. That way the people who want to run hero stacks can still do so without being punished for playing the combat, but their heroes will gain levels slower. That's still a punishment but it's a punishment you can often mitigate given running a full hero stack is still strong regardless.

Alternatively if these things are added and people who wanna run a lot of heroes and hero stacks are displeased, I'd suggest adding realm traits to mitigate this. Such as removing the XP penalty in wonders, removing/decreasing the upkeep of heroes and even one that touches on the hero recruitment where heroes arrive at twice the speed.

Afterall the realm traits are there to bring imbalance to the game and flavor it yourself without the rest of the balance being at concern, from what I was told. While there may be people disappointed they lose a realm trait or 2 to play their hero armies, it's better than nothing at all, cause I do feel hero heavy games diminish the game overall by design, but that's just my opinion.

 

[Grakor Spiriteye]

I suggested this on discord but I'm unsure it'd help much cause it may just become a choice of "heroes over X then", and that's giving them upkeep. Currently heroes are a free T3 at worst and a free T4/5/beyond as you invest in them, and ontop of that they're free. It kinda feels weird when you think about it, if there's no limit to heroes, why shouldn't you have one when they at worst a free unit that cost no imperium, but then later they can be compared to units that do cost imperium and that becomes an easy question to answer when considering your limited slots.

I mean, the question seems inaccurate to me on the premise. Heroes themselves are essentially a resource that you are limited in. You have a steadily growing cap of heroes you can have at once, and you can invest imperium to essentially buy turns to get heroes early.

I feel like the question of "balance" with heroes has significantly shifted since the hero cap changes. How a hero compared to a tier 3 or whatever unit made a lot more sense to consider when we had society traits that had significant impact on how many and when those heroes could be recruited. Now that it's standardized, everyone has a level playing field when it comes to their ability to recruit them, so their relative value compared to another unit is less important to consider for that purpose. How strong a hero is compared to other units is now primarily a balance concern when it comes to creeping/neutrals/wonders/infestation difficulty.

Rather, the question seems to be "What is a hero unit's intended role?" Are they intended as stack leaders? Are they particularly powerful units intended to be carried until they are strong enough to carry you? Are they modular units whose combat role is intended to be customized to fit with your particular combat strategy? Are they early-game muscle designed to push you through particularly difficult PvE fights? Are they heroic RPG characters designed to help tell emergent, dynamic stories? They are, so far, shades of all of those things, but some of those goals bump up against one another, and may even be considered mutually exclusive.

IMO, if they are intended solely as stack leaders, they probably should have gone the Endless Legend route of having a dedicated stack slot for them instead. If they're particularly powerful and customizable units of very limited quantity, then they should be stackable but there should be a notable tactical trade-off for having them all in one place. If they're "carries" that are designed to be killer end-game units, they probably shouldn't be so good early. But it all depends on what they are intended to be.

 

[seperamos]

I mean, the question seems inaccurate to me on the premise. Heroes themselves are essentially a resource that you are limited in. You have a steadily growing cap of heroes you can have at once, and you can invest imperium to essentially buy turns to get heroes early.

I feel like the question of "balance" with heroes has significantly shifted since the hero cap changes. How a hero compared to a tier 3 or whatever unit made a lot more sense to consider when we had society traits that had significant impact on how many and when those heroes could be recruited. Now that it's standardized, everyone has a level playing field when it comes to their ability to recruit them, so their relative value compared to another unit is less important to consider for that purpose. How strong a hero is compared to other units is now primarily a balance concern when it comes to creeping/neutrals/wonders/infestation difficulty.

Rather, the question seems to be "What is a hero unit's intended role?" Are they intended as stack leaders? Are they particularly powerful units intended to be carried until they are strong enough to carry you? Are they modular units whose combat role is intended to be customized to fit with your particular combat strategy? Are they early-game muscle designed to push you through particularly difficult PvE fights? Are they heroic RPG characters designed to help tell emergent, dynamic stories? They are, so far, shades of all of those things, but some of those goals bump up against one another, and may even be considered mutually exclusive.

IMO, if they are intended solely as stack leaders, they probably should have gone the Endless Legend route of having a dedicated stack slot for them instead. If they're particularly powerful and customizable units of very limited quantity, then they should be stackable but there should be a notable tactical trade-off for having them all in one place. If they're "carries" that are designed to be killer end-game units, they probably shouldn't be so good early. But it all depends on what they are intended to be.

They need to be flexible, there just shouldnt be too many of them unless its late game, a realm trait or tome unlock. Stack leadership should be a mechanic on its own that is influenced by culture+ rank, role, or office held by the hero.

