Upcoming Changes
True, shaolin can do the damage immediately, but Monks would do the same amount of damage as the Warriors, and I'd argue that the final 25% of a crystal's HP is much more important than the first 25%. I think it's a fair tradeoff between immediate, but not as tactically significant, damage and damage that you have to wait for but can impact a game much more.
As for the poisoner, she is a very good unit, but she still does less damage than an archer under most circumstances and has a crappy HP. This was with the intent for Shaolin to do more combos than is currently possible. I don't think their debuff working against crystals would be *too* consequential of a buff to push them overboard. But hey, I could be wrong. I can't see either situation being OP though.
I'm not folllowing, how would it be inconsistent with other mechanics? Annihiator debuff works on crystals. Warrior and Axe thrower specials work on crystals.
And yeah, it wouldn't make much sense for poison to damage crystals, but it also doesn't make much sense that drills come from the sky and destroy shields before helmets, that warriors can inexplicably do infinite damage, as long as a unit is under 50% health, that a chieftan spins so fast as to create a centripetal force strong enough to pull enemies towards it, etc etc. Hero Academy isn't really know for its realism! :p
I love how the people on this forum can turn anything into a strategy discussion. Ex: This started as a thread for the next patch. It turned into a thread for discussing DE v. DW matchups.
I love how the people on this forum can turn anything into a strategy discussion. Ex: This started as a thread for the next patch. It turned into a thread for discussing DE v. DW matchups.
I like traffic lights.
Specially when they're green.
I love how the people on this forum can turn anything into a strategy discussion. Ex: This started as a thread for the next patch. It turned into a thread for discussing DE v. DW matchups.
I like traffic lights.
Specially when they're green.
Writch likes traffic lights, that is what he said...
Writch likes traffic lights, but not when...
True, shaolin can do the damage immediately, but Monks would do the same amount of damage as the Warriors, and I'd argue that the final 25% of a crystal's HP is much more important than the first 25%. I think it's a fair tradeoff between immediate, but not as tactically significant, damage and damage that you have to wait for but can impact a game much more.
the power of doing so high crystal damage from the start, will force the other player to defend his crystals right away. Since the risk of loosing on crystals will be much greater, and can be used to the monks advantage from the start (more or less)
As for the poisoner, she is a very good unit, but she still does less damage than an archer under most circumstances and has a crappy HP. This was with the intent for Shaolin to do more combos than is currently possible. I don't think their debuff working against crystals would be *too* consequential of a buff to push them overboard. But hey, I could be wrong. I can't see either situation being OP though.
I still think poisoner > archer even now. Spamming the debuff everywhere makes all your target to just die. I'd rather take the 40% armor reduction then 100 more damage. The power of 1 AP saying, ehm yeah. that unit is dead when you try to use it. But i dunno, if shaolin is having problems going for a CK win this might help them. But personally i'd prefer a buff on the windblade since its just... so bad :)
And yeah, it wouldn't make much sense for poison to damage crystals, but it also doesn't make much sense that drills come from the sky and destroy shields before helmets, that warriors can inexplicably do infinite damage, as long as a unit is under 50% health, that a chieftan spins so fast as to create a centripetal force strong enough to pull enemies towards it, etc etc. Hero Academy isn't really know for its realism! :p
Never seen dwarves stealth bombers? Why they are using drills and not something more.. explosive :)
True, shaolin can do the damage immediately, but Monks would do the same amount of damage as the Warriors, and I'd argue that the final 25% of a crystal's HP is much more important than the first 25%. I think it's a fair tradeoff between immediate, but not as tactically significant, damage and damage that you have to wait for but can impact a game much more.
the power of doing so high crystal damage from the start, will force the other player to defend his crystals right away. Since the risk of loosing on crystals will be much greater, and can be used to the monks advantage from the start (more or less)
I just lost a brutally-long 32 day, 115 round Shaolin vs Dark Elves match because I didn't realize the Monk's debuff vanishes when you attack a Crystal. Obviously it's my fault for not knowing that, but it seems to me the Monk's debuff should either:
-
A) Stick with the previously-debuffed unit after attacking a Crystal
- B) Debuff the Crystal 25% if the Crystal is still above 75%.
