Discussion in 'Bugs / Suggestions / Support' started by Cyberaddict, Jun 17, 2020.
Very well said.
I suggested in another thread today an achievements/rewards system that could educate the players to these advanced strategies. Frankly, I would prefer that, instead of killing that turn skipping altogether. Another solution would be group Initiative...
I don't recall exactly how TT is played. I do recall Blood Bowl, and Initiative is taken in turn, one team at a time (not one unit at a time). That way, the coach can decide which unit moves first, and which will move later or last. It adds a layer of strategy that is very interesting, and that turn skipping actually emulates, and I like that A LOT. Could it be possible for players taking turns in Initiative order (average of all units)? And on their turn, move units in whatever order they want within a 2 or 3 minutes turn? This way, we keep the strategic aspect of moving units in certain order, but we fix the problem of Alpha Strike (double turns, which only frustrates noobs away as we terrorize them in PvP) and we greatly accelerate gameplay.
As I stated many times earlier, the game needs a better, torally new tutorial. The one present now is garbage. Only teaches you to move into cover.l, which you can probably figure out by yourself after the 1st encounter with ranged weapons.
On Cybers idea...well, if you seriously want Mercs to have ZERO, no usefull spells at all, then I can get it. Lesser magic is garbage for the most part, 1st tier spells are good, 2nd are not worth a glance and 3rd tier are simply meh. To reduce flying this much (remember, getting 100% cast needs at least 7 skill points + gear worth of 600+ gold if youre lucky). Literally the only usefull spell throughout all the ranks is the flight. Your suggestion would nerf it to the ground and Mercs would be at an extreme disadvantage.
Simply no to that one. Imagine casting sorcerers curse and not being able to attack afterwards.
@Cyberaddict I would trully gratefull if you stopped complaining about solo caps all the time. Please. Magic triangle. It's a thing.
P.S. Obviously if someone puts 20 hrs of gameplay into 1 character, you with your 8 men squad with 5 hrs of gameplay will be at a disadvantage.
You really don’t get it. I have sympathy and empathy for the players who put time and effort developing their Warbands, whether solo or full roster. I know the effort needed to develop the Solo Captain, I’ve done it. My only grief is that the rating system makes poor matchups in the PvP queue, and that is very bad for the community at large (only a few benefit from the current system). As far as I’m concerned, Solo builds can continue to exist. They should just be rated higher.
And no, I won’t stop complaining about an issue that is long due fixing. The number of victories by disconnect I got with a simple Solo rated 100 is staggering. I’m the voice of all the noobs we’ve intimidated away from this game, and that may never come back. By failing them, we’ve failed to ourselves. As core fans of the game, we’re the first losers when it fails to attract and keep players.
Just hope the developers are paying attention.
As for this triangle you’re talking about, I just don’t get it. You’re the only one that seems to think it exists, but I’ve failed to see how it applies on the field. Oh, I understand the concept of rock, paper, scissors, and the balance it creates in many games. It was there in the first Age Of Empire (infantry > cavalry > archers), and it’s there in MTG (Aggro > Control > Combo). Maybe there’s a triangle, but the rating system is so broken, it must have a really twisted shape.
About Flight, my suggestion to only cast before combat only applies to that spell, not any others. Yes, it would nerf Mercs. But moving after melee combat is one of the things broken now. Again, don’t think about what you’ll lose from such a change, but how much you will gain by an expanding community. So much more people to troll!
I now very much feel the rating system is fine... This whole discussion just proves that no matter what rating system you build people will be unhappy and find ways to exploit the system to noob stomp.
Honestly I think this topic should be about how do we make PvP fun and exciting rather than how do we fix a rating system. Maybe match making just needs to be defined by different things than rating. Like shards gained, wins, fights or some kind of elo. Also maybe we should have a PvP mode like tournaments or a league rather than just open PvP.
To summarize my thoughts on the key items brought forth here:
1) Rating System: Agree. It needs adjustment. That was always my concern with the current rating system as to make it work you have to calibrate weights correctly vs the old rating system.
2) Flight: If we need to adjust the rating weight that is fine. I think all spells in general could use some adjustment. But completely disagree with changing the mechanics on how it works (i.e. it works fine) . Those who have a hard time against should try using different tactics.
3) Solo: No issue. It's simply a pathway people use to level up their warbands. Also it was mentioned above that 4 pistoliers at 25 points each can kill a captain at 100 points which also shows that solo warbands can be beat by people who know who to strategically level up their warband to face one.
