Initial Impressions: The Shaolin
tbh bamboo is crazy strong .. placeable at any given time anywhere.. including those purple tiles yes the ones that boost damage on crystals, so far lost to two shaolin players who seems to figure out how exploit push the crystals tactic. on a head to head army fight shaolin players dont stand a cnahce tho, so i guess its going to be their thing, rush for the crystal victory.
So short version: I have too many other things to do to go back and respond to the criticisms of my post, but I think my general impression of "paid teams > council" is borne out by my experience enough to support the idea of new teams being released in various states of over-the-top. Dark Elf life leech is a huge gamechanger, and where council has to be careful not to overextend units without cleric support, a void monk can spend turn after turn zerging in, healing any amount of damage not enough to kill+stomp him throught aoe. Dwarves AOE + sturdy paladins makes them easier to play than council as well, tribe excels at punishing huge investment on a single unit which is almost the only way to get anywhere with council, blah blah blah.
Additionally, I feel that my opinion of the POISONER as a unit is fairly accurate, and in 90% of the games that I've started against Shaolin players they end up loading up a poisoner and ignoring combo points to do insane damage at 3 range with the 1 unit instead. That said, the healer is REALLY weak, the monk is hard to use, and the short range of the windblade makes her also of questionable value. So sure, the end result is that the Shaolin team may not be overtuned as a whole, but that doesn't make the poisoner as an individual unit well balanced. I'm not sure on what would be the best fix for the healing situation, because a lack of rez spell or potion + the low range, not exception healing of the Taoist leaves the Shaolin very vulnerable to aggressive AOE, and the Monk is hard to use with his low mobility and poor individual efficacy, etc. etc.
Sorry, but your pay to win argument simple isn't supported by the facts. The league data shows that the teams are as a whole remarkably well balanced and there's little win bias based on whatever team a player is using. There's no statistically significant higher loss/win ratio when playing Council. Actually, you draw a parallel between the Council and the Dark Elves but I think the data shows a slight edge of the Council over Dark Elves (although again not really statistically significant).
Indeed, the general pattern of teams being released shows them recieving later buffs, not nerfs. TF2 got a sniper buff to make the kneel far more viable as they were a tad underpowered before, dwarves got the pally aura and I think Shaolin will get something too. And this is because these teams were slightly underpowered at release, and most certainly not over-the-top.
The concept of a single unit in isolation being well balanced is rather oxymoronic. Well balanced in comparison to what, exactly? The poinser is very good, but I wouldn't really call the damage 'insane' when it is marginally less than an archer in most cases. True, against a unit with magic resist, the poisoner does more net damage, but you should also take into consideration the low HP of the poisner. It's much easier to protect an archer than a poisoner.
The poisoner should also be considered in the context of the team as a whole, considering some of the stuff you have pointed out. As you say, the combos are very hard to achieve, it's hard to use the monk effectively, the healing sucks and the shadow's resurrect is hard to protect. The Shaolin have the single weakest 'scroll' varient in the game as well. Their 'scroll' does 400 damage. That's it. Sure, it sets up the next unit for a massive 600 damage, but that's in 3 AP, at least, and that's unrealistically assuming optimal positioning. The Archer with a scroll, however, can do 1350 damage in 3AP. All things considered, the majority of people in these forums think the Shaolin should get a buff.
Agreed. I think it's unfair to say "Pay to Win, lolol you guys throw money at RE so you can win!".
If anything, I feel as if purchasing the other teams give VARIETY to gameplay, not an easier win.
@MrWho -- Actually, Council is 264-332 post 1.3, and that includes the 55-55 record when they play themselves. A similar result persists when we look at the rating adjusted performance ratings. You might have made the mistake of looking at ALL data, but pre-1.3 is garbage since DE and Dwarves got buffs. Moreover, we have enough post 1.3 data for it to be statistically meaningfull to look at it. Also keep in mind that the Council row is the record for council going first, the column with Council in it shows the record with Council going second. So you actually need to bust out the calculator to get the overall record, our spreadsheet isnt actually showing that.
Its not a huge balance problem, 100% agree with that, but Council is indeed struggling against the new teams to a degree. DE still has a negative record as well, Tribe about neutrial.