I don't really care which happens, but the fact that the Monk has the worst of both worlds right now is just rubbing salt in the wound of an already pretty sad unit. (Pending the 1.4.2 balance changes, of course.)
As for archer vs poisoner
Archer does more damage and has more hp.... she even looks better with the helm :)
- A) Stick with the previously-debuffed unit after attacking a Crystal
yes
As for archer vs poisoner
Archer does more damage and has more hp.... she even looks better with the helm :)
i'd rather use 1 AP to make an enemy unit dead as soon as the unit tries to do anything (thanks to the debuff) rather then having some more damage (which wont be such a huge diffrence due to the debuff) and the 150less hp is worth it. This is just my opinion tho :)
the power of doing so high crystal damage from the start, will force the other player to defend his crystals right away. Since the risk of loosing on crystals will be much greater, and can be used to the monks advantage from the start (more or less)
I still think poisoner > archer even now. Spamming the debuff everywhere makes all your target to just die. I'd rather take the 40% armor reduction then 100 more damage. The power of 1 AP saying, ehm yeah. that unit is dead when you try to use it. But i dunno, if shaolin is having problems going for a CK win this might help them. But personally i'd prefer a buff on the windblade since its just... so bad :)
Missed this until now.
Yeah, the risk in the early game will be much greater, but that's the tradeoff I'm talking about. A high-risk unit in the early game compared to a (much) higher risk in the late game. Again, the last 25% of a crystal's HP is much more important than the first 25%. So the Monk is more threatening in the early game, but that threat dissapates, whilst the Warrior becomes an even bigger threat than the Monk as the game developes. Maybe tone down the debuff a bit; just like the Warrior is below 25% instead of 50%, the Monk could be reduce 12% instead of 25%. But at the moment, having a monk which doesn't perform its debuff on crystals is inconsistent with the rest of the game and feels very underwhelming.
The 40% armor reduction, in the majority of cases, is worth less than an extra 100 damage, AP-wise. This becomes especially apparent where you try to 2-shot a unit but can't, an occurance that IMHO you're not giving enough precedence to. Of course, the debuff stays on the unit, which is what makes the poisoner so great, but it also has a low HP to compensate. It's close, but I think I'd still prefer a (comboing) archer over a poisoner. Granted, that is quite likely to change once the bamboo is fixed and the Shaolin can finally execute the deadly Poisoner+dragon+bamboo combo. However, I'd still argue that regardless of this, in most cases a 40% crystal debuff is largely inconsequential. The only time I can see it making a real difference is for crystal comboing, and if the Shaolin are comboing your crystals like that, you're probably going to lose anyway.
It just feels wrong to have such inconsistency in the crystal mechanics. The annihilator debuff works. The paladin buff works. The warrior buff works. The axe thrower buff works. Then again, the priestess debuff doesn't work on barbed crystals, nor does the jarate. I see no reason why the priestess debuff shouldn't work, and I'd hesitently say the same for the jarate (assuming of course, that the assault tile boost isn't included in the jarate calculation). I mean, that's still less damage than you'd get from a scroll attack. I don't see why it'd be OP. We should go either way, so that either unit / items buffs and debuffs work, or they don't. I'd definitely dislike the latter. But currently it just feels messy, and the shaolin have exacerbated this messiness from fringe circustances (how often would you be going for a priestess debuff on a barbed crystal, how often would you waste a jarate on a crystal?) to much more common ones.
I agree that the monk debuff shouldn't disappear from heros when the monk hits a crystal.
I think monk debuff on crystal causes more confusion than its worth. What happens when a monk hits a hero, or a second crystal, after hitting a crystal, should the first crystal get its HP back?...
monks first attack deals 25% of the defenders HP and then adds a debuff reducing max hp by 25% so no the crystal shouldnt get its hp back. and if the monk doesnt add its debuff to a crystal it makes no sense that debuff on a unit would go away. they shat the bed with shaolin. any ideas on when this update is actually gonna get released? personally im afraid to spend more money on teams after this shaolin fiasco.
they shat the bed with shaolin. any ideas on when this update is actually gonna get released? personally im afraid to spend more money on teams after this shaolin fiasco.