To add, a wizard captain at max level is about 700 points. If you harm him with a sniper rifle he jumps to 1,400. So the range of 700-1400. I also have that old Reikland warband that I mess around with and have added 3 elves. Total rating now is about 1,000. Those 3 elves are worth about 250 of rating. I've faced solo captains and have tested this in multiple PVP matches where those 3 elves alone and shoot down the captain. I just keep mine hidden to test this. So I honestly don't see the huge concern about a solo captain.
4) Turn Skipping: I disagree about removing it as it adds a strategic layer to the game. Where this really shines is at high levels with a full warband. I normally don't call out opponents but I will this time to demonstrate and also to compliment the guy as he was one of the best opponents I've faced. Some of my favorite matches in the past were with my Middenheim warband against the Mordheim Leaders Foundation --> Kello Squad (now renamed the Wowsers, I only know that because he's the top ranked warband based on Shard count). Anyways, he also had a maxed level Marienburg warband with a wizard captain, 3 snipers and 4 ogres. All of them had max initiative and actually his captain was from the original levelling (random increases instead of fixed 5) system so had like a 76 initiative. At that time there were no elves so I had wizard captain, warlock and 6 warriors. My warriors had a lower initiatve so a key part of that was the turn skipping where depending on the situation it may make sense for one warrior to not skip risking the opponent going twice or skipping and risking getting hit first, as well as when to use crimson shade and mushrooms. Positioning was very key obvisously Anyways, it was a strategic layer that turned these matches into an enjoyable chess like match.
Also I recall first matched up against him (under the old rating system based on XP and I think shard count factored in too) but the ratings were about even based on that system. This was right before the rating system changed because the next time I faced him he was the underdog and my rating spiked because they weighted combat and strength skills so high. But in that first match, he had a solo captain setup with his snipers and ogres still to be leveled (kinda like how I develop a warband, keep guys in the back while the captain kills everything). I had a solo captain and warriors who were more developed but not maxed. It was an easy win showing that solo captains don't do well against a developed warband.
Also a built in manual to explain turns would be helpful for new players to understand how this works.
1) we both agree
2 and 3) Our opinions differ, and both are legitimate. We disagree. :shrugs:
4) I’m all for educating the noobs with a tutorial and encourage good behavior (learn and practice turn skipping) with an achievements and rewards system. This, way before removing the turn skipping option. But I wouldn’t mind if it gets there, if these solutions don’t work and the game as a whole benefits from the change.
For the solo and pistol concern mentioned in prior posts I wanted to share some actual PvP battles I had yesterday. GG to all those opponents. I used my old Reikland band that had the wiz cap and 3 elves. I don’t consider this one of my proper warbands but rather on of my experimental ones. Rating was about 850 with about 250 being the elves. I armed him with a skull hammer instead of axe to lower his rating.
1). Opponent Deaduski - solo vampire build, similar rating, first 2 matches my elves alone won the fight. One match he tried to run back and hide but just moved one elf up to spot and the 3 lit him up. Third match i killed him with my captain without having to use flight to charge or do hit and run by properly positioning and forcing a situation with the elves. Again 250 Pts of warriors responsible for beating an 800 pt solo.
2). Undead: solo vampire at 1400. My 250 elves shot him down. Yes he tried to hide but I just had one elf move forward and took away that option. My cap just hid in the back because I wanted to test taking on a 1400 solo vs a group of warriors.
3). Fought this guy once yesterday but also had a few other battles with him in the past. A wiz cap solo/duo called the Invincibles. I say solo because it looked like he was trying to develop a second guy. But regardless, wizard captain shot down by elves or causes him to force quit because he knew his wiz captain couldn’t win.
4). This one had an interesting name: Putin’s Poisoners. But this was a 1500 7 man warband that had a wiz captain, 4 pisotliers 2 elves and a guy with a comet maul. I was able to wipe this warband with an 850 warband with a wiz captain and 3 elves.
My point with showing these battles for the first 3 example is that solos are a non issue and my point with the fourth is although pistoliers can do damage against low defense opponents, I don’t see an issue with them either. The key in all these matches is proper strategy and positioning. So that’s why i really don’t want to dumb down the game but instead would like to see players learn and use better strategies.
Another just now. My 1700 underdog Possessed (non solo) facing a 2100 solo vampire. Solo is non issue. Key is tactics to position correctly to coordinate attacks.