This is why Trip, myself and others are proposing modest nerfs to TF2 and Dwarves, and adjustments designed to improve gameplay but not to effect overall strength to the Tribe. Balance is pretty good, but it could be improved. We dont want "Pick Dwarves or TF2 and dont think about it" to be the right choice for people trying to get every edge.
I'm not very tolerant of text walls, and there does seem to be a mild sense of persecution, but Jwallyr definitely had a few valid points in there. One thing he is wrong about is it being a "pay vs free" divide. Council used to be too strong, killing the pay teams, DE and to a lesser extent, pre-buff Dwarves. Robot made good balance changes that we wanted. Things just got complicated with more and more teams coming out, and now things have swung in the other direction. But the track record is clear -- Robot truly wants good balance for all teams.
I take back what I said then. I haven't looked at the data in a while and was merely going off of memory. That'll teach me for next time. I agree, Jwallyr had a few good points and I'm glad that he's adopted a far more open way of voicing his views this time. I still think that his 'pay to win' assertion just isn't really supported by the league data as it has been in the past, although Council might be at a small disadvantage now. I definitely agree that TF2 and Dwarves should get small nerfs but there's no massive and consistent imbalance to imply a pay to win mentality. I think we might see a few balance changes in a few weeks or so to make the teams more balanced than they already are.
What amazes me is that the teams are sooo different yet pretty balanced. I play the other teams to get some variarety to the game, and I really enjoy that each team has different strength and weaknesses thus challenging the players in a new way.
I agree that some teams can have an edge over others, and I am sure that RE will take the time to look into any mismatches that will be brought up by the comminity.
But I have not played Shaolin enough to really have a good view on them yet, but i am definitely going to try and combo some crystals with them ;)
And my gut feeling is that their ability to rez opponent unit is such an advantage that any changes to them cannot boost this ability thus I do not expect the healer to get longer range nor the Shadow to be able to heal. I understand that this ability is hard to use now, but it has its reason, as converting enemy units is a big deal. A potential game breaker if it gets too strong.
I agree that shaolin will probably need a buff eventually but I think it's too soon to make the call. They actually are one of the best teams at defending rushes in my opinion especially if they have the shadow out. Rushing a unit in to take out a target isn't as worth it if the unit gets stolen. They also are able to effectively use their combos to take out super units pressing in on them so they shouldn't be as hopeless against an upgraded void monk as some other teams.
I agree that they have trouble going on the offensive and pure defense will not work well against dwarves and council. Currently, Shaolin has to make a slow push across the map using the bamboo and dragons to punch a hole in the opponent to give them time to deploy in an offensive position. Unfortunately, they get picked apart too easily before they can deploy right now. I think maybe a buff to the monks physical and/or magic resist could be the ultimate change they need.
I love the flavor of the team and am glad they depend so much on positioning and smart play. Some of the earlier suggestions to buff shaolin might work but I think making the shadow rez at more than 100 health would probably be too much. You are not supposed to be able to gain the unit every time. Usually it should just be useful to waste AP.
What if the Shadow could heal? It'd make an odd sort of sense, since we have a shooter/fighter Super (Ninja), a fighter/tank Super (Wraith), a caster Super (Annhilator), and a tank/AoE Super (Chieftan), so why not a healer/tank Super? A 3 range/movement healer could help a lot with Shaolin, though he'd still be less than ideal at rezzing, since he kills gear. But he'd also be able to heal his converted units, strengthening that aspect (possibly too much, that might be a problem).
A range 3 Taoist seems... I dunno. I think Shaolin will possibly need a buff (but it is early), but it seems too much. I know I'd gear up at least one Taoist if that was the case.
A range 3 Taoist seems... I dunno. I think Shaolin will possibly need a buff (but it is early), but it seems too much. I know I'd gear up at least one Taoist if that was the case.
You cant be a serious player and gear up a Taoist. If for no other reason, because the hat looks like a folded up paper lunch bag that a kid might wear to be silly, but with the yin/yang symbol drawn on.
deleted, double post
I think the main problem for me is that the Shaolin's combo hits special should deliver (at least sometimes) spectacular, satisfying damage that gives the player joy, but it never does, unless the opposing player walks their unit right into middle of Shaolin forces.
I am so sad to say this, as even yesterday I was still trying to defend it.
The progressive combo bonus doesn't work offensively, (on units anyway. maybe there is something in crystal rushing.)
