Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 104

Thread: Is BM OP

  1. #61
    I was thinking if making a 7 WP minimum would perhaps keep the versatility of the unit but make you not make the BM good at everything. You would have to choose between 9 armor, 8 strength, 3 exertion or 2 armorbreaks. Rank 1 would have to take 3 stats from all, rank 2 2 stats and rank 3 1 stat. Skystriker already has 7 min so there is a precedence.

  2. #62
    Senior Member Kletian999's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    258
    Boosting one minimum means lowering another by the same point (you can't just give the class less flex than the others), so how would you lower the rest?

  3. #63
    Quote Originally Posted by Kletian999 View Post
    Boosting one minimum means lowering another by the same point (you can't just give the class less flex than the others), so how would you lower the rest?
    Lowering the armor or strength, allowing 0 break bowmasters or 0 exertion.

  4. #64
    Junior Member Esth's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    29
    I do think that the current balancing method of arbitrary max and mins, but same stat total has some problems; it assumes that every ability (or at least within the class) is equal. For instance, I think that reducing backbiter total stats by one, but leaving their max strength the same, would have been a better change.

  5. #65
    Senior Member Kletian999's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    258
    It is what it is for now. Stoic's probably gone to far to try and change this model.

  6. #66
    Junior Member glraven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    21
    Testing result

    After feeling that BMs are OP. I decided not to enter the tournament with my old build. Instead, I've been testing out other build against BMs. I think it is extremely difficult to defeat an opponent with Breakers + 3BMs/2BM+SS builds. BMs should definitely lose 1 AB!
    Last edited by glraven; 05-25-2013 at 08:53 AM.

  7. #67
    Senior Member roder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    215
    so do you think they'll make any balance adjustments soon, or after banner releases, or do they think BM is in a good place right now.

  8. #68
    Developer raven2134's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Manila, Philippines
    Posts
    1,061
    Balance tweaks will happen even before Saga release. It just takes a bit more time cos the team is busy with SP development, check out the latest dev update in news!

  9. #69
    Member AnotherPersona's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    USA, Michigan
    Posts
    84
    It seems like the BM is meant to be the Glass Cannon of the archer builds. Honestly, the SA needs to go back to 10 arm, since her ability nerf, her name really suits it. I think a good possibility for the BM is to reduce Max armor by 2, and break by 1. Force a point or two into WP. You already have to player her strategically, but sometimes you set your opponent up to come maim her, then counter maim and she has that 9 arm, with her strong range ability. I've won games where my opponent was only half broken on 4 units with two broken (1/8, 2/8) BMs, simply by using the turn advantage for 1 wp, then using that WP to BoP. With the reduced armor, we could no longer depend on BM end game, unless played VERY tactically. Just a thought.

    I could possibly even see forcing 6 arm and giving BoP 1 more range per level. That'd be some crazyness. xD

  10. #70
    Member SeraphimLoki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    54
    Same here i think siege archer should get 10 armor. And the bowmaster is the only unit that can kill, break "active" shieldmaster which is untoucheble (sorry for spelly). With melee units.

  11. #71
    Skald Aleonymous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    2,444
    Quote Originally Posted by SeraphimLoki View Post
    ...i think siege archer should get 10 armor.
    I am also running my SAs at 9ARM these days (at the cost of STR), to have them as
    (1) ranged-breakers with 2AB+WP,
    (2) zone-controllers with SnB or
    (3) endgame "un-maim-ables" with SnB+WP / Puncture.
    If I were given the option of 10ARM, I'd take it.

  12. #72
    Senior Member roder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    215
    Yea i'd take 10ARM if SA were given it, at least they'd be less of a BM-variant with lower str for unmaimability

  13. #73
    Member Tatski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Philippines
    Posts
    58
    8 str / 9 arm Bow master is a little tough and can be hard to get too. She is a better damager than a SS & can Break like an SA. She can be tougher than a SA with that 1 extra strength. She's by far the best archer IMO. That being said I agree that The SA needs some love, bringing her armor back to 10 would be nice. As breakers they are usually exposed and easily killed in 1 turn cycle. 10 armor will help SA survive and break or slag for another turn.
    Last edited by Tatski; 06-06-2013 at 08:28 PM.

  14. #74
    Senior Member Butters's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Tokyo, Japan
    Posts
    303
    Getting a bit off topic, but I don't think I'd care for that 10th point of armor on the SA. It made sense when SnB was OP, much less now. I'd rather have those points in wp. I barely ever play them over 8 armor. Maybe that's just me though. I'm all for shaking things up a bit, especially in the archer department. The BM getting a AB nerf would be the best SA buff IMHO.

  15. #75
    Senior Member Rensei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Wrocław
    Posts
    237
    Siege Archer is often seen as "front line archer". Partly because of her early break potential (and awesome dmg she is capable of when paired with WL) and already higher armor, partly because... well she has no other options SS can cover the ground with RoA from safe distance, BM can deal almost her normal dmg, while SA can cover the no mans land with SnB to a mediocre effect.

