Pyrezombies: Imbalanced?

[Blackmantle]

So you fix a non-broken macro feature (the Sheaim civ) for what purpose besides micro feature-level balance (which is not needed if 1. the Sheaim are balanced overall +! 2. Pyre Zombies don't destroy the game or are a only option for the Sheaim at the time making skeleton swarm completely unfeasible)?

Touching a non-broken feature (Sheaim balance) might! break it even with the best of intents unless tested well? (Which takes time and drains the teams resources. For fixing a non-broken feature? The possible problems caused by changing summoner trait are not enough to test the sheaim for right now?)

For the record: I have understood that you want that micro-feature fixed badly for whatever reasons. And that you disagree with me here that changeing Pyre Zombies will have no effect on Sheaim performance if a compensation is magically introduced without testing it intensively before.
I'm just not sure that you have understood the game-design goals FFH2 is based on and why your point will have a hard time to bear fruit beyond a modmod for yourselves and those who agree that such a change is badly needed.

 

[Seven05]

@ Seven05: Your post was a bit ironic / pun in parts, right? Just to be sure... Yours seems to be the only post of those 3 which actually not sounds dead-serious trough and through.

Well, polls are a joke in most cases such as this. They're like statistics and can be twisted to mean whatever you consider favorable at the time. The pie however is definately a lie so i was dead serious about need to help those voters.

As for the Pyre Zombies, I am one of the people that thinks they have issues but for different reasons apparently. I no longer play as the Sheaim because I don't like one-trick ponies which is what they feel like ever since I accidentally discovered just how potent pure pyre zombie spam can be against the AI. I don't really care one way or the other, well except for the pie bit, since I have 17 other civs to chose from.

So, um... maybe more sarcastic than ironic but definately not as dead-serious

 

[Neomega]

For the record: I have understood that you want that micro-feature fixed badly for whatever reasons. And that you disagree with me here. I'm just not sure that you have understood the game-design FFH2 is based on and why your point will have a hard time to bear fruit beyond a modmod for yourselves and those who agree that such a change is badly needed.

Well, be sure, I understand. Everytime somebody wants to change something, you will get a bunch of people who don't want it, and argue the imbalance is the beauty. Sometimes they are rigth, sometimes they are wrong.

 

[Blackmantle]

Well then i have to rest my point since i sure have no problems with you voicing your opinion and we have to agree to disagree here. (even on strategy and possible counters. And not least because it seems you like multiplayer more if I'm not mistaken. The competitive part i don't give a bit about.)

Sorry, for pressing the issue so much since i got your intention a bit wrong.


@ Seven05: Thanks for clearing that up.
Yea. But then there have been far worse polls on these forums (+ an overall inflation of polls overall recently. One even asking if we like polls?).
I don't think this one is a real horrible example of how to conduct a poll in terms of options / setup (unlike the one about Samhain. But the Pollster which is the same who conducted this poll if im not mistaken got his bill for that one... ) and i for one have my doubts that its much totally a misrepresentation of what the voters think.

 

[Trojan Sheep]

I wouldn't so much advise a nerf as I would a rebalancing, reducing their explosion's potency and giving them something in return to make them more viable in the late game like fire affinity or potentially even multiple mana affinities (fire, death and entropy maybe?). I don't know the Sheam's palace manas offhand, but obviously you'd want to account for those so they only gained strength over regular axemen through outside mana sources.

Just my two cents though.

 

[Neomega]

I wouldn't so much advise a nerf as I would a rebalancing, reducing their explosion's potency and giving them something in return to make them more viable in the late game like fire affinity or potentially even multiple mana affinities (fire, death and entropy maybe?). I don't know the Sheam's palace manas offhand, but obviously you'd want to account for those so they only gained strength over regular axemen through outside mana sources.

Just my two cents though.

this quote here just asserts that the term "nerf" is indeed negative.

 

[Blackmantle]

Hence the username.
But we learned so much from Troy.

.
.
.













(*hopes Trojan Sheep does not feel to much offended by that pun* )

 

[Trojan Sheep]

Hence the username.
But we learned so much from Troy.

Just because it's full of soldiers who want to kill your guards and lower your gates shouldn't detract from its value as a large wooden lawn ornament.

