Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 84

  Click here to go to the first staff post in this thread.   Thread: Unit Cap Idea/Suggestion/Request

  1. #61
    Senior Member Butters's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Tokyo, Japan
    Posts
    303
    I'm with wordplay.
    It's challenging, but beating a 4Th/2WH or 4BB/2WM with a balanced team is possible enough as it is (still plenty challenging, sure). I could see a 3-per-class cap making some sense to avoid cheesing, but I'd prefer for it to come after the balance of all higher rank units is taken into account.
    I think a 2 cap as proposed and endorsed earlier here is way too restrictive, and a 1 per class cap on varls seems completely uncalled for.

  2. #62
    Community Moderator Guğmundr's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Skogr, Setterlund
    Posts
    822
    If I understand correctly, we're talking about caps on individual unit types, right? So, you could still play 2 thrashers, 2 backbiters, a warhawk and a warmaster?
    Án brynju, mağur er varnarlaus. Án styrks, er hann ekkert.

  3. #63
    Senior Member sweetjer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Pacific NW, United States
    Posts
    154
    That's right, Gud. The original proposal was a hard cap on the base unit, but the idea has been tweaked as we discussed it to a cap on unique advanced class.
    that which does not kill you often leaves you handicapped

  4. #64
    Is 2x Backbiter 2x Thrasher super different in power from 4x one or the other?

    Honest question.
    Last edited by Chumpy; 03-10-2013 at 06:53 PM.

  5. #65
    Backer Grits's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    East Coast
    Posts
    106
    I would like to see at least a restriction to two of the same units, possibly one of each. Would make for much more interesting builds.

  6. #66
    Senior Member Yellow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    265
    Quote Originally Posted by Chumpy View Post
    Is 2x Backbiter 2x Thrasher super different in power from 4x one or the other?

    Honest question.
    Honest answer, nope, ain't a big diference between that, and 4x.... Thats why in my opinion 3 of same unit class, while a bitt restrictive, would be the best in terms of balance....

    But if in stead of 3 of same class, 2x of same upgrade(veteran) is implemented i could live with that, it might not change a hugge deal when it comes to all melle builds, but at least it brings some more variation....

    PS: am personally taking a break from Factions until this issue and the matchmaking deal gets sorted out, wich is a shame as i lost my daily log in streak of 12 days :/ and i have already droped from top 10 on "most wins" and "most games played" :/

    PS2: In the meantime am waiting impasiently for the Poster i bought to arrive
    Last edited by Yellow; 03-11-2013 at 10:26 AM.

  7. #67
    Senior Member Yellow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    265
    Update for everybody on here:

    The 4x issue is now fixed, as with last build, the unit cap was reduced to 3 for Archers and 3 for Raiders very pleased with this to be honest! Bright days are to come!

  8. #68
    I redownloaded Factions and was looking forward to playing with my team of raiders (five raiders and an archer). I always liked the idea of challenging the game by not using a Varl, now this is not possible (unless you want to spam archers). It's not like you're going to be too strong if you take more than three raiders, on the contrary, it's quite a challenge. Now this is not possible. Very sad.

  9. #69
    Senior Member Yellow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    265
    Quote Originally Posted by Dansk viking View Post
    I redownloaded Factions and was looking forward to playing with my team of raiders (five raiders and an archer). I always liked the idea of challenging the game by not using a Varl, now this is not possible (unless you want to spam archers). It's not like you're going to be too strong if you take more than three raiders, on the contrary, it's quite a challenge. Now this is not possible. Very sad.
    Holy Necro!
    "Forged by Fire; Empowered by Passion"

  10. #70
    Skald Aleonymous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    2,444
    Quote Originally Posted by Yellow View Post
    Holy Necro!
    Indeed For what it's worth, I agree with Dansk Viking. The unit-restrictions should be to prevent over-powered builds (like 3+ Varl) not under-powered ones... However, five raiders, especially if they are Thrashers, is gonna be highly-annoying to play against!
    Together we stand, divided we fall.

  11. #71
    I know that Factions haven't been updated in a long while, but could you please consider letting people have at least four raiders? I'm sure I'm not the only one with this sentiment - as can be seen in the patch thread for the version that changed the class limits. I don't think switching a Varl or an archer for an additional raider gives you any obvious advantages, but many people prefer to play with challenging and interesting setups, and it makes sense as it enhances the use of the shieldwall mechanics - a tactic that many people consider iconic to the Vikings from whom the game has taken most of its inspiration. The current limits really lowers the amount of possible builds, for no real reason. While I'd go so far as to opt for a limit of five raiders, I believe four would be a viable compromise.

  12. #72
    Skald Aleonymous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    2,444
    My suggestions, for the various match types, are as follows:

    1. Ranked/Tournament matches: Hardest restrictions. 2 Raiders, 2 Archer, 1 Warrior, 1 Shieldbanger. I'd go as far as banning same-class raiders/archers as well.
    2. Quick/Random matches: Mild restrictions, like the current ones. 1-3 Raiders, 1-3 Archers, 0-2 Varl.
    3. Friendly/Custom matches: No restrictions at all 0-6 units of any class!
    Together we stand, divided we fall.