Because of the 5AP per move limit, you can move and hit with a maximum of two different units. That is:
- Move A.
- Hit with A.
- Move B.
- Hit with B.
- HIt with A or B.
This, of course, leaves two units in harms way.
Compare this to the single unit option.
- Move A.
- Hit with A.
- Hit with A
- Hit with A
- Hit with A or move out of harms way.
Either you get 4 hits in or you leave 0 units in harms way.
I assert that the only way the 2 unit move above can be better, is if it actually dropped and stomped an enemy unit. In my experience with shaolin, that is never the case. The 2 unit combo bonus, is too small to drop units on AP 4. In fact, I don't think I've see a unit dropped on AP 5.
Now, defense is another story. If the other guy wanders into your range and stays there and you don't have to spend AP's moving, he's dead. I haven't worked out actual tactics yet, but I wouldn't be surprised if you can set up deadly defensive formations very economically.
There might be hope for the team, strength-wise, if it turns out that the poisoner is strong enough to be heart of the team's offense. That would suggest a general strategy of: Make use of combo bonus to create a strong immobile defense, and small poisoner-based roving offensive groups.
But I am pessimistic. I was imagining the combo bonus would encourage interesting roving formations. But because the moving side will only get the meager 2 combo bouns, while the non-mover benefits from huge 3,4,5 bonuses, it accomplishes the opposite.
Proposal 1: Only have a 2 combo bonus, (not 3, 4, 5) and make it massive enough to stomp most units on AP 5.
Proposal 2: Or: more wierdly: Make the 2 unit hit combo bonus include an extra AP, allowing you to pull new units into the battle. I think this would throw the advantage back to the offense, which is where it should be, for interesting games. Hence the battle would look like this:
- Move A.
- Hit with A.
- Move B.
- Hit with B. (2 unit hit--extra AP)
- Move C.
- HIt C (massive damage)
This idea is not fully baked, but I think there is something in it. Mixing AOE into this... Might have to force in some way that the extra AP goes on a third unit. If you allow both 5 and 6 to be AOE hits, you could be dropping a whole army.
Proposal 2: Or: more wierdly: Make the 2 unit hit combo bonus include an extra AP, allowing you to pull new units into the battle. I think this would throw the advantage back to the offense, which is where it should be, for interesting games. Hence the battle would look like this:
- Move A.
- Hit with A.
- Move B.
- Hit with B. (2 unit hit--extra AP)
- Move C.
- HIt C (massive damage)
This idea is not fully baked, but I think there is something in it. Mixing AOE into this... Might have to force in some way that the extra AP goes on a third unit. If you allow both 5 and 6 to be AOE hits, you could be dropping a whole army.
No. give the extra AP for moving the 3rd unit. That is where the bonus needs to be, to give the advantage back to the offense.
That is:
- Move A.
- Hit with A.
- Move B.
- Hit with B. (combo bonus damage)
- Move C. (3rd unit moved. extra AP)
- HIt C (massive damage)
I am so sad to say this, as even yesterday I was still trying to defend it.
The progressive combo bonus doesn't work offensively, (on units anyway. maybe there is something in crystal rushing.)
Because of the 5AP per move limit, you can move and hit with a maximum of two different units. That is:
- Move A.
- Hit with A.
- Move B.
- Hit with B.
- HIt with A or B.
This, of course, leaves two units in harms way.
Compare this to the single unit option.
- Move A.
- Hit with A.
- Hit with A
- Hit with A
- Hit with A or move out of harms way.
Either you get 4 hits in or you leave 0 units in harms way.
I assert that the only way the 2 unit move above can be better, is if it actually dropped and stomped an enemy unit. In my experience with shaolin, that is never the case. The 2 unit combo bonus, is too small to drop units on AP 4. In fact, I don't think I've see a unit dropped on AP 5.
Now, defense is another story. If the other guy wanders into your range and stays there and you don't have to spend AP's moving, he's dead. I haven't worked out actual tactics yet, but I wouldn't be surprised if you can set up deadly defensive formations very economically.
There might be hope for the team, strength-wise, if it turns out that the poisoner is strong enough to be heart of the team's offense. That would suggest a general strategy of: Make use of combo bonus to create a strong immobile defense, and small poisoner-based roving offensive groups.