 

[PotatoOverdose]

A nerf is a nerf, even with the best intentions. What you were proposing was a nerf. It may or may not be a necessary nerf. It may be a good nerf, a deserved nerf. That depends on opinions that vary from person to person (Incidentally: This poll was meant to determine the aggregate opinions fo the community and whether the aggregate opinion concluded that a nerf was justified). The gallows have a negative connotation associated with them. They don't stop being gallows though. They are what they are, and sugarcoating them doesn't help anyone.

Does anyone seriously believe that the given wording of the poll severely influenced the results?

 

[vivictius]

I've allways found the Sheaim to be one of the weaker AI controlled civs (I dont have the option of trying multiplayer).

Do they damage each other when they blow up? I seem to remember they use to, but that may have been long ago.

 

[Monkeyfinger]

They do, and exploiting this is effective against the AI. Park two units in their way, let the pyre zombies attack, and there's guaranteed to be at least one straggler (one which beat the first unit, one which beat the second, they're guaranteed to be on different tiles.) Kill whichever zombie is alone with a horseman or something.

 

[WarKirby]

I've allways found the Sheaim to be one of the weaker AI controlled civs (I dont have the option of trying multiplayer).

Do they damage each other when they blow up? I seem to remember they use to, but that may have been long ago.

Only if they're not on the same tile. You have to break the stack apart to make them hit each other.

Also, pyre zombies have 50% fire resistance, and their explosion is fire damage, so it's not especially effective.

 

[WarKirby]

The Sheiam are far from a weak civ.

For a start, they begin with death mana. Allowing them to spam skeletons en masse as soon as they hit KotE. They also have chaos, which gives them half the mana needed to build the tower of necromancy, making a skeleton spam strategy that much easier.

Their planar gates generate an army for them constantly. Once the AC is up a bit, they can just build infrastructure and the gates will provide troops to protect them. Tar demons, Revellers, and Succubi are quite potent considering how relatively little it takes to get them. Corruption of Spirit, Mathematics, and sanitation, respectively, all techs that you're likely to be going for anyways.

They also have a ridiculously powerful archmage UU, allowing them to eat population and cast a great number of spells in one turn. A size 10 city can allow you so summon 9 wraiths, each of which last 3 turns thanks to the summoner trait. You can just consume your enemies' cities to create an army of summoned demons.

 

[Thunder_Gr]

Does anyone seriously believe that the given wording of the poll severely influenced the results?

No, I don't think it did.

If you wan't to follow the argument line "I know I am right and most people would agree with me if someone else didn't affect them somehow", you can find all sorts of things to blame the major figure of the opposition, I guess.

Most of the people that voted here have already followed the discussion of the other thread, at least a part of it. So, the arguments presented there would have their effect.
It is not so hard to understand that with the series of nerfs that make the game less interesting that had taken place lately, the majority of FFH fans wouldn't want more of it. I also notice a small shift to FF for that reason, since at the same time, the FF team keeps adding unique cool features.

Apart from that, it is also a no-brainer that the Sheaim have become significantly weaker lately. If that thread was going on before the summoner nerf, the results may not have been so far apart.

They also have a ridiculously powerful archmage UU, allowing them to eat population and cast a great number of spells in one turn. A size 10 city can allow you so summon 9 wraiths, each of which last 3 turns thanks to the summoner trait. You can just consume your enemies' cities to create an army of summoned demons.

2 turns my friend, 2 turns, not 3. And this "army of summond demons" will die 2 turns later. However, the city population is gone forever. It does not sound as "rediculusly powerful" to me. It is good to have and a handy tool, but the cost is great and it is a "one time" benefit.

 

[Neomega]

If you wan't to follow the argument line "I know I am right and most people would agree with me if someone else didn't affect them somehow", you can find all sorts of things to blame the major figure of the opposition, I guess.

It is really annoying when someone states your intentions for you.

I didn't think most people would agree with "me", I ma not particularly interested in "who won" the poll. Even if a greater majority of people disagreed, according to you, "i know I am right", so why would I change my opinion based on popular opinion.

Apart from that, it is also a no-brainer that the Sheaim have become significantly weaker lately. If that thread was going on before the summoner nerf, the results may not have been so far apart.

