Balance Feedback

[Valkrionn]

I have tried fawns. However at the exact same time for far cheaper technologies the Svart have their hunter, and the Ljos have their Archer, both of whom are very worthwhile to build, wheareas the fawn's charm has perhaps a 10% chance to effect a unit, is very expensive, and cannot best a warrior in offensive or defensive combat.
(unless of course fawn's have been buffed this patch. )
To be honest after my repeated negative experiences with them in previous RIFE versions I 've stopped building them completely.

Hmmm... Should be buffed a bit then. I like the role of the unit, as opposed to just a generic recon unit, but giving it more of a use would be good.

Good lord, don't remove the research bonus from Infused Ash. Reduce the slave % yes (or even remove it -- we can get by without it) but not the research.

The change that needs to happen there? Make D'Teshi-only improvements *only* buildable on Wasteland. Maybe drop the bonus down to 0.5% or even 0.25% if you must, but for the love of death don't remove it altogether.

Hmm... Having it only on wasteland is already pretty much the case, everything becomes wasteland.

And it is impossible to go below 1% on that tag.

I believe Valk has previously stated that the research bonus could not be lowered below 1%. Buuut if it is possible to grant a "hidden" bonus for every "x" ash obtained and then assigning both 1% buffs to that hidden bonus. It would allow for both effects to simultaneously be kept and nerfed.

That is far too messy.

One alternative: Have a building that requires X ash, that increases research? Would only be able to build one instance of the building for every X ash.

 

[Tsathoggua]

Hmm... Having it only on wasteland is already pretty much the case, everything becomes wasteland.

Yeah but that takes time -- 30-60 turns, if I recall, before you could even start building the Pyre if it were an actual requirement. Let's not forget that most of the resources on the map wouldn't be burnable so early on if not for invisible fort spam.

One alternative: Have a building that requires X ash, that increases research? Would only be able to build one instance of the building for every X ash.

The D'Tesh have a lot of unique buildings, as it is. I'm not against adding more, or even incorporating ash into the buildings somehow (a cool idea, actually; making *all* the UBs have an ash requirement wouldn't be ludicrous) but it's worth pointing out that the *primary* reason D'Tesh are able to get so much ash so early on is a combination of invisible lair exploration and invisible fort spam coupled with the general choke-hold that the new health system has placed on AI expansion.

Fix Kelp, rebalance health and how the AI deals with it, balance lair yields to reflect the phase of the game, and make exploration de-stealth recon units. Once that's in place, see how they play. Heck, send me a prelim version and I'll help you test it.

If you have to knee-jerk nerf anything about ash, make it the slavery boost. Honestly, that simply trivializes the world spell, anyway.

 

[Valkrionn]

Yeah but that takes time -- 30-60 turns, if I recall, before you could even start building the Pyre if it were an actual requirement. Let's not forget that most of the resources on the map wouldn't be burnable so early on if not for invisible fort spam.

This is true, but with that requirement you couldn't build forts at all.

Well.... Maybe if forts spread wasteland faster, some how... Would end up playing rather like the Zerg, steadily expanding their creep.

The D'Tesh have a lot of unique buildings, as it is. I'm not against adding more, or even incorporating ash into the buildings somehow (a cool idea, actually; making *all* the UBs have an ash requirement wouldn't be ludicrous) but it's worth pointing out that the *primary* reason D'Tesh are able to get so much ash so early on is a combination of invisible lair exploration and invisible fort spam coupled with the general choke-hold that the new health system has placed on AI expansion.

Fix Kelp, rebalance health and how the AI deals with it, balance lair yields to reflect the phase of the game, and make exploration de-stealth recon units. Once that's in place, see how they play. Heck, send me a prelim version and I'll help you test it.

If you have to knee-jerk nerf anything about ash, make it the slavery boost. Honestly, that simply trivializes the world spell, anyway.

Pretty much what we're doing. I'm not nerfing anything about ash until the rest is done.

 

[Milaga]

I don't think the infused ash itself needs a nerf at all. The biggest problem with it is that you can get infused ash from kelp, which just blows my little mind. They aren't a resource, and there is a ton of the stuff.

I agree 100%. But also, I really don't see why D'Tesh need to be given a bonus from the water.

Water resources are great for most civs because they are health bonuses and a very nice food bonus. D'Tesh need neither health nor food, so they get slavery and resource bonuses from them. You could say that a fish gives a greater bonus to the D'Tesh than it does to the Lanun.

And really, burning pyres that float? I always thought was trying to force a mechanic for the D'Tesh rather than just accepting the fact that they have no use for the water. Call it a weakness even. I really don't see a problem with that.

 

[Valkrionn]

I agree 100%. But also, I really don't see why D'Tesh need to be given a bonus from the water.

Water resources are great for most civs because they are health bonuses and a very nice food bonus. D'Tesh need neither health nor food, so they get slavery and resource bonuses from them. You could say that a fish gives a greater bonus to the D'Tesh than it does to the Lanun.

And really, burning pyres that float? I always thought was trying to force a mechanic for the D'Tesh rather than just accepting the fact that they have no use for the water. Call it a weakness even. I really don't see a problem with that.

