Page MenuHomeWildfire Games

Balance finetuning

Authored by Grugnas on Feb 23 2017, 6:01 PM.


Test Plan

I modified few units' parameters in order to valorize their role letting intact what are their dynamics.
Spear Cavalry has now a bonus multiplier against cavalry units marking their role as "charger" units wheter in battlefield or in commando raids without altering too much the previous balancing decisions. F.e. now spear cavalry can outdamage a sword cavalry without compromise the sword cavalry role of "ranged units stalker".
Infantry Champion Spear has slightly lower attack rate giving a more relevant role to champ swordman in infantry fights.
Wardogs could deal more damage before being killed (i think that they can still be improved but increasing armor to a population free units didn't seem a good solution).
Pikemen can move faster and deal a bit of damage more in their 2 seconds attack rate.
Mauryans have an unique unit which is the elephant Archer which could have a solid constitution typical of elephant units.
Links to the forum about the subjects:
Spear Cavalry, Wardogs, Pikemen:
Infantry Spearman Champions and Infantry Sword Champions:

Diff Detail

Lint Skipped
Unit Tests Skipped

Event Timeline

Grugnas created this revision.Feb 23 2017, 6:01 PM
Grugnas edited the test plan for this revision. (Show Details)Feb 23 2017, 6:05 PM
Grugnas edited the test plan for this revision. (Show Details)Feb 23 2017, 6:42 PM
Grugnas edited the test plan for this revision. (Show Details)Feb 25 2017, 12:34 AM
elexis edited reviewers, added: borg-, Hannibal_Barca; removed: fatherbushido.Feb 25 2017, 2:02 AM
Hannibal_Barca resigned from this revision.Feb 25 2017, 4:58 PM
elexis edited edge metadata.Feb 26 2017, 8:48 AM
elexis added a subscriber: fatherbushido.

@fatherbushido Considering D162, are you interested in reviewing this commit? (There is a big forum blob to be crosschecked which I don't really fancy)


These bonuses are considered deprecated, though I personally wouldn't mind having few well selected of them.

Your argument "now spear cavalry can outdamage a sword cavalry without compromise the sword cavalry role of "ranged units stalker" doesn't appear unreasonable.


Agree that they are very tanky. They had been buffed as they were useless before. We wanted to fix it by adding a tech to upgrade them. The cavalry upgrades could become "mounted unit" upgrades. This way they were less OP in the first 20 minutes (in particular for mauryans).

Maybe the nerf is not enough, but better than nothing.


I find it very weird that we can train an infinite number of dogs (10 per kennel as defined by player.xml). There should be a limit of 5 kennels IMO

Grugnas updated this revision to Diff 639.EditedFeb 28 2017, 12:43 PM

Slingers spread modify added. Slingers result as a cheap and deadly unit in any situation that could be attacking a wall, a siege, an elephant, attacking enemy troops. Since a slightly change of crush damage was already occurred in order to prevent slingers to win alone the game, a slightly spread modify will make them less effective even against more expensive units.

Grugnas updated this revision to Diff 643.Feb 28 2017, 3:26 PM
Grugnas retitled this revision from Units finetuning to Balance finetuning.

Macedonian fortress cost and building time fixed to fit other hellenic civilities.
Britons Kennels limit.
Wardogs exp loot decreased.

siole added a subscriber: siole.Feb 28 2017, 8:51 PM

Other than dogs I agree with changes.


I agree with limit of kennels, also see that you already changed it. Good.
Yes, hack damage should be 10, but cannot. The reason is siege. With 10 you're making them one of the most effective units vs siege. Even swordsman is less effective.
Maybe hack dmg should be divided in 2 damages, sharp and blunt. With blunt you could regulate damage to siege. With it you could also make pikeman more effective vs siege than woman. Which in my opinion every soldier should do more damage to siege than woman. Of coures all of this requires a lot of work.
The way I see it is to increase armour to 2 rather than increase damage.

All that seems to go in many different directions and seems a bit random. (That's a feeling).
Changing the RepeatTime change the DPS, the attack animation is strechted to fit that time, the 900 value doesn't sound good with the other used values. The balance guy has tried (sorry if I speak for him) to do coherent things during the past years.
Changing that spread value seems a bit random, how does that fit with other spread value (moreover there are work about the aiming code so that's a bit useless to change that now).
Same for speed value, how does that scale with other values? (moreover perhaps should we wait decisions about D13 before looking at that).
For the elephant archer, the first question is "what is that unit?" (is it a chariot? a camel?...)
And hard bonus (I am not convinced by that one).
So I guess that kind of things should be thought before in the forum, focusing on one inconsistency or doing the whole stuff. Else we could fear that everybody spam phabricator with his wanted values for the game.

I know it could seems a bit random but that RepeatTime probably wouldn't so relevant as could a 1000 be and considering what could be the conseguences of that change, the spear cavalry has been modified too. Seems to be a choerence between infantry / cavalry despite the non standard values, opening the way to new strategies, anyway more tests shall be useful. Regarding the spread, probably it is an hazard but the intent was to have a lower accuracy resulting in a lower dps when those units are deployed considering the fact that when ranged units are promoted, they gain spread but pierce damage. The archer elephant template is a an archer cavalry child template without inherit the counter entry and the possibility to access to technologies aviable for the cavalry in order to get more close to how the elephants are designed. The relationship between cavalry and champion cavalry isn't changed, what changed is the cavalry dynamic by revaluing the spear cavalry from a dead end strategy to a marked role (in my humil opinion) and acting as conseguence on the sword cavalry. Seems to be a choerence between infantry and cavalry counterparts performances despite the speed changes without modifying the interaction of those. I agree on the fact that maybe I could have rushed in using a tool as phabricator and I almost feel guilty for that, but since I thought it could be useful expecially for the facility to upload the diff and analyze point to point the changes and maybe catch the interest of some "balance guys", I did it. I hope to have been of any help.


In the current alpha spear cavalry isn't very effective in battlefields but in women raids. Since Sword cavalry were used in battle for out flanking enemies and deal a critical strike to the backward lines, I thought that increasing their movement speed would help them in that task and in escaping from Spear Cavalry which is more effective vs other melee cavalry because of their higher range and impact on the rider. I thought that providing them a 1,25x would give them a more deterministic role letting unvaried the performance vs most of the units f.e. skirmish cavalry is still able to defeat spear cavalry.
elexix, for the Cavalry speed buff ticket you posted, I think that corral tech should have a conseguence like granting to cavalry a higher movement speed at disadvantage of their capture points


Agree, elephants result very tanky in early and, since ranged units can research for upgrades later in the game. elephants result less powerful for instance

Agree with fatherbushido. There are also a lot of changes in this diff that aren't mentioned in the summary. and thus, has no visible justification within this page. This revision should probably be split into multiple tickets.

Thanks, I'll provide to close the revision and split it in multiple tickets with more deep explanations and how some correlate each other.

Grugnas changed the visibility from "Public (No Login Required)" to "No One".Mar 1 2017, 8:01 PM
Grugnas changed the visibility from "No One" to "Public (No Login Required)".Mar 24 2017, 6:24 PM
Grugnas abandoned this revision.Mar 24 2017, 7:32 PM