 

[TimeMask]

I do hope the faction unit colors/body lengths being randomized when you go edit faction gets fixed by time of next patch because its really frustrating and hard to remember what the original settings where like x'D

 

[TimeMask]

Also currently at 39/50 heroes/rulers in pantheon, so starting to bit feel that pressure of "who I should include?" :'D since I want to have all tome authors, official rulers with fitting transformations and such there plus my own ones x'D

 

[The Numi]

Spoiler: Snippet

I mean, the question seems inaccurate to me on the premise. Heroes themselves are essentially a resource that you are limited in. You have a steadily growing cap of heroes you can have at once, and you can invest imperium to essentially buy turns to get heroes early.

I feel like the question of "balance" with heroes has significantly shifted since the hero cap changes. How a hero compared to a tier 3 or whatever unit made a lot more sense to consider when we had society traits that had significant impact on how many and when those heroes could be recruited. Now that it's standardized, everyone has a level playing field when it comes to their ability to recruit them, so their relative value compared to another unit is less important to consider for that purpose. How strong a hero is compared to other units is now primarily a balance concern when it comes to creeping/neutrals/wonders/infestation difficulty.

Rather, the question seems to be "What is a hero unit's intended role?" Are they intended as stack leaders? Are they particularly powerful units intended to be carried until they are strong enough to carry you? Are they modular units whose combat role is intended to be customized to fit with your particular combat strategy? Are they early-game muscle designed to push you through particularly difficult PvE fights? Are they heroic RPG characters designed to help tell emergent, dynamic stories? They are, so far, shades of all of those things, but some of those goals bump up against one another, and may even be considered mutually exclusive.

IMO, if they are intended solely as stack leaders, they probably should have gone the Endless Legend route of having a dedicated stack slot for them instead. If they're particularly powerful and customizable units of very limited quantity, then they should be stackable but there should be a notable tactical trade-off for having them all in one place. If they're "carries" that are designed to be killer end-game units, they probably shouldn't be so good early. But it all depends on what they are intended to be.

I definitely agree with you in that the design philosophy of heroes seems to be clashing, in how it appears stuff like leadership clash wants them to be army leaders, but then they also don't want to push that entirely so the design for it falls apart cause it's not pushing it enough to matter.

I do believe it's an issue that likely AoW4 can't tackle, namely AI. You could perhaps add this restriction with a lot of work to players, but the AI needs to be recoded to know that it can't stack heroes and that might be even more trial and error to not get AI armies getting stuck and pathing becoming a problem when the AI can't seamlessly move every unit to every hex as long as a stack is open.

Not that I'd say I know this is it, but I can imagine that's what's going on and is the issue, and likely a design philosophy one.


On an unrelated note, I've made some posts on discord where it seems the outfits for Mystic got some odd clipping issues. Then there's also Animists losing the animal spirit's damage type and all defaulting to poison.

 

[Lord Sheogorath]

Just bringing to attention that star blades does not have increased effects for non repeating attacks, an outlier after the enchantment rebalance.

 

[Kharyu]

I would prefer, if heroes couldnt be easily replaced.
Either only at a very high cost (Imperium) or with a bigger cooldown.

This way you would have to be more careful about your heroes.
If they get captured, a rescue mission really gets important. If they die, trying to revive them should be the better option (and also costly) than just getting new ones.

In that way, heroes would be special & valuable.

 

[TimeMask]

Now I'm at 40/50 pantheon and I'm getting bit of decision paralysis on who to play next x'D Since yeah I can't have everyone I wanted to be in pantheon, would be nice if cap was higher.

(What is the cap needed for anyway? I mean, there isn't cap for amount of factions you can create, so considering customs are moved to pantheon tab, is it really matter of memory space like with saves?)

 

[Mr. Hawn]

• Removed the Leadership Clash
• Implemented AI Hero Recruitment Cooldown
  • The cooldown scales based on the difficulty settings for that individual AI. From 5 Turns on Very Easy to 1 Turn on Very Hard.
• The Conjure Primal Animal spells will now only appear as research after you completed your first Tome of Magic

A shame about the clash, I thought it was pretty good. I dislike AI spamming hero stacks. Hopefully you'll find something better to incentivise varied stacks.
The hero recruitment cooldown could still be longer, I keep facing hero stack after hero stack on hard.
Conjure primal animal nerf is good, but they are still quite strong.

 

[davrovana]

Is it just me or is the Stormbringer too powerful?

 

[Astronlmo]

Trident is too powerful, yes. It makes main attack to be completely useless for stormbringer

 

[Dragonkingz159]

Is it possible to add a feature that lets us turn off specific race transformations instead of all of them? By which I mean if I have two races with Frostling transformation I would like the option to turn off one’s transformation and not both.