  13. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by Aleonymous View Post
    2. Quick/Random matches: Mild restrictions, like the current ones. 1-3 Raiders, 1-3 Archers, 0-2 Varl.
    So, why not 1-4 raiders (and thus 0-3 archers)?


    EDIT: I wouldn't mind the introduction of some restrictions on class types. Maybe a maximum of two of the same type (backbiter, thraser, skystriker, etc.) would be good.
    Last edited by Dansk viking; 12-30-2014 at 11:05 AM.

  14. #74
    Skald Aleonymous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    2,444
    Quote Originally Posted by Dansk viking View Post
    So, why not 1-4 raiders (and thus 0-3 archers)?
    Well, you see, the Quick/Random matches will also have to be more-or-less fair for most of the builds out there. In this case, I believe that a 4Raider build (e.g. something like 4 Thrashers or 4 Raidmasters) can beat a 3Archer+1Raider build on any give date... That would make random matches unfun for archer-loving players and eventually everybody will start using 4Raider builds only.

    But, that's just my estimation. Maybe things would turn out differently In any case, all this talk is meaningless with such a small playerbase...
    Together we stand, divided we fall.

  15. #75
    I don't know, with the release of the new singleplayer addition pending, things might pick up.

    I don't see how four raider builds should inevitably become predominant. All classes have advantages and disadvantages, archers are superior at taking out low armour foes from a distance, and combined with two good Varls (which I believe most people play with), I'm pretty sure a balanced 3R+1A+2V or 2R+2A+2V can stand up to an all out melee team if properly applied. People (read I) want choices. Give us the possibility to use more raiders, the basic infantry unit! The balance should be so, that every build has its advantages and disadvantages, and I don't think the build options are free enough to give the exciting and sometimes surprising builds that some people might try.

    In the matter of "same-class" raiders, I am, as I said above, all for a limitation (just like the OP's alternative solution).
    Last edited by Dansk viking; 12-30-2014 at 02:14 PM.

  16. #76
    Skald Aleonymous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    2,444
    Quote Originally Posted by Dansk viking View Post
    I don't know, with the release of the new singleplayer addition pending, things might pick up.
    Just like with TBS1's release (notice the "spike" in Jan 2014), the numbers will climb for a month or so, but then people will lose interest again, as it's such an old game, with no new stuff coming anytime soon.

    Frankly, I think that the undeniably "best" way to handle those things (e.g. the class restrictions), is to constantly change and tweak them, so that you force people to try different things, experiment, never feel stagnant with the same old content etc. Same goes for other aspects of the game, e.g. stats, abilities etc. Constantly changing them, little by little, will hopefully bring the game closer and closer to an overall "balanced" whole.
    Together we stand, divided we fall.

  17. #77
    Superbacker netnazgul's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Belarus
    Posts
    456
    Quote Originally Posted by Dansk viking View Post
    I don't see how four raider builds should inevitably become predominant.
    Canadian Army and 4BB-builds back in beta don't agree with you
    If limitations are there - they are there for a reason, not that someone just came up with a dumb idea.

    Although there should probably be less (or none) limitations in friendly matches.
    If you don't know where to put it - put it in the pillage

    Steelhammer Tribune issues collected here
    Some of my Factions games can be observed here
    Also possible streaming at http://www.twitch.tv/netnazgul

  18. #78
    Well, if the backbiter (which has been nerfed from what I've heard) is the problem, don't limit the classes themselves, limit the class types.


    Quote Originally Posted by Yellow View Post
    As an alternative:

    -Add a "same unit(same promotion)Cap of 2.

    This way the game would be more balanced and enjojable while still allowing a good diversity of builds and matchups.

  19. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by Aleonymous View Post
    It might be a coincidence, but it seems the major drop in population happened after the patch that limited the classes. I think many people (including me) left when they lost the possibility to play with their favourite build - be it a four archer build, full melee team, or like me a human only 5R+1A team (which I doubt anyone here would call overpowered). Like many people have stated before, I think a limiting of the advanced classes would be much more preferable. I'd say that a limit of two of the same class type (backbiter, warmaster, skystriker, raidmaster, thraser, etc.) all across the board would be very nice.

  20. #80
    Superbacker netnazgul's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Belarus
    Posts
    456
    I strongly dislike playing against cheesy 2TH 2SA 2WM or 3BM 2SRM 1RM builds or something like that. But those are still better than ones that got banned with the patch (probably due to overall players skill being lower than before, but still).

    Anyways, population drop in Factions doesn't relate to patches, it's just people played everything they wanted out of the game (you can get most of it in several weeks max). Game being in stagnant state since it's release (!) is the one and only reason for its decline.
    Last edited by netnazgul; 01-02-2015 at 08:39 AM.
    If you don't know where to put it - put it in the pillage

    Steelhammer Tribune issues collected here
    Some of my Factions games can be observed here
    Also possible streaming at http://www.twitch.tv/netnazgul

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •