Project: Build Consensus Balance Re ...
200 shadow base damage is a bad change, turned units combing is a bad change. I'll tell you why. The shadow is borderline op right now. He is just this unstoppable force of destruction that can't be killed without player error, (or intentional trade) giving him 200 damage would make him this beefy, highly mobile, high ranged killing machine that basically means that vanilla units cannot come within 6 squares of him and live. This is while being a real pain to kill. Just no.
sniper to range 6 is also bad. Sniper's job is to make you unwilling to occupy a row.
yeah, I suppose increasing the shadow's base damage to 200 might be a bit too much, what with the combo damage and the remote stomp.
What about giving the Windblade 10% physical resist to put him more on par with the Wizard's 10% magical resist?
Also, I think someone mentioned possibly increasing the Taoist's healing range to 3, since he currently is the weakest healer in the game.
Taoist may be the weakest healer, but removing debuffs and buffs is HUGE.
I don't support more buffs to survivability of SL in itself - they're not "squishy" like how TR or TF are squishy. What they lack are offensive options, mainly due to their reliance on combos. I'd rather have the monk rush (like chieftain, but 1 tile) to help with creating offense.
DW: I too would like to see something done about the late/mid DW game, but early game, the pally resist buff is all that keeps them going, sometimes... I would rather that pally resist not stack with equipment. That way you don't get unkillable +3 units, but vanilla units still gain a bit more survivability.
Shaolin are hilariously underpowered. They should be fixed as follows:
1) Increase monk movement to 3. With 2 movement, these guys are objectively the worst unit in the game.
2) Increase windblade damage to 100/50/50 or 100/66/66. Otherwise the windblade is are just a really crappy wizard. 100/50/50 or 100/66/66 at least gives them some needed flavor.
3) Let the poisoner debuff persist through death like the monk's debuff. A strategy I like to do vs non-Shaolin is apply the debuff to as many enemy units as possible, but as it doesn't persist through death it really limits the harass you can do with the already fragile poisoner.
4) Add +50 damage per combo attack. This makes it is worth more than the 1 AP you would have to spend moving a vanilla unit in range to start a combo with another unit. It is all too often the case that it is actually worthless (and sometimes, even negative) to bring another Shaolin unit into range to start a combo.
5) Add combo healing, and allow the combo healing to work with the Shadow's ressurecting. So for example, if the Shadow revives a unit, the Taoist who heals the unit heals for 650 instead of 400. This actually makes it viable to try to Shadow snipe a unit, resurrect it, and actually USE it. As it currently stands, doing this effectively is extremely rare, and nonexistant against good players.
Out of curiousity, why is it agreed that the council is not in need of a change? And i'm looking for something other than "they are the original team and the benchmark for balance."
Out of curiousity, why is it agreed that the council is not in need of a change? And i'm looking for something other than "they are the original team and the benchmark for balance."
Well, one does need a benchmark, although I suppose it could be League data and you could try to tweak every team a little to get closer to balance.
Perhaps the real answer is that Council is such a basic team with so few "extras" that it isnt clear what one would tweak without creating problems. Super Knights (1440s) created problems. The slight heal on rez reduction the Council got could be reversed without problems but how much does that really matter? Not much. What else would one do? I dont think one could safely give any more health or resists to archers or wizards...a small difference could have a huge impact. Adding another fireball or upping fireball damage would be way too big, not an option. Perhaps adding a third potion would be an option. I dunno -- Council is hard to touch.
Out of curiousity, why is it agreed that the council is not in need of a change? And i'm looking for something other than "they are the original team and the benchmark for balance."
Well, one does need a benchmark, although I suppose it could be League data and you could try to tweak every team a little to get closer to balance.
Perhaps the real answer is that Council is such a basic team with so few "extras" that it isnt clear what one would tweak without creating problems. Super Knights (1440s) created problems. The slight heal on rez reduction the Council got could be reversed without problems but how much does that really matter? Not much. What else would one do? I dont think one could safely give any more health or resists to archers or wizards...a small difference could have a huge impact. Adding another fireball or upping fireball damage would be way too big, not an option. Perhaps adding a third potion would be an option. I dunno -- Council is hard to touch.