  16. #76
    Once the BM gets tweaked a little people will stop saying SA is weak

  17. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by Rensei View Post
    Siege Archer is often seen as "front line archer". Partly because of her early break potential (and awesome dmg she is capable of when paired with WL) and already higher armor, partly because... well she has no other options SS can cover the ground with RoA from safe distance, BM can deal almost her normal dmg, while SA can cover the no mans land with SnB to a mediocre effect.
    The only reason that the SA is a front line archer is because the range of her ability forces her to go into the front lines. Yes you can use the ability in the middle of no where but that would be a waste of wp unless your opponent was dumb enough to actually walk over the coals towards you. That's the reason the SA had such high armor in the first place (well, okay, one of the justifications), since she had to be used in front in order to reach her full potential. If you really think about the SS actually has a longer range of effectiveness with her ability than the SA. Also the "awesome damage when paired with WL" is highly misleading because the SA doesn't really do that much more damage than any other unit paired with a WL. Yes you can "punish" a person that groups up and doesn't expect the FA SA, but the same argument could be made for the WM and WH, and they could do even more damage!

    Finally the reason I wrote this post in the first place (other than to make rensei feel bad ) is that I guarantee you if the SA's SnB had 1-2 more range, similar to the BM BoP, then SA would be the most used archer in the game (well I guess they already were before but...) and people would want her armor nerfed (or the range reduced ). The only reason the SA isn't used right now is the somewhat inferior stats and slightly underpowered ability when compared to her counterparts (BM). Basically I agree with some people in the thread here that the SA doesn't need to be touched. Now let's get back on topic about what does need to be fixed, the BM :P

    (PLUS we don't need to encourage Tirean to create more broken builds lol)

  18. #78
    Junior Member Slimpy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    15
    I posted this on the steam forums but finally got around to registering and posting here. The issue as I see it relates entirely to do with the synergy between eagle eye and piercing. I personally feel that piercing is currently OP and would rather it was changed to something like a bonus str for each armour point the target has below the archers Str. This suggestion may already be in here somewhere (apologies if that's the case)...but there's too many posts to ream em all! This approach removes the stupidity of higher armour units being more vulnerable than low armour ones.

    I'm also in favour of a general nerf to ranged break (even though I like it!), maybe with the exception of the SA.

  19. #79
    Skald Aleonymous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    2,444
    Quote Originally Posted by Slimpy View Post
    [...] The issue as I see it relates entirely to do with the synergy between eagle eye and piercing. I personally feel that piercing is currently OP and would rather it was changed to something like a bonus str for each armour point the target has below the archers Str. [...] I'm also in favour of a general nerf to ranged break (even though I like it!), maybe with the exception of the SA.
    Its funny how you mistook both bird-of-prey (eagle eye) and puncture (piercing)

    I am one of the few (in this forum) that believe archers are OP in general, because of puncture, and that they should be nerfed somehow. Your proposal is interesting (STR-bonus only for ARM-loss below archer's STR), and I do not think that I have come upon it too often (or at all, for that matter). Perhaps when other/more ranged-attack units are introduced, this ability will be re-addressed.

    Concerning the AB-nerf, I think it is coming for the BM, sooner or later...

  20. #80
    Developer raven2134's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Manila, Philippines
    Posts
    1,061
    That's sort of the point of puncture, to down high armor units. High armor units are incredibly good against high strength units. You need so many turns to down a unit like a full armor/str Shieldbanger because first you'd need to whittle away the armor, and then attack the strength. It probably takes twice as long to down that kind of shieldbanger.

    To "economize" turns, the strategic option is to take advantage of puncture. When you analyze things, puncture only makes high armor units as vulnerable as units with ave. armor. How so? Well if you have a unit with 10 armor and 10 str, and you need 1 break and 1 strength attack to kill it, and if you have a 15 armor 10 str unit, instead of needing 4 turns (2 breaks, 2 strength attacks) you'd do 3 turns because you could 1 shot the unit using puncture. Now I'm just illustrating the idea, not making it specific.

    If archers only got a bonus when the enemy has less armor than the archer has strength, the effect on puncture is probably going to be larger than you expect. (Currently) when archer str<enemy armor, the armor still does block part of the archer's damage, (8 str archer vs 10/15 armor PK is still just 1 effective damage +100% accurracy for willpower shot).

    We didn't really have issues with puncture when archers range was limited to 5. During that point in time, playing to take advantage of puncture was a risk and a sacrifice. You had to keep an archer still within enemy/melee range. So puncture was used to take out a key target at a cost of the archer, or to the units protecting that archer.

    This is not the case for the BM, in addition to the stats which trump SA and SS.

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 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
  •