Honestly, it was added because there were multiple requests for it and no complaints against it.

I wouldn't be terribly opposed to removing it.

 

[Opera]

Seems like Milaga hit something. Having Water be uninteresting for the D'tesh might be a good idea. Especially Kelp.

 

[Milaga]

Honestly, it was added because there were multiple requests for it and no complaints against it.

I wouldn't be terribly opposed to removing it.

I was against it, but I think I was the only one. Then again, that was back when the D'Tesh were still new and had a lot of other problems.

 

[Oranos]

Figured after a few games it's about time I gave my input on the changes. I actually like them, they slow the growth nicely, though I have noticed certain civs were buffed by the changes. Worker improvement speed could definitely use a boost, but it hasn't bothered me overmuch.

 

[Swinkscalibur]

I was definitely for some sort of water use with D'tesh (seeing as I went as far as making a basic module for it) but the way I implemented it put the floating pyres further down the tech chain. (I gave the build to an Arcane Barge UU) I can see that with the amount of kelp in the game and even if it was reduced that kelp being ashed might be Overpowered. But I will continue to believe that D'tesh would have no logical reason not to make the most of sea resources. As of now the sea techs are virtually useless for the D'tesh, putting the build requirement further up the chain should just be a small reward for teching up an otherwise mostly useless branch.

 

[Valkrionn]

We could move it to an Arcane Barge before cutting it entirely, sure.

 

[Viatos]

Might it be possible and desirable to cap the number of Forts a GC can produce? Even without the invisibility of Dullahans, the D'tesh insta-growth forts allow some really harsh territory grabs (it is not hard to just cage AI this way, since they won't declare war on you to expand until far too late for them) and fort-spam in general just feels a lot like cheating - especially for the D'tesh, but it applies to everyone. The races with super-forts are just more in-your-face about it.

The original idea, for GC to be able to supplement invasion forces in the field with defensive stations to heal up and weather counterattacks, is fantastic. The part where you just put like a thousand forts everywhere and blast the AI to pieces is not so fantastic. Could a cap of, say, 3 forts be placed and then refreshed by some combat-related action like taking a city?

 

[Valkrionn]

I could actually probably allow one per level of the commander. Using a stackable promo, it would be quite easy. Just have the spell itself apply the stack promo to the caster, and then have the req compare the number of stacked promos against the level. If the level is higher, you can build a fort.

 

[Viatos]

I could actually probably allow one per level of the commander. Using a stackable promo, it would be quite easy. Just have the spell itself apply the stack promo to the caster, and then have the req compare the number of stacked promos against the level. If the level is higher, you can build a fort.

Awesome.

 

[Torugu]

Sorry if I'm breaking some kind of Taboo, but the problem with the D'Tesh is not that they can built pyres on water, it's not the D'Tesh affinity nor is it that their cities are too big or that they have too many of them and it's not the mausoleums either, though they are certainly exploitable atm.
The reason why the D'Tesh are so incredibly unbalanced that I can get Mithril Working one turn before my mp buddy, who's just as good a player as I, finishes Bronze Working, without rushing it (status of some of the other research paths: Strength of Will, Feral Bond, Astrology, Machinery) is because of their crazy improvement yields. A single pyre produces 3P and 9C, crypts which can be built everywhere 4P and 3C, 4P and 5C with Haunted Lands and the 4P 1C yield from Catacombs merely causes you to avoid hills when choosing city locations. This means that every D'Tesh population point produced as much as 2 or 3 normal population points which in turn means that a 10 pop. D'Tesh city, something you can easily get just by killing barbs, is about as productive as a 25 pop. non-D'Tesh city, which, since the health changes, is the size my cities tend to have when I research Divine Essence. The same moment the D'Tesh declare war to get slaves the game is effectively won.
The first thing which needs to be done to make plating the D'Tesh more than just bullying is to drastically nerf those improvements, everything else can come afterwards.

PS: I assume it's a bug that I can build the Tower of D'Tesh in every city since I can't see Valk fail that bad at nerfing.

 

[Divvu]

But how did you earn experience to upgrade those fawns?

It's just 10 px... You can easily start with 6 on a unit. Usually I start building fawns in the mid game, whenever I have an idle city. I keep them "maturing", if I have no immediate need. Reaching 10 xp with training building alone is sloooooow, I admit, but in the mid game you can litterally flood the game with fawns, they don't even need a special building!
Sooner or later (in my games, usually sooner) I manage to earn the 4 remaining xp and, it's Satyrs time!

Also, as a final note, training building are sloooooow, but granted!
Have you never reached that point in a FoL game where your capital has nothing useful to build anymore? Start churning fawns, they can still be fast response unit with Charm (one maybe has 10% to work [I actually think is higher] but 4-5 fawns can keep an army at bay). Eventually, 40-ish or so turns later...

They are really good for a defensive style! Fast stacks means you need less to cover your whole realm. Between Mobility, march wine and the default Woodsman II, I'm usually able to keep an army in my capital, said army can then reach everywere in the forested world in 1-2 turns. Also, don't forget they have 9 defensive strenght, pair it with Woodsman II and, even unupgraded, you have a defensive force to be reckoned with. A dominating defensive force!

Really Satyrs can only be upgraded from fawns because they would be very OP if directly buildable

 

[tokala]

The Clan entertaining a massive breeding program for (savage) Minotaurs is really not funny if you happen to be located next to them and those Minotaur hordes start to wander in your direction shorly after turn 100 normal speed

 

[OpheliaImmortal]

Maybe just maybe.. fawns used to be great for defence with woodsman two. However.. now since all FOL elven food tiles can't contain forests, all food tiles must be built on rivers.. and since all cities must be built on rivers...
I think you see where this is going. The is a direct path that the elves, with their no siege, and mediocre military must defend without forest or benefit. Rendering fawns even more uselesss now then they have ever been.
(I know I sound bitter.. I am more then a little bit. My two favourite civilizations can no longer be played.. so, perhaps I am distinctily annoyed. I still have my baalseraph, their mechanics are still ok.. but the elves are now so bad that I'd play the hippus without mounted units first. And as far as I can tell their is no intention to ever remedy the situation. Restoring the ability to build in forests wouldn't do it, nor would the addition of Orchards for everyone. A Civilization designed specifically to gain benefits from forests,while being inferior in other areas, cannot be balanced or playable unless they are allowed to gain benefits over other civilizations for forests. 'IF' the yields on orchards are what Valkrionn has implied, then the elves will forever be relegated to the garbage pile, permanently the worse possible choice for fellowship of leaves or any religion.
Do the math on 1f, 2 commerce orchards. Figure a single improvement the elves could build that would be better. The best possible comparison would be Aristocracy + agrarianism farms, with sanitation ..and even these would have one less production then orchards.
I'm.. and I hate to say this.. trying to find the download link for 1.23 again.

 

[Calavente]

For Ashes :
-isn't it possible that the ashes give science% to the city it is related instead of civ-wide ?
-why can't floating pyre be limited to fish/clam/shrimp and crab ? (fishing the creatures then burnng them to crisp) thus, D'tesh has interest to go into the water but not OP.

fawn :
as a religious unit, they should be on-par with a tier II unit +a bonus. (Disease corps are like champs + undead + diseaded; drowns are axemen+undead +waterwalking; nigthwatch are stronger longbows; SoK are axemen + dwarf + hurry mechanism; radiant guard are axemen +sunII; crusader are worse than champs ) for fawn it means Hunter + charm. another way to do it might be 5/3 + charm or 3/5 + charm or 3/4 + charm+taunt (in FFH they are 4 +see invisible animal) IMO, 2/3 +charm is really crappy.

Elves :
-to have high production high commerce but small cities :
-have Ancient forests get 0F/2P/2C with FoL (-1F/+1P/+1C without FoL ; normal forest being -1F/+1P IIRC)
(0F means a grassland ancient forest is self sustainable) ; have forest at +0.5 and ancient forest at +1 (or respectively +0.25 and +0.5)
+ give 1F for elves in forest + 1P/1C in ancient forest.

Thus for elves develops a bit better in forest than other civs (but as much as other civs in their usual starting terrain and are not loosers if they only have forested plains); for them changing to ancient forest doesn't change anything for food but boost research and prod. compared to other FoL civs : they get better prod and better commerce. In the end, having a windmill or a farm or a mine under a forest / ancient forest would still be way better than for other civs.

BUT FoL elves won't have such high-pop cities as before, as they won't have +3F ancient forests.

(if you want to reduce their pop size even more and still be a good civ production / commerce wise : you have to drastically rise their P/C output in forest ... as less food means less pop and less pop is less prod/commerce)

 

[Divvu]

Maybe just maybe.. fawns used to be great for defence with woodsman two.

Well, I admit my experience with them is only before 1.3... And no, fawn sucked greatly, I was talking about satyrs!

Howerver, don't be so bitter

I'm sure is all bout fine tuning something, for example the proposed idea of giving Elves +1 in forests would do a lot in this sense (maybe even a bit OP). Or maybe scrape the food idea and give them +1 in forests.
With increased (maybe the old + 0.5) and 1 more you would have those small, productive (and I'll add, healthy) cities the team is aiming for!

That said, I can understand your bitterness. I love elves too! I was waiting for rife 1.3 in order to have either, an elf, a Mazatl or a D'Tesh game, guess what?
Between bugs and balance issues none of those civs are playable for me
Still, let's wait and see what the Evil Hamstermind has in store for us...

 

[Segolenus]

What about removing the -1F from ancient forests but blocking elves from building farms/camps inside forest/ancient forest? (Not sure if this is possible to do while still allowing them to build on resources - maybe have special elven improvements for those?) This could be accompanied by elves and FoL/GoN getting +P and +C on ancient forest.

Another option might be to keep the status quo but give elves +1F on towns/mines/etc. inside ancient forest if FoL. (Is it possible to check for both terrain and improvement when granting boni? If not, there might have to be elf-specific improvements as well.)