For the record I do not think they necessarily need a change, but they are recieving no attention at all. So, just for the sake of adding discussion I'll add things that come to the top of my head.
Slight buff to the ninja - damage at range seems most appropriate or even bonus damage if an attack is made immediately after a port.
Adding bonus damage to crystals for a specific unit - as council gets the most crystal kills this could do a lot. I'm thinking the knight just to make you think twice about porting in with the ninja, though it is the most likely unit to be at the front.
Giving them a team bonus - I was going to make a legitimate arguement for this but people say that robot is against huge changes and I think this would qualify. But if this were a possibility, you could directly effect the team with any amount of strengthening or weakening necessary as it is a completely new mechanic.
More healing on consecutive heals - Don't think this would be utilized often but it could make the difference between say getting your knight rezzed and back to full health in 3 ap instead of 4. This could already be the case though, this just came to mind. This would coincide with the council having arguably the best heals which is their second staple behind archers.
Out of curiousity, why is it agreed that the council is not in need of a change? And i'm looking for something other than "they are the original team and the benchmark for balance."
I think there are decent arguments, like ArtNJ's, that Coucil is good as it is but don't discount "There has to be a benchmark."
There has to be a benchmark. To avoid inflation. "Let's make all the teams more powerful! then everyone will be happy..."
Council is the least arbirtrary benchmark. If other teams beat them too much, or lose to them too much, the other teams should change.
I'll also add my opinion on the Dwarves as I think they are the biggest issue currently.
The biggest problem I see with the dwarves is the paladin. Not only do they tank for the team, heal the team, but they also are given the auras. With how they can stay in the front lines and still give out heals to the current damage dealers, I just don't get why they are also giving those units more survivability and firepower. That just puts a tankier damage dealer and a tanky healer at your doorstep. Now, with how the engi currently works I see her as nothing more than a bubble *** that sits in the back. So, why not give the engineers the aura? I feel like this would recquire more thought out positioning from the dwarf player instead of just putting paladins in front and gaining all of these benefits while keeping engi's in the back to do their one and only job. This could also allow for engi's to be reverted back to only bubbling 2 spaces away. The ability to have 2 units between the engi and bubbled unit just seems way powerful in my eyes. If these changes were made, and aura stacking was eliminated, I think the dwarves would be in the right place and have way more diviersity as a result. I see dwarf players swap items constantly because they only seem to be worried about 3 units: the paladin, grenadier, and of course annihilator.
Out of curiousity, why is it agreed that the council is not in need of a change? And i'm looking for something other than "they are the original team and the benchmark for balance."
I think there are decent arguments, like ArtNJ's, that Coucil is good as it is but don't discount "There has to be a benchmark."
There has to be a benchmark. To avoid inflation. "Let's make all the teams more powerful! then everyone will be happy..."
Council is the least arbirtrary benchmark. If other teams beat them too much, or lose to them too much, they should change.
If I am not mistaken they hold the worst rating in the ladder. How exactly is that not other teams "beating them too much."
Edit: Sorry, behind shaolin, but that isn't saying anything in my eyes.
Regarding council balance, this may go without saying, but if dwarves and TF2 get a slight nerf, then that will almost certainly improve council's strength relative to the other teams.
Regarding council balance, this may go without saying, but if dwarves and TF2 get a slight nerf, then that will almost certainly improve council's strength relative to the other teams.
If this logic is used, why are the DE and TR being even considered for buffs then? If we wish to see what the nerfs do in the current environment, you cannot also buff things and get straight forward results.
I personally don't think that DE and TR need to be changed at all. Yes, DE is a bit weak now, but it seems to be an inherent problem of flavor (phy weakness) and in fact doesn't seem to underpower DE too much. The only "buff" so far that I've seen is to buff wraith starting HP to 800 (which I actually don't agree with either).
TR currently has a fundamental issue with the witch being rather useless, and the team lacking in meaningful AOE, which puts TR at a severe disadvantage against TF2. The buff to 66% splash is also rather minor, and more for flavor than anything, and I don't think this will affect any of the other matchups significantly.
