Forums-->Ideas and suggestions-->
| Author | Missing retal versus multi hit |
|---|
Did you guys notice that the Lizard Assailants side-attack for every multi hit of another stack (for example minotaur soldiers)?
I realised that some time ago, but now I just came to think "Why do units with unlimited retaliation (griffins/modern golems/Ironroot treefolk) not retaliate for every multihit, since it seems that they already trigger special effects each, but only to the benefit of the attacker.
Aswell, for example, modern golems should retaliate to eliteforestkeepers when they are not main targets too, since spray-attacks and dragon breath (again dark elf, yes they are strong) trigger specials too (Lizard Assailants side-attack).
Actually this is not a Suggestion, its a balance fix that has to be done. | | For spray attacks, units have no retal ability as well. As for dragon breath, since the back end attack isn't really from the dragon, but from the front stack it really doesn't make sense for that retal to happen even if that 2nd stack is next to the dragon. | As for dragon breath, since the back end attack isn't really from the dragon, but from the front stack it really doesn't make sense for that retal to happen even if that 2nd stack is next to the dragon.
It it would be hella funny if an enemy dragon retaliates that way. I'm sure the targeted stack will enjoy a double dose of dragon fire. XD
Seriously, though. "Balance" isn't about keeping talents and unit abilities symmetrical, like making retaliation proc for every attack like the Lizard Assailant ability. It's about looking at the overall faction strengths and weaknesses. For this to be a "balance fix," you need to prove that the factions with units that possess unlimited retaliation are weak and need a boost. As it stands, this suggestion only serves to strengthen a few factions... | since spray-attacks triggerLizard Assailants side-attack
as far as I know they only trigger on the unit you attack.
I.e. there are four stacks of farmers in a row.
On side there is a ladon, on the other side a lizard assailant.
Ladon aims for farmer stack A, but hits farmer stack B C and D as well due to six headed attack. As far as I know lizard assailants will only attack A since ladons aimed at those, and NOT attack B C and D
its fine as it is now, and i dont see a reason to change it | For spray attacks, units have no retal ability as well. As for dragon breath, since the back end attack isn't really from the dragon, but from the front stack it really doesn't make sense for that retal to happen even if that 2nd stack is next to the dragon.
Understandable, but actually that was not my main point. It would be more logical, since abilities (for example "Assault") are triggered, but not "unlimted retaliation". Make it logical and equal.
you need to prove that the factions with units that possess unlimited retaliation are weak and need a boost. As it stands, this suggestion only serves to strengthen a few factions...
You talk as if the current balance situation were fine :o
I do not see why I need to proof some logical game flaw, but here you are with my try:
-In the real HoMM game, each multi attack is retaliated (here has to be said that there are differences in the diverse patches aswell)
-just more logical
-unit "griffin", weak, dies easily, the "boost" would increase their survivability since their unlimited retal ability gets not ignored so easily
-unit "modern golem", slow (ini and speed, even with mini-arts), they are seen as useless by so many people (recruit count is restricted too much aswell; can't get a decent amount at a "normal" cost, compared to gargs), a "boost" comes in handy
-unit "ironroot treefolk", boost to their "take roots" ability, good since there is no real other change from treefolk compared to other faction Tier 6
(dunno if there are more units with that ability under human command right now)
-make me happy, since i feel less suppressed as wizard :) | You talk as if the current balance situation were fine :o
I am aware that the game is in constant development (all games like this are) and may need some tweaking. But that is irrelevant. That wasn't my point. In case you didn't catch my drift the first time, let me express it in simpler terms: It is forbidden to create topics with suggestions to weaken/strengthen any unit, artifact, faction. There, you made me throw the rule book at you.
-just more logical
Personal bias. One might also argue that multiple attack (like the Elite Forest Keeper ability) is a form of "sneak attack" on all adjacent squares not unlike that of Shrews or Vampires. Therefore, I can argue that it is also "logical" that you cannot normally retaliate from such attack. Really, any multiple attack ability does not count as "normal," therefore they don't have to be treated as such. | It is forbidden to create topics with suggestions to weaken/strengthen any unit, artifact, faction.
I see this rule thrown out many times, and I do not see the point in forbidding such topics. It is not like making the topic will cause some catastrophic change in the game.
Anyway the creator has a point, unlimited retaliation units retaliating against both attacks from a double strike or all three attacks in the case of a triple strike unit just flat out makes sense. | Anyway the creator has a point, unlimited retaliation units retaliating against both attacks from a double strike or all three attacks in the case of a triple strike unit just flat out makes sense.
It does make sense the same way that all range units should be able to retaliate like a Succubus does. But we don't see all range units built in with this ability. This is a game. In games like this there are concepts like "unit counter" or "ability counter" and some such. Think of it this way:
Bowmen: I'd like to shoot that demon chick but she might throw something back at me... wait! I have Volley! Yay!
In this scenario, the Volley ability is a counter to the Return fire ability. Next scenario:
Elite forest keeper: I'd like to stab that Griffin but I don't want it to whack me... hmmm. There's a bunch of Bowmen nearby. I'll just whack them and let my Battledance damage the Griffin.
In this scenario, the Battledance ability is a counter to the Griffin's Unlimited retaliation ability. These scenarios aren't very realistic, I admit, but from gameplay point of view, it's all valid. There's no reason to change the current game mechanics. | Wityh regard to balancing, it is a fine point, seemingly inocuos (sp) things can significantly change the balance. The balancing is based upon duels. What the admin do is run a duel tourny on .ru. They then gather all the statistics for how each faction did against every other faction at each level, and for each main build. If one faction is significantly dominating over many others then they would change teh recruit count. This will not change too much, but tweaks the balance such that this faction may win a few % more overall.
If they made many changes as suggested here and elsewhere, it wouldn't positively affect the balancing, but actually make it worse, as it is in a position of ok balancing due to significant tweaks. If the change was impolemented they would have to start retuning a lot again.
In anything fiction logic had to be ignored sometimes, no one has said, how can gremlin engineers repair something across the otherside of the field, or why does a sword in my hand make the dragons breath kill more people. It is the way it works and you just have to ride with it. | | I think if (for example) if wolf riders hit griffins, griffs should retaliate twice. Once for each hit |
Back to topics list
|