Last example I’ll show but it’s just to show the developers the point that solo aren’t an issue. Should this vampire be rated 2100? Yeah probably because if this opponent were able to outmaneuver me and get the alpha strike, that vampire could easily kill and I’d probably lose.
Your Warband was solo with 700-750 rating before you hired the elves, if that’s the same Captain that fought a few times my Skaven.
As I said before, you’re one of the best PvP player around, if not the best. Thus, I’m not sure you’re the right guy to test and experiment to prove these points. Of course, for an interesting challenge, you’ll like the community to reach your level of gameplay. But that won’t probably ever happen. You have a natural, 3-dimensional understanding of the game. This can’t be learned.
Also, I think your tests actually don’t prove your point. What they prove is that solo Vampire isn’t the best solo build, that the rating is probably appropriate at the level you were playing (it is not between 100 and 500 ; point of entry for noobs), and that you were the best player in each matchups (which is most generally the case).
Balance is not about solos guys, who cares if somebody wants to pay solo? The main thing is to make each skill cost the right rating for what it does, in early game and late game, actually works for late, not for early, so new people jumps out of the boat, balance should work on any level. The half of this discussion goes about solos. They are not the problem, balance is the problem, and I get the point that there are many people who don't want to break their old bands due to a change on the rating system. If it's balanced I just don't care, it's an investment on future fun
I agree with you, the discussion should be about balance, and that's the goal of this whole thread. It happens, however, that there are some disagreements about the Solos : are they or not balanced? Some people think so, and I have voiced my disagreement. It would be a lot more simple for LG to do their job if we could all agree, but we don't. To make matters worse, I agree with Shangular that Solos are balanced at higher rating. This makes it very hard to balance them out in the early game, where there's clearly a big problem. If we could at least agree on that, maybe we could put our mind together to get a fix.
I've run some test with a new Warband : Witch Hunters made up of 3 Elf Rangers (levels 26, 27 and 24) and 1 Human Pet (a Henchman turned Captain, who only gets Streetwise, Haggle and Wyrdstone Hunter). Yes, I've fired the Warrior-Priest, and no, there's no way to get a 4th elf in the Warband. I've grinded the University District for Tome of Magic and farmed EXP with other tactics. The 3 elves all have 93% casting chance for Flight of Zimmerman (thanks to 4 Holy Books ; still haven't found any magic staff). Rating of the Warband was around 180 when I hit PvP (now 191).
My goal with this Warband was to develop a winning strategy against Solo Captains and low-rated Skaven Pistoliers w/ Black Hunger & Infiltration. There's this Skaven Warband that plagues the ladder in the range of 150-180 ratings (named "Skaven"), and I haven't been able to beat them at all with any other strategies.
Sample is a bit small, but I've got 12 games in PvP ladder with this team, with 100% win rate. Of these 12 games, there were only 2 in which I was the Underdog (against these Skaven Pistoliers and Reikland Ranged Tanks). What I've learned so far :
83% of matchups were with opponents with lesser rating. These are the noobs we terrorize away with our unfair Warbands (pretty sure an Elvish Witch Hunters Warband is unfair, I've spent 40+ Fate to build it). Considering they form the majority of the players in that range, we should pay more attention to them. That they don't stay long in the game to have a good queue at higher ratings is a problem that concerns us all.
Flying at 93% is more than fine. It's not entirely reliable, but still very powerful. Without it, I would have lost against these Skaven Pistoliers w/ Black Hunger (I escaped with the Treasure, thanks to Alpha Flight instead of Alpha Strike). If flying spells casting chance are capped at 90%, like all other tests are, veterans should survive the humiliation of failing 10% of their hit and runs.
Moving after attacking, thanks to Flying, breaks the rules of combat of Mordheim. I abused this concept to win against these Reikland Ranged Tanks (389 rating vs me at 191). I'm happy the Underdog was able to win (me), but I could just have escaped with the Treasure and be done with it on turn 4 or 5. Instead, I trolled my opponent and proceeded to snipe his units one by one until he finally got the option to retreat away (with zero experience points and some injuries ; remember he's not the Underdog, I am). This doesn't show the superiority of ranged tactics, because my opponent was better equipped for that (big armor so I dealt little to no damage ; and he had more units and could fire more shots per turn than me, but flying after attacking denied him the opportunity to retaliate). What this proves is that flying away after combat is not necessary to win, only to win more even as the Underdog.