In all honesty, the Shaolin are probably not any worse than Dwarves were on release (not counting the unintentional bamboo bug, of course). They've already shown a commitment to fixing balance issues, even if the time frame isn't always exactly what we'd prefer -- I don't see any reason to boycott new teams just because they aren't perfectly balanced initially.
In all honesty, the Shaolin are probably not any worse than Dwarves were on release (not counting the unintentional bamboo bug, of course). They've already shown a commitment to fixing balance issues, even if the time frame isn't always exactly what we'd prefer -- I don't see any reason to boycott new teams just because they aren't perfectly balanced initially.
yeah..who am I kidding. I'll buy any new teams because this is an awesome game. I'm just really disappointed with the shaolin problems. I was doing decent enough until the bamboo bug ruined it for me. Crossing fingers that the update comes soon...but have they actually submitted to apple or are they still working on it?
yeah..who am I kidding. I'll buy any new teams because this is an awesome game. I'm just really disappointed with the shaolin problems. I was doing decent enough until the bamboo bug ruined it for me. Crossing fingers that the update comes soon...but have they actually submitted to apple or are they still working on it?
Yes, I agree with you there -- I don't quite understand why the bamboo fix hasn't happened sooner... Seems like that should have been an open-and-shut bugfix update, but maybe it was more complicated than we think? Regardless, it pretty much crippled an already struggling team.
In all honesty, the Shaolin are probably not any worse than Dwarves were on release (not counting the unintentional bamboo bug, of course). They've already shown a commitment to fixing balance issues, even if the time frame isn't always exactly what we'd prefer -- I don't see any reason to boycott new teams just because they aren't perfectly balanced initially.
yeah..who am I kidding. I'll buy any new teams because this is an awesome game. I'm just really disappointed with the shaolin problems. I was doing decent enough until the bamboo bug ruined it for me. Crossing fingers that the update comes soon...but have they actually submitted to apple or are they still working on it?
Lol i agree on everything you said. I was going to say earlier that maybe this whole thing is a lie and they just wanted to see how people would react. And to see what we think would make us happy and or angry. Like the poisoner i mean did anybody want him buffed... I dont see why when the windblade i personally think she sucks. And to not mention the tribe at all? I mean these are kind've minor details but i think they still need to be fixed
In all honesty, the Shaolin are probably not any worse than Dwarves were on release (not counting the unintentional bamboo bug, of course). They've already shown a commitment to fixing balance issues, even if the time frame isn't always exactly what we'd prefer -- I don't see any reason to boycott new teams just because they aren't perfectly balanced initially.
yeah..who am I kidding. I'll buy any new teams because this is an awesome game. I'm just really disappointed with the shaolin problems. I was doing decent enough until the bamboo bug ruined it for me. Crossing fingers that the update comes soon...but have they actually submitted to apple or are they still working on it?
+1
In all honesty, the Shaolin are probably not any worse than Dwarves were on release (not counting the unintentional bamboo bug, of course). They've already shown a commitment to fixing balance issues, even if the time frame isn't always exactly what we'd prefer -- I don't see any reason to boycott new teams just because they aren't perfectly balanced initially.
The idea that the Dwarves were crappy on release is a myth. Using the League stats feature, searching for 1.1 only reveals the following records for Dwarves, going first: 66-93 against Council, 98-52 against the DE. This was in the big bad days of 5ap and very crystal rush prone maps, but leaving all of that aside, Dwarves just won a lot more games than the Shaolin did.
I understand you are probably attributing some of the Shaolin's problems to the bamboo bug...but I still think the situation is not comparable.
The idea that the Dwarves were crappy on release is a myth. Using the League stats feature, searching for 1.1 only reveals the following records for Dwarves, going first: 66-93 against Council, 98-52 against the DE. This was in the big bad days of 5ap and very crystal rush prone maps, but leaving all of that aside, Dwarves just won a lot more games than the Shaolin did.