If neither of these changes are implemented, I would be fine with that. And DE and TR certainly need it more than CL, IMO. Is it the case that CL is ranked below DE? I would find that surprising, personally - CL has never been below DE in the rankings over the life of the game. TR had an advantage over CL, but since the last patch where corpse explosion was nerfed, I'd be surprised if TR was still on top.
None of the changes to DE and TR are real game changers - which is why most of us have been focusing on DW, TF2 and SL, to get them in line with CL, DE and TR. There are bound to be slight imbalances in any assymetric game, but as long as the difference is within tolerable levels, we shouldn't be proposing changes which do not address a serious balance concern.
I personally don't think that DE and TR need to be changed at all. Yes, DE is a bit weak now, but it seems to be an inherent problem of flavor (phy weakness) and in fact doesn't seem to underpower DE too much. The only "buff" so far that I've seen is to buff wraith starting HP to 800 (which I actually don't agree with either).
TR currently has a fundamental issue with the witch being rather useless, and the team lacking in meaningful AOE, which puts TR at a severe disadvantage against TF2. The buff to 66% splash is also rather minor, and more for flavor than anything, and I don't think this will affect any of the other matchups significantly.
If neither of these changes are implemented, I would be fine with that. And DE and TR certainly need it more than CL, IMO. Is it the case that CL is ranked below DE? I would find that surprising, personally - CL has never been below DE in the rankings over the life of the game. TR had an advantage over CL, but since the last patch where corpse explosion was nerfed, I'd be surprised if TR was still on top.
None of the changes to DE and TR are real game changers - which is why most of us have been focusing on DW, TF2 and SL, to get them in line with CL, DE and TR. There are bound to be slight imbalances in any assymetric game, but as long as the difference is within tolerable levels, we shouldn't be proposing changes which do not address a serious balance concern.
I agree with everything said in this post. However, if all teams are going to be considered for balance changes, I don't find it fair to forget the council just because they are a "benchmark."
In my opinion, if we want robot to take anything away from threads like this, we need to prioritize changes and propose like 3 to 5 at most, and affect the least amount of teams possible. Changing every team is only going to produce a new meta which to my understanding isn't what we want. What we are going for is making subtle changes to the teams at the extreme ends and see how that affects balance overall WITHIN the current system. Too many changes is going to create issues that are impossible to consider before they happen.
I agree with everything said in this post. However, if all teams are going to be considered for balance changes, I don't find it fair to forget the council just because they are a "benchmark."
I'm confused. When we say "benchmark" we are saying there needs to be a team which is the definition of a team which is neither OP nor UP. You don't change your definition of a team which is neither OP nor UP.
Too many changes is going to create issues that are impossible to consider before they happen.
Exactly. One mild nerf for TF2. One mild nerf for DW. A more sigificant rethink of shaolin--giving them reason to move. And re-evaluate. That's what I'd do balance-wise.
Tribe needs something to make them more fun, few people play them, witch spash to 66% seems the least controversially way to do that. This may make them OP again so people have also suggested reducing axe. (I am not actually in favor of axe reduction. Let's see first... But no biggie.)
I agree with everything said in this post. However, if all teams are going to be considered for balance changes, I don't find it fair to forget the council just because they are a "benchmark."
I'm confused. When we say "benchmark" we are saying there needs to be a team which is the definition of a team which is neither OP nor UP. You don't change your definition of a team which is neither OP nor UP.
Wait, are you thinking that "balance" means something other than "Team X beats Team Y too much"? For example, do you think it means something about balance of range and melee or AoE etc?
I think most people here are meaning balance to be simply, Team X beats Team Y too much, therefore how can we make them beat eachother about the same without changing the flavor of the teams (and if one of those teams is the "benchmark", change the other one)
I, for one, am against trying to make the teams more similar to eachother. For example I am not sympathetic at all to arguments like "TF2 has less healing than other teams..."
I'm confused. When we say "benchmark" we are saying there needs to be a team which is the definition of a team which is neither OP nor UP. You don't change your definition of a team which is neither OP nor UP.