Look, I've spent 43 Fate points to build this Warband (priest for 4, then elves for 6 + 12 + 18, and 3 for hats). This is real money I've dumped in that concept, and I wouldn't mind AT ALL, if that Warband was nerfed and/or rated higher. Clearly :
Worthy opponents for that Warband are not in the 200 zone. Range skills and Magic spells should be rated higher.
More than one Hired Sword of each type in a Warband can lead to all kind of abuse.
Concentrated power, in less units (3, in my case), leads to unbalanced matchups at the same rating value (mostly under 1000). Unless a fix in rating is developped to acknowledge this reality, I think the Warband that suffers from diluted power should benefit from "inducements" (akin to Blood Bowl's). Maybe just a few pimped Temple blessings would do (+10 Defence and WS, +10% Dodge, etc.), and would be a lot easier to code. Otherwise, mechanics could be develop to encourage/force a Warband to hire more units (if stats are standardized, that would not be a problem).
An Elf (and to a lesser degree a Matriarch or Warrior-Priest) shouldn't be able to equip more than one Holy Book (for multiple +10% bonus to spells). This breaks the law of physics of Mordheim (there's reasons why Elves can't get rid of their armor and can't learn Sorcery or Warrior Wizard skills). I don't care how much gold has been spent building that archetype (3 x 4 x 200 gold, in my case). That won't make my opponent feel better when I'll beat the crap out of him in PvP ladder with an exploit abuse.
Following that line of thoughts, Blunderbusses should also be limited to one per unit (as well as Healing Herbs, and all other items).
Flying could be capped at 90% * AND * nerfed at before combat only, and would still be too powerful for it's current rating value (please, put credit in that opinion, it comes from a guy who've just spent a lot of real money to abuse Flying). Note, however, that this opinion is only valid under the current ratio of Treasure/Shards Hunt vs Occupy scenarios. More Occupy scenarios in PvP could change the metagame value of Flying (or it may not).
Noobs need a better tutorial that would teach them turn-skipping and rating management.
Rating value of each skills should be shown before choosing a skill. Or an undo button made available. Or better : reset all the skills of a unit with 1 Fate.
In-game chat would allow veterans to teach tricks to noobs. I would feel much better educating a noob that could defeat me the next time, than just rolling over his Warband and make him feel bad about this game.
Unspent skill points should have an impact on rating. Otherwise, it's easy to abuse concepts without PvP impacts (my pet Captain that is mainly used to trade things at the Store has tons of unspent skills ; he makes the rest of the team better while having almost no value).
I wish I had a 200 point warband to test against that Skaven you mentioned. Ok, I'll go through the list and give an open minded review.
1) Let's go back to the old rating system: Again, this is the difficulty in calibrating at low levels because it all depends on how a player decides to level their warrior. TBH, I like the older rating system better because it avoids all of this. It uses XP of the warband to calculate rating like TT. Thus a warband in 200 can utilize WS and multiple attack levels vs the skaven pistols or elves. Since both sides have the same number of level up skill points, it should be more even. My guess is that your elves or that Skaven probably have many more skill levels than the average 200 point opponent who doesn't know what they're doing (yours are at level 26 for example). In the old rating, you'd match up against a warband that has 26 skill point levels and imo would be more even. As I've stated before, the current rating system can be better but it is difficult to calibrate correctly.
2) Agree, I've asked for this multiple times, purely based on the TT logic. However, one adjustment that may be needed are the warband specific hired swords, like Beastmen where Possessed should have up to 2 as consistent with the TT.
3) My suggestion with #1 above should fix this.
4) My 3 elves testing has been at both high and low-mid (under 1,000) but with a mercenary band, so only had 53% Flight chance. This seemed reasonable. I can see how having 3-4 elves with 93% change and super shooting can be abusive. If we wanted to be consistent with TT, we could just remove the Magic ability. Elf would still be strong without it. Or limit only one holy tome to be equipped. Also another option is to limit hired swords to 1 per type as mentioned in #2 above.
5) Disagree, blunderbusses can only be used once per turn, even if you have 4. Plus using it counts as using a spell, so you can't for example Fly in and use it, and if you happen to use it, you can't fly out. I think blunderbusses are fine with the exception that the ranged should truly be limited to 8, not 8 plus 8.
6) Disagree. Flight is fine as is. The Treasure Hunt scenario is what probably should be modified. Perhaps to resolve we could: 1) at a 50% casting penalty when holding the chest and 2) limit movement to a maximum of 3. That way Skaven who have infiltrate and get 3 turns in a row on an unsuspecting opponent can't abuse and it also won't penalize the already slow dwarves.