But I am pessimistic. I was imagining the combo bonus would encourage interesting roving formations. But because the moving side will only get the meager 2 combo bouns, while the non-mover benefits from huge 3,4,5 bonuses, it accomplishes the opposite.
Proposal 1: Only have a 2 combo bonus, (not 3, 4, 5) and make it massive enough to stomp most units on AP 5.
Proposal 2: Or: more wierdly: Make the 2 unit hit combo bonus include an extra AP, allowing you to pull new units into the battle. I think this would throw the advantage back to the offense, which is where it should be, for interesting games. Hence the battle would look like this:
- Move A.
- Hit with A.
- Move B.
- Hit with B. (2 unit hit--extra AP)
- Move C.
- HIt C (massive damage)
This idea is not fully baked, but I think there is something in it. Mixing AOE into this... Might have to force in some way that the extra AP goes on a third unit. If you allow both 5 and 6 to be AOE hits, you could be dropping a whole army.
This analysis is distilled wisdom. I like some Shaolin units, dislike others and yet others are situational. But at the end of each game, I walk away with this same feeling: the combos are their brightest potential but that you never are given enough opportunity to pull a good combo but once or twice over the course of 40 or so rounds. And those few are rarely game-changers.
I think its true that they would be great CK'ers but you cannot get the right trio together and mobilized or keep them in formation long enough because the wolves are nippin' at your heals. You turn to defend yourself (with inadequate combos as Adaza spells out above) and then your momentum is broken up and you lose a crit member w/o a nearby sub.
So yeah, Shaolin are a flash mob with no signal coverage.
Proposal 2 (w/o the AOE finale) seems viable and promising due to the fact that we know that TF2 can circumstantually "earn AP" - so why can't another team as long as the situation is equally well defined? Since RE has the algorythms for combo triggers, folding the AP bonus into it shoul be relatively straight forward. Caveat: We'd have to be careful to see if there were situations that could perpetually earn AP (sort of a recursion loop).
No. give the extra AP for moving the 3rd unit. That is where the bonus needs to be, to give the advantage back to the offense.
That is:
- Move A.
- Hit with A.
- Move B.
- Hit with B. (combo bonus damage)
- Move C. (3rd unit moved. extra AP)
- HIt C (massive damage)
More explicitly, here is the good proposal.
Moving a third unit, in a turn, gets an extra AP. (You only get it if you move 3 different units.)
If you put the bonus on hitting, rather than moving, defense will still be advantaged more than the offense.
Caveat: We'd have to be careful to see if there were situations that could perpetually earn AP (sort of a recursion loop).
Assuming we are now talking about 3rd movement AP bonus, we could discuss whether 4th and 5th new unit should get APs too. My gut says it'd be too strong, but it would sure be interesting. You could move a 5 unit army and still have 3 APs left.
Move A
Move B
Move C. (AP bonus)
Move D. (AP bonus)
Move E. (AP bonus)
And why stop there? You could move your whole field one move each, and have up to 3 hits at the end.
My guess is it is too radical to be accepted.
I am putting my support behind just the 3rd unit movement bonus.
I have no idea how this team is supposed to handle AoE. I've been half hazardly blasting them apart with upgraded wizards, Taoists just can't keep up at all. I can't imagine the havok a Grenadier would wreak on them.
I do think you guys are on the right track.
I quote:
Move A.
Hit with A.
Move B.
Hit with B. (combo bonus damage)
Move C. (3rd unit moved. extra AP)
HIt C (massive damage)
Now you distilled it to "3rd movement gets +1 AP". Consider "The first movement of a unit is free":
1. Move A (free)
2. Hit with A.
3. Move B.
4. Hit with B.
5. Move C.
6. Hit with C.
This yields the same result, but is more flexible. It's also much clearer and more applicable then before. Also, it would make them have a certain speed advantage in the first turns, in order to get the units into place. It also communicates more clearly when put into the team bonus.
I welcome any notes of unforeseen sideeffects. I also thank you for bringing that thought up, it sure has potential!
EDIT: Corrected the ambigiouty in "the first move is free"
Consider "The first move is free":
1. Move A (free)
2. Hit with A.
3. Move B.
4. Hit with B.
5. Move C.
6. Hit with C.
This yields the same result, but is more flexible. It's also much clearer and more applicable then before. Also, it would make them have a certain speed advantage in the first turns, in order to get the units into place. It also communicates more clearly when put into the team bonus.