This is how I understand your guys use of benchmark, but I don't agree with it. Why does there need to be a team that determines balance? I don't see blizzard picking one race and trying to balance around it in SC, or LoL saying "this character is balanced, we will make decisions based on how a character performs against this one," nor is there any other game I can think of that does this. Based off of league data, the council is statistically weaker than 2 of the 3 teams being talked about recieving buffs. I am merely saying that it only seems appropriate to consider changes to the council if the dark elves and/or tribe are getting support for making them stronger.
And I don't get why people don't like the tribe. I will agree that I have a very hard time determining who to put items on and who to designate as a tank, but after every game I feel like I find a new strategy to try or a way of positioning my units to effectively deal with certain situations. But I just purchased them during last weeks sale so I will not comment on how they stand in terms of balance.
I mentioned this earlier, but not as a serious balance change, but what if they replaced the 300 damage on the pyro with 200 dmg per turn until healed? (Perhaps prevent it from KOing though?) This would keep more with TF2(game) thematically and reduce their burst damage. (Which I have heard some people say is slightly too high)
Sent from my iPhone, so apologies for any errors. :-/
The league seems to be down, so I can't check, but can anyone look up the data to check if CL is ranked below TR and DE, after the last patch?
EDIT: It's up again! CL is still above DE, barely - call it even. TR is just a few points above CL. And DW and TF are of course on the tippy top end. Looking at the magnitude of the changes proposed to TR and DE, I don't feel that they're out of line.
On top of that, I'd like to see the rankings of the players still playing DE and TR, compared to the players playing CL - if possible, I'd like to cut the reported matches which are from 1 shot wonders, the players that come in, lose a game or a few games, and never come back, as I'm sure they skew CL's results more than any other race.
I agree with all changes, except for one, on TF2, I would just make respawn tokens cost an ap, TF2 has no defense what so ever and they're all pretty squishy except for the heavy, the 75% health would really negate the effectiveness of the respawn token, especially if you respawn a spy, his health would be sooo low! Too tired to do the math lol
I agree with all changes, except for one, on TF2, I would just make respawn tokens cost an ap, TF2 has no defense what so ever and they're all pretty squishy except for the heavy, the 75% health would really negate the effectiveness of the respawn token, especially if you respawn a spy, his health would be sooo low! Too tired to do the math lol
I don't like any changes involving the respawn token. Tf2 already has enough trouble without a third healer, the respawn token is such an important feature I can't see it beeing touched.
It's up again! CL is still above DE, barely - call it even. TR is just a few points above CL. And DW and TF are of course on the tippy top end. Looking at the magnitude of the changes proposed to TR and DE, I don't feel that they're out of line.
On top of that, I'd like to see the rankings of the players still playing DE and TR, compared to the players playing CL - if possible, I'd like to cut the reported matches which are from 1 shot wonders, the players that come in, lose a game or a few games, and never come back, as I'm sure they skew CL's results more than any other race.
This fits with my feel of it. I don't have a sense that CL is UP against DE or TR. I think CL stats are a little deflated and TR is a little inflated due to experience of the people playing them and DE is probably a wash. So my guess is that CL is a little above TR and DE strengthwise, but not enough to need adjustment.
TR needs adjustment to make them fun. Or maybe not. Maybe nobody plays them because they're cosmetically challenged. Maybe they need a make over. Hats have been done. Wigs? http://www.ehairexperts.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/pink-wigs2.jpg
I suggest RE change combo attacks to deal a flat +400 damage, rather than +200/+400/+800..., and reduce poisoner range to 2, as this change greatly strengthens poisoners.
The goal here is to improve Shaolin in such a way that makes them feel more like martial artists. The combo mechanic was designed to do that, but it's currently too weak to impact the flow of games. Compare the combo mechanic to other race-defining mechanics like bloodlust and relentless action, which factor into almost every tactical decision. Most of the time, you're lucky to just break even when using combos, much less get ahead.
This change lets unit pairs move-move-attack-attack-stomp fairly frequently, so being within move + range of two units is very dangerous. This gives shaolin a unique feel -- against other races, you're mainly making sure to stay out of move + range of individual powerful units (snipers being the exception).