This is true, and in reality, it also may have skewed the basic question. Before, people may have said, yes, pyre zombies are imbalanced, but now, with the summoner trait being weakened, they are thinking, well the pyre zombies are sheaim, and even though they are overpowered, sheaim as a whole are underpowered, so therefore it balances out. That is not an honest answer of the question about pyre zombies, themselves, however.

 

[Thunder_Gr]

It is really annoying when someone states your intentions for you.

I didn't think most people would agree with "me", I ma not particularly interested in "who won" the poll. Even if a greater majority of people disagreed, according to you, "i know I am right", so why would I change my opinion based on popular opinion.

Well, I did not state your intentions. I just said the only reason that someone would start blaming the wording of the answers for the poll's results. This is what you did. Didn't you?

This is true, and in reality, it also may have skewed the basic question. Before, people may have said, yes, pyre zombies are imbalanced, but now, with the summoner trait being weakened, they are thinking, well the pyre zombies are sheaim, and even though they are overpowered, sheaim as a whole are underpowered, so therefore it balances out. That is not an honest answer of the question about pyre zombies, themselves, however.

It has been mentioned repeatedly that:
1) Pyre zombies are the only buildable Sheaim melee unit. The get no champions, no phalanxes, no berserkers no nothing.
2) If you want to argue using the "AV has diseased corpses" line, I will have to respond with the common note that "AV can be adopted by any civ. So you still get your champions, phalanxes, berserkers and the diseased corpses.
3)If you want to argue that the Sheaim get creatures from the planar gates, I would respond with "yes, but they are constrained to the AC counter, they are of a random type, and they cannot be used as a mainstream of an army. They do not come when I want, they are not what I want when they come. They are not as many as I need. The others just build what they want, when they want, in whatever numbers they like."

So, you think of the pyre zombies as an axeman unit. From this point of view they are ways overpowered. But you should have seen them as a champion unit. And from this point of view, they are pretty less than adequate. I prefer to see it like the Sheaim get a weak version of a champion unit early, and then are stuck with it while the others grow powerful and powerful, in the melee line.

 

[Neomega]

Well, I did not state your intentions.

C'mon, be honest. What else were you doing by writing out how "somebody" (read me) was thinking?

I just said the only reason that someone would start blaming the wording of the answers for the poll's results. This is wht yu did. Didn't you?

It was actually my initial reaction when I saw the poll, after 3 votes. I wanted to say something before he posted the poll, but I didn't.

It has been mentioned repeatedly that:
1) Pyre zombies are the only buildable Sheaim melee unit. The get no champions, no phalanxes, no berserkers no nothing.

Agreed. As I already stated, if pyre zombies were nerfed, (beyond the spring spell disabling their explosions, which is not that big of a nerf), there would need to be something to correct that. So I don't think it was needed to be stated again.

 

[WarKirby]

2 turns my friend, 2 turns, not 3. And this "army of summond demons" will die 2 turns later. However, the city population is gone forever. It does not sound as "rediculusly powerful" to me. It is good to have and a handy tool, but the cost is great and it is a "one time" benefit.

One turn is all you need to create an expendable army instantly from nothing, take a city with them, and be able to do it all over again.

 

[Neomega]

One turn is all you need to create an expendable army instantly from nothing, take a city with them, and be able to do it all over again.

But, if you are user eater of dreams, you have to somehow eat the population, summon the creatures, and get them within range of the next city within 2 turns, which is quite tricky. If not, all you have done is created a defense force of the newly conquered city... and are then defending a city you just destroyed even harder. It could be a nice tactic if you intend to eventually jsut raze the city, but it is not a very viable offensive tactic.

 

[WarKirby]

1) Pyre zombies are the only buildable Sheaim melee unit. The get no champions, no phalanxes, no berserkers no nothing.

They still get Eidolons, don't they ?

So, you think of the pyre zombies as an axeman unit. From this point of view they are ways overpowered. But you should have seen them as a champion unit. And from this point of view, they are pretty less than adequate. I prefer to see it like the Sheaim get a weak version of a champion unit early, and then are stuck with it while the others grow powerful and powerful, in the melee line.

If they're supposed to be a champion unit, then they should come at the same time as champions. Would you not think it overpowered if a civ got champions at bronze working?

If your enemy can beat you in the long run, that doesn't make much difference when you beat them now. there's no long run when everyone is dead. Or at least, enough people to build an empire capable of spamming more pyre zombies than you know what to do with.