So, Moontear, just so we understand and we get the discussion going in the correct direction, you want us to toss around the idea that the Shaolin get a team-wide, unconditional free AP? If so, let's.
Folks, what are the balance implication for this hobbled, lack-luster team should this be the ONLY buff the Shaolin get?
Actually, my comment was quite ambigious. With "the first move free", I actually meant the first moving of a unit, as opposed to a full 6-AP. :D
Actually, my comment was quite ambigious. With "the first move free", I actually meant the first moving of a unit, as opposed to a full 6-AP. :D
Too late, I fear. The hounds have been loosed. I pray we should await their return from their hunt to investigate the mutilated and savaged prey they fell upon, clamped in their vicious and toothy maws.
6ap would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater -- the current round of balance testing would be totally irrelevant, as 6ap or a bonus ap is basically a different team. Robot never does that, so your basically running a throught experiment.
Robot will make tweaks -- major, if necessary, but tweaks.
I've bought up this concept before earlier, and I was wondering why no one addressed it.... Bonus AP for achieving combos. What's wrong with that? Of course, with a limit. I mentioned that too.
Wouldn't implementing something like "1 AP bonus per 2 Combo score" be reasonable?
6ap would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater -- the current round of balance testing would be totally irrelevant, as 6ap or a bonus ap is basically a different team. Robot never does that, so your basically running a throught experiment.
Robot will make tweaks -- major, if necessary, but tweaks.
By different, you mean different than what was originally advertised and delivered as the currently incarnate band of mediocrity, the Shaolin?
Or different as in too radical a departure from the other currently fielded factions? What about TF and their abominable bonus AP?
No one likes my ideas. ;__;
Am I the only one who has the feeling the taoist has a too low healing? specially when the monk is fully upgraded fast killed... well he is no knight, but who else should you then give the upgrades?..
Am I the only one who has the feeling the taoist has a too low healing? specially when the monk is fully upgraded fast killed... well he is no knight, but who else should you then give the upgrades?..
Many have said this already.
At the very least, I would certainly back combo healing. A heal from a second Taoist should be for 800 -- so you can combo heal a geared shadow or monk in two heals if both monks are in position. Even if nothing else is done to healing, and it may be needed, combo healing just makes sense. Rare that it would save an AP, but it would help a little and just fits in with the team.
Yes, the effectiveness of the Taoist is in question. Most discussion is about AoE healing / defense, though.
To throw yet another possibility in: We opened up the possibility of "the third movement of a unit is free" and "the first movement of a unit is free". The first could be too situational, the other too strong. Therefore, we should also consider "The second moving of a unit is free."
However, this proposal is probably irrelevant, because I suspect numbers to be fixing this issue rather than mechanics. There's nothimg bad about just increasing Move/Range/values to fix the team, I guess. I do wonder though, if this will single-handedly fix the flawed team bonus.
Yes, the effectiveness of the Taoist is in question. Most discussion is about AoE healing / defense, though.
To throw yet another possibility in: We opened up the possibility of "the third movement of a unit is free" and "the first movement of a unit is free". The first could be too situational, the other too strong. Therefore, we should also consider "The second moving of a unit is free."
However, this proposal is probably irrelevant, because I suspect numbers to be fixing this issue rather than mechanics. There's nothimg bad about just increasing Move/Range/values to fix the team, I guess. I do wonder though, if this will single-handedly fix the flawed team bonus.
I'm sure I've said this before, but here it is again.
Having them get a free AP for no reason is probably unbalanced. They could use it to retreat, they could use it to block, they could use it to attack.
However, changing the Team Bonus to "1 bonus AP per 2 combo" would make it so that this free AP would only happen during attacks. Which is what the Shaolin team is suppose to be all about! This would also prevent abuse for unbalanced defensive Shaolin play.
I don't know about anybody else who has played shaolin but I would gladly trade the poisoner for an archer. In fact I frequently make trades to get access to an archer because her range + her damage + her sturdiness are truly unmatched.
Redexoskeleton. That's my name in game. Challenge me if you like (I am slightly above average) be sure to mention if it is a friendly or league game