Damage table for move-move-attack-attack:
Windblade, Windblade: 200 + 600 = 800
Poisoner, Windblade (vs Shield): 200 + 720 = 920
Poisoner, Windblade (vs Shield + Helm): 160 + 720 = 880
Poisoner, Poisoner (vs Helm): same as above
Poisoner, Poisoner: 200 + 780 = 980
So, if any two shaolin units can move adjacent to your unarmored unit, shaolin gets a stomp, with the cost and benefit of advancing some units on the board.
If a poisoner is one of the units, even a Helm/Shield won't save you, but both will be just enough. If both units are poisoners, nothing can save you.
This buff also makes potions a lot better, which were pretty lackluster before.
If RE wants to be flashy, they can instead make attacks that are part of a combo cost no AP. That is, if the attack receives bonus damage for being part of a combo, it's free. This has roughly the same effect as my original suggestions, but makes you feel more like a martial artist. There's a good chance the complexity and the "wtf" from your opponent isn't worth it, though. People get pretty weirded out the first time they see someone take more than five actions.
I suggest RE change combo attacks to deal a flat +400 damage, rather than +200/+400/+800..., and reduce poisoner range to 2, as this change greatly strengthens poisoners.
The goal here is to improve Shaolin in such a way that makes them feel more like martial artists. The combo mechanic was designed to do that, but it's currently too weak to impact the flow of games. Compare the combo mechanic to other race-defining mechanics like bloodlust and relentless action, which factor into almost every tactical decision. Most of the time, you're lucky to just break even when using combos, much less get ahead.
This change lets unit pairs move-move-attack-attack-stomp fairly frequently, so being within move + range of two units is very dangerous. This gives shaolin a unique feel -- against other races, you're mainly making sure to stay out of move + range of individual powerful units (snipers being the exception).
Damage table for move-move-attack-attack:
Windblade, Windblade: 200 + 600 = 800
Poisoner, Windblade (vs Shield): 200 + 720 = 920
Poisoner, Windblade (vs Shield + Helm): 160 + 720 = 880
Poisoner, Poisoner (vs Helm): same as above
Poisoner, Poisoner: 200 + 780 = 980
So, if any two shaolin units can move adjacent to your unarmored unit, shaolin gets a stomp, with the cost and benefit of advancing some units on the board.
If a poisoner is one of the units, even a Helm/Shield won't save you, but both will be just enough. If both units are poisoners, nothing can save you.
This buff also makes potions a lot better, which were pretty lackluster before.
Yes. This is worth a look. A flat bonus is a good way to save combo.
If RE wants to be flashy, they can instead make attacks that are part of a combo cost no AP. That is, if the attack receives bonus damage for being part of a combo, it's free. This has roughly the same effect as my original suggestions, but makes you feel more like a martial artist. There's a good chance the complexity and the "wtf" from your opponent isn't worth it, though. People get pretty weirded out the first time they see someone take more than five actions.
We discussed this in another thread. The problem is that it further encourages stasis. Better, I think, is to award an extra AP for moving a third unit. That way one could move 3 units and hit with all 3 in the same turn. But you're right--the weirdness of extra APs is detrimental. Better are the ideas that combine movement and attack into a single AP, like monk swap and monk charge.
Edit: No we never discussed all combo attacks cost no AP, just the 2nd which would allow a 3rd. Your idea would allow for more movement, but would be hugely OP, I fear.
Because I know you guys are too lazy to look it up, here's the list. >.>
Virtual Player Current ELO Average ELO
Council (1st) 1166 1178
Council (2nd) 1131 1152
Dark Elves (1st) 1164 1172
Dark Elves (2nd) 1175 1187
Dwarves (1st) 1323 1238
Dwarves (2nd) 1248 1250
The Tribe (1st) 1203 1187
The Tribe (2nd) 1168 1195
Team Fortress (1st) 1249 1238
Team Fortress (2nd) 1308 1267
Shaolin (1st) 1130 1134
Shaolin (2nd) 1135 1131
I don't know what the difference between current ELO and average ELO is, but they aren't too far off from each other, so that's fine. As you can see, the difference between CL and DE is pretty much less than the difference between going first and second (and DE apparently does better going second, which leads me to think the data is skewed somehow). Pretty much the same story when looking at TR.