10) Disagree. Unspent points don't add any benefit other than playing the "rating management". For players who don't care about PVP and only like to PVE, this gives them a good way to quickly level up their warbands. But if we moved back to the old rating system, this is a non issue as rating is based on XP regardless if you spend skill points or not.
8 level-5 Mercs won't ever beat a pair of level-20 Captain + friend (see, trying really hard to move away from Solo ). Both are worth 40 levels, but should never be rated the same in any rating system (the first won't ever defeat the second). I * COMPLETELY * agree, however, that the 8 level-5 Mercs Warband is testimony of terrible rating management. Fixing this is incredibly complicated. Since it is much more harder to educate noobs at rating management, I think, from the perspective of expanding the community, it will be easier to either rate up the concentrated power Warbands and/or develop a system where it becomes mandatory to add units as the Warband reaches certain threshold (with standardized stats on all type of units, as TT), and where it's not possible to hoard up more than a few skill points.
Idea : Choose upon creation of Warband if it is for PvP or not. If it is, you can't farm AI in any way to develop a team. If it is not, the Warband can't enter the ladder but can be played in private PvP games. All locations should be unlocked in PvP that way (maximum diversity). This would greatly change the way PvP is played, as many archetypes are only viable after having farmed a lot. I don't know if this would dramatically help the rating problems, but this would at least have the benefit of leveling the playing field. The Blood Bowl 2 PC game is designed that way. It's not perfect, but it removes a lot of abuse.
That's true, and I think that was one of the arguments from moving away from the old rating system. Although 5 level 20 Mercs can beat a solo 100 level captain
I think the old rating system also had the shard count as part of the ratings, perhaps someone with a better memory can confirm. Or perhaps it was just a function of warbands with higher shards naturally have high XP levels. I recall when I was first building my Middenheimers, I would try to farm to get my shard count up because I was curious to see who were the warbands at the top of the rankings. When I finally was able to fight the top shard guy, his warband as I mentioned previous was a high level wiz captain, but he had many low level ogres and snipers. I had a high level wiz captain and mid-level warriors and would have thought my rating would be higher, but it wasn't. So perhaps shard count did have an impact? or perhaps his wiz captain and a very high level due to farming all those shards?
The only reason why I'm asking about the shard count is because it may help to equalize the level distribution concern mentioned. A level 40 captain probably would farm more and have a higher shard count and thus higher rating than an 8 man Level 5 warband.
Yeah, but if we stay with the current rating system, it can work if we spend the time to adjust weights. But as someone mentioned above, it would first be good to see the current calculation formulas as I know that some are scaled. So in these cases there is an exponential curve what may need to be a smaller curve by having a higher starting point.
There is a problem with standartization...unless you make all max stats as standart (which you won't remember straight middle cap stats) all older warbands will have an EXTREME advantage over the new ones. If I get good random roll in tavern, I rename band like Middenheim try no.1 and archive them for later possible use. I have around 12 warbands like these atm. Imagine how powerfull these bands will be against standartized ones. So unless you make all models on max stats as standart, yeah, guess what. I am pretty sure I am not the only one that keeps good/decent rolls for later. And while holding unspent skill points, you only rob yourself. Old rating system plz come back
This is more true of the very old warbands (original release of this game) when skill increases were random and could go higher than 5. For example, when I first fought that one warband, his wizard cap was wielding a double handed hammer yet had a 76 initiative, he went before my 75 initiative warlock. At first I was wondering if this was a hack, but then found out its an old warband that was levelled up on an older levelling system. In the end, the impact on these skills, although did give an advantage, were minimal. The only significant advantage is initiative. The current version standardizes stat increase for (WS, BS, STR and INI) by a fixed amount of 5.
The latest standardization attempt was on the captains by forcing all stats to 30. TBH, the difference between 30 and 35 isn't that much. Again, the only significant advantage is initiative.
I think we Mordheim 2.0 ever occurs and adds a level cap, we could reset every warband (although giving them the skill points they've earned) to reallocate to the level cap. Similar to what was done when the Reiklanders were adjusted to match up to the TT champions skill list and lost the Speed tree.
That is why a kind of "reset" of the PvP ladder would be good. All Warbands that enter it must be fresh new, and can't play AI. No farming exploits, and no old warbands with non-standardized stats... Unless LG find a way to standardize stats retroactively on all archived Warbands. It would be rude, but I wouldn't mind. I'm really more focused on trying to find the best solution to keep the noobs around, than defending my current assets.
Separate names with a comma.