I understand you are probably attributing some of the Shaolin's problems to the bamboo bug...but I still think the situation is not comparable.
can you check in order the stats was reported?
when i played prepatch dwarves i went from 7-0 to 7-8 (i might remember the numbers wrong, my point is the winning streak turned into a clear loosing streak). Meaning people played againts them with the wrong approach, and when they learned it was instant death. the first 2 weeks that dwarves was out everyone said they were OP. So i dont think shaolin aint any weaker then dwarves was.
The idea that the Dwarves were crappy on release is a myth. Using the League stats feature, searching for 1.1 only reveals the following records for Dwarves, going first: 66-93 against Council, 98-52 against the DE. This was in the big bad days of 5ap and very crystal rush prone maps, but leaving all of that aside, Dwarves just won a lot more games than the Shaolin did.
I understand you are probably attributing some of the Shaolin's problems to the bamboo bug...but I still think the situation is not comparable.
That's hardly a stellar record, considering the fact that you are looking only at games where they went first (with 5 AP). Prepatch Dwarves were 1-dimensional crystal rushers with zero staying power -- with 3 FTAP and current maps, I'd take bug-free Shaolin over them every time.
Dwarves also got to start with Grenadiers doing full Assault damage as AoE, which was a wild first few weeks as we all learned to crystal rush (also the original offset-crystals map and the single-crystal map were 1/2 of maps then). Only after the AoE nerf did they languish a little more and eventually get the Paladin and Pulverizer buffs.
Dwarves also got to start with Grenadiers doing full Assault damage as AoE, which was a wild first few weeks as we all learned to crystal rush (also the original offset-crystals map and the single-crystal map were 1/2 of maps then). Only after the AoE nerf did they languish a little more and eventually get the Paladin and Pulverizer buffs.
AOE nerfs happened alongside the other Dwarf buffs, I believe. The full AOE crystal damage was pretty much the only thing that Dwarves 1.0 had going for them, and they languished pretty much as soon as everyone realized that.
Dwarves also got to start with Grenadiers doing full Assault damage as AoE, which was a wild first few weeks as we all learned to crystal rush (also the original offset-crystals map and the single-crystal map were 1/2 of maps then). Only after the AoE nerf did they languish a little more and eventually get the Paladin and Pulverizer buffs.
Ah, I didnt remember that. But regardless of the "why", in 1.1, Dwarves were winning a much greater % than the Shaolin are now. Shaolin are the worst release team by far in my book.
Current Shaolin are 1.0 so ot would be a thing to compare them to dwarves 1.0 .... how long did it take for robot to move dwarves to 1.1?
Current Shaolin are 1.0 so ot would be a thing to compare them to dwarves 1.0 .... how long did it take for robot to move dwarves to 1.1?
It was 42 days between the release of the Dwarves (HA v1.1) and the rebalancing of the Dwarves (HA v1.2 - the Tribe/iPad release).
It's been 70 days since the release of the Shaolin (HA v1.4), and 43 days since the Bamboo "fix" release (HA v1.4.1).
you know what would be awesome...if RE would actually let us know what stage this update is in by now. it seems like a lot are thinkin this update will be coming out soon. i think they havent even submitted to apple yet which means theyre still workin on it which means its gonna be mid feb if were lucky. what happened to RE? they used to be pretty informative with the community back when i started playing. what happened to the MMM updates?
you know what would be awesome...if RE would actually let us know what stage this update is in by now. it seems like a lot are thinkin this update will be coming out soon.
Well, actually a status update - that would just be courteous.
What would be awesome would be the patch itself.
What is unreasonable, apparently, is expecting both.
Sniper's fine as it is. As with Heavy.
Sniper's fine as it is. As with Heavy.
Do you play as any of the other teams? Or is TF the only team you play?
4500 * 0.25 = 1125 dmg on the first hit for the monks. So unlike the warriors that need to wait a while before their massive hit shaolin can do their one hit nuke right away for still a good amount of dmg :)
as for the poisoner, shes already very strong unit so i dont know if she actually need any buffs. And it might be abit inconsistent compared to other smiliar mechanics. But you can look at it like this, the crystals aint living things and with their poison they weaken the targets. How the hell should poison work on it? Its not like a snake can bite a rock and it will be poisoned. :)
if anyone wants to play some hero academy with me, challenge me!
nick: Ragnaok