DW and TF, on the other hand, are pretty much out there in terms of ranking. The difference between say CL and DW is more than the difference between the first turn and second turn at 5AP for the first turn. For comparison, the average 's rank should be 1200 , who would rank about 200+ on the league board. A 100 point difference (i.e. someone with ELO 1300) would mean someone ranked around 80. The difference is that big.
I suggest RE change combo attacks to deal a flat +400 damage, rather than +200/+400/+800..., and reduce poisoner range to 2, as this change greatly strengthens poisoners.
This change lets unit pairs move-move-attack-attack-stomp fairly frequently, so being within move + range of two units is very dangerous. This gives shaolin a unique feel -- against other races, you're mainly making sure to stay out of move + range of individual powerful units (snipers being the exception).
Um. This makes SL the unapprochable master turtle..? How would you ever advance against SL? 2 poisoners in the centre with monks in front would lock down the entire board, even without swords...?
EDIT: Also, how would this help combo potions? Since any combo attack would be worth a flat 400...
Because I know you guys are too lazy to look it up, here's the list. >.>
Virtual Player Current ELO Average ELO
Council (1st) 1166 1178
Council (2nd) 1131 1152
Dark Elves (1st) 1164 1172
Dark Elves (2nd) 1175 1187
Dwarves (1st) 1323 1238
Dwarves (2nd) 1248 1250
The Tribe (1st) 1203 1187
The Tribe (2nd) 1168 1195
Team Fortress (1st) 1249 1238
Team Fortress (2nd) 1308 1267
Shaolin (1st) 1130 1134
Shaolin (2nd) 1135 1131
I don't know what the difference between current ELO and average ELO is, but they aren't too far off from each other, so that's fine. As you can see, the difference between CL and DE is pretty much less than the difference between going first and second (and DE apparently does better going second, which leads me to think the data is skewed somehow). Pretty much the same story when looking at TR.
DW and TF, on the other hand, are pretty much out there in terms of ranking. The difference between say CL and DW is more than the difference between the first turn and second turn at 5AP for the first turn. For comparison, the average 's rank should be 1200 , who would rank about 200+ on the league board. A 100 point difference (i.e. someone with ELO 1300) would mean someone ranked around 80. The difference is that big.
No matter how many games they play, the faction ratings will fluctuate between a range, and not be the same on any given day. That is why we have the Average Elo figure, to provide stability. Once there are enough games, Average Elo becomes stable and Current Elo should be disregarded.
I suggest RE change combo attacks to deal a flat +400 damage, rather than +200/+400/+800..., and reduce poisoner range to 2, as this change greatly strengthens poisoners.
The goal here is to improve Shaolin in such a way that makes them feel more like martial artists. The combo mechanic was designed to do that, but it's currently too weak to impact the flow of games. Compare the combo mechanic to other race-defining mechanics like bloodlust and relentless action, which factor into almost every tactical decision. Most of the time, you're lucky to just break even when using combos, much less get ahead.
This change lets unit pairs move-move-attack-attack-stomp fairly frequently, so being within move + range of two units is very dangerous. This gives shaolin a unique feel -- against other races, you're mainly making sure to stay out of move + range of individual powerful units (snipers being the exception).
Damage table for move-move-attack-attack:
Windblade, Windblade: 200 + 600 = 800
Poisoner, Windblade (vs Shield): 200 + 720 = 920
Poisoner, Windblade (vs Shield + Helm): 160 + 720 = 880
Poisoner, Poisoner (vs Helm): same as above
Poisoner, Poisoner: 200 + 780 = 980
So, if any two shaolin units can move adjacent to your unarmored unit, shaolin gets a stomp, with the cost and benefit of advancing some units on the board.
If a poisoner is one of the units, even a Helm/Shield won't save you, but both will be just enough. If both units are poisoners, nothing can save you.
This buff also makes potions a lot better, which were pretty lackluster before.
If RE wants to be flashy, they can instead make attacks that are part of a combo cost no AP. That is, if the attack receives bonus damage for being part of a combo, it's free. This has roughly the same effect as my original suggestions, but makes you feel more like a martial artist. There's a good chance the complexity and the "wtf" from your opponent isn't worth it, though. People get pretty weirded out the first time they see someone take more than five actions.
Strongly disagree
shaolin range nerf is huge for a team with only 4 range 3 units leaving them one dimensional turtles trying to survive
also not a fan of the change to the combo points
If only the Shaolin could get access to the Tribe's tidal wave all would be good
I suggest RE change combo attacks to deal a flat +400 damage, rather than +200/+400/+800..., and reduce poisoner range to 2, as this change greatly strengthens poisoners.
The goal here is to improve Shaolin in such a way that makes them feel more like martial artists. The combo mechanic was designed to do that, but it's currently too weak to impact the flow of games. Compare the combo mechanic to other race-defining mechanics like bloodlust and relentless action, which factor into almost every tactical decision. Most of the time, you're lucky to just break even when using combos, much less get ahead.
This change lets unit pairs move-move-attack-attack-stomp fairly frequently, so being within move + range of two units is very dangerous. This gives shaolin a unique feel -- against other races, you're mainly making sure to stay out of move + range of individual powerful units (snipers being the exception).
Damage table for move-move-attack-attack:
Windblade, Windblade: 200 + 600 = 800
Poisoner, Windblade (vs Shield): 200 + 720 = 920
Poisoner, Windblade (vs Shield + Helm): 160 + 720 = 880
Poisoner, Poisoner (vs Helm): same as above
Poisoner, Poisoner: 200 + 780 = 980
So, if any two shaolin units can move adjacent to your unarmored unit, shaolin gets a stomp, with the cost and benefit of advancing some units on the board.
If a poisoner is one of the units, even a Helm/Shield won't save you, but both will be just enough. If both units are poisoners, nothing can save you.
This buff also makes potions a lot better, which were pretty lackluster before.
If RE wants to be flashy, they can instead make attacks that are part of a combo cost no AP. That is, if the attack receives bonus damage for being part of a combo, it's free. This has roughly the same effect as my original suggestions, but makes you feel more like a martial artist. There's a good chance the complexity and the "wtf" from your opponent isn't worth it, though. People get pretty weirded out the first time they see someone take more than five actions.
Strongly disagree
shaolin range nerf is huge for a team with only 4 range 3 units leaving them one dimensional turtles trying to survive
also not a fan of the change to the combo points
If only the Shaolin could get access to the Tribe's tidal wave all would be good
I agree...range nerf would just make them hang back and die to enemy range and aoe...or conversely try to get into enemy range but die in the process of enemy fire. If you give range nerf all their units mobility needs to be upgraded.
Or
since they are martial artists, every time someone deals dmg to them, they give a counter attack applying the buff/debuffs specific to the targetted unit. So if you AOE a bunch of SL...say 2 poisoners and a monk they will do dmg back to the AOE attacker. Counterattack would be nice for SL, say 10% of the unit attacked?
i.e. if you attack a poisoner, upon counter attack (no upgrades on poisoner - deals 20 dmg counter attack) it applies poison buff. If poisoner doesn't die then next turn either the poisoner or other units will have a chance to deal more damage to attacking unit. Might be a good way to counter SL's lack of mobility/combo ability.
Also Taoist Heals should combo. SL takes so much dmg cause it takes so much time to get into position and as such take quite a bit of damage early game (risk losing units early due to range or high mobility harass).
I agree with most of the above suggestions.
Changes I would make:
CL: None
DE: Increase Wraith base health to 800 and base damage to 300 OR implement consume spawn
Increasing base damage to 300 would allow him to actually kill something without having to consume a corpse first.
Having the wraith consume a target by stomping it would also be a useful change, as it would allow him to consume a target in fewer APs.
DW: Remove the 5% resist bonus from the pally aura.
The DW are tough enough with the bubbles, adding in the aura makes them unbalanced.
TR: Witch explosion boost (66%)
TF2: Sniper range to 6
SL: Windblade AoE (100/66/66)
Increase shadow base damage to 200
Fix shadow res so that it does NOT remove upgrades when rezzing your own team
Give turned units the ability to combo
Increase Taoist res to 100% of damage (200 base, 300 w/ runemetal, 450 w/ runemetal + attack square)