Page MenuHomeWildfire Games

real_tabasco_sauce (RCA)
User

Projects

User Details

User Since
Mar 10 2022, 2:20 AM (16 w, 1 d)

Recent Activity

Today

real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4722: Balance Fanatic.
In D4722#200985, @Stan wrote:

More auras less performance by the way.

Fri, Jul 1, 2:55 AM
real_tabasco_sauce accepted D4724: [Gameplay] Differentiating Persian.
In D4724#200988, @borg- wrote:

Maybe one last change could be to lock the move speed hero's aura to a range of 60 meters, instead of global.

I think for the first time movement aura can be useful on the battlefield. Besides that putting it in range takes away all the effectiveness of the caravans. I'm not sure if I should change this aura.

Fri, Jul 1, 2:49 AM

Yesterday

real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4722: Balance Fanatic.
In D4722#200983, @borg- wrote:

I need to redo this patch. What @chrstgtr said makes sense. I find it more interesting to increase the cost of wood rather than food.
Also, I think the movement speed aura is enough, we don't need two auras, what do you think?

Thu, Jun 30, 5:06 PM
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4722: Balance Fanatic.

Fanatics have needed changes since a22 for awhile so good that something is being done.

The aura changes make sense to me.

But I don’t agree that replacing metal makes with wood/food makes it easier to spam the unit. Food is the slowest fathered resource. Gathering wood also requires the constant building of nearby storehouses as the closest wood gets depleted (whereas a single storehouse can service a metal mine for a very long time).

I personally think fanatics are underpowered because cav can do the same thing with lower input costs. The aura should help with that, though. If the aura changes don’t do enough then lowering costs, increasing HP, or increasing armor seem like the two best options to improve fanatic performance (compared to cav)

Thu, Jun 30, 4:34 PM
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4722: Balance Fanatic.

It would give them almost the same aura as the carnyx. Maybe give the latter a positive friendly bonus?

Thu, Jun 30, 4:13 PM
real_tabasco_sauce accepted D4722: Balance Fanatic.

I like this patch a lot. It should make fanatic rushes a lot more interesting, and I think it puts them in a more fitting role for fights.

Thu, Jun 30, 3:32 PM

Tue, Jun 28

real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4724: [Gameplay] Differentiating Persian.

Maybe one last change could be to lock the move speed hero's aura to a range of 60 meters, instead of global.

Tue, Jun 28, 2:59 AM
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4724: [Gameplay] Differentiating Persian.
In D4724#200874, @borg- wrote:
In D4724#200857, @borg- wrote:

Ice house must allow garrison infantry and cavalry?

Historically travelers entered, but as it can only be built in their own territory now, I don't know if it's interesting to keep infantry and cavalry.

I think it's better off not garrisoned. Otherwise, they could be used as an escape route for cavalry, and they would be harder to capture.

About the patch overall, @borg-, I am inclined to accept everything except the immortals. I am still certain they are overpowered, mathematically. Perhaps they should be removed from the patch and balanced separately via a mod?

Basically his spearman form has the resistance of a level 3 spearman, nothing too strong, although his attack is still that of a champion. This can be done today in the current alpha with some spearman champions and some ranged units as cover, and there are no complaints that this is op.
the fact that they move slower makes them chaseable targets against fast units such as archers, javelins, and slingers. So the player will have to be careful when using Immortals. I really can't think of it as something very op.

Tue, Jun 28, 2:56 AM

Mon, Jun 27

real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4724: [Gameplay] Differentiating Persian.

Here is also a concern of mine: How is weapon switching handled when the spearmen variant (from apadana) and the archer variant (from barracks) are combined? In the mod, I had to separate the archer group from the spearman group and then upgrade one.
For ease of use, maybe make the barracks also train the spearman version.

Mon, Jun 27, 9:21 PM
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4724: [Gameplay] Differentiating Persian.
In D4724#200857, @borg- wrote:

Ice house must allow garrison infantry and cavalry?

Historically travelers entered, but as it can only be built in their own territory now, I don't know if it's interesting to keep infantry and cavalry.

Mon, Jun 27, 9:17 PM

Fri, Jun 24

real_tabasco_sauce accepted D4713: [balance] Han unit roster restructure.

as suggested, this time with the camp cav crossbow (4 champions now),
but minus the normal infantry swordman (they would have had 5 units in the barracks, which is to much imo and they have the sword cav as anti ram)

Fri, Jun 24, 9:11 PM

Thu, Jun 23

real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4704: [balancing] allow kushite axe champions in p2.

I think this will be a nice p2 wrinkle. It will give the ability to knock out CCs, which will make the game more interesting.

I, however, think we should test this as I am a little concerned that CCs going down in p2 could become an OP strat.

Maybe this type of unit should go to another civ, though. Like @real_tabasco_sauce already said, Kush can already employ this type of strat with merc clubmen. So it may make more sense to give a champ axe strat to a different civ.

Thu, Jun 23, 3:10 AM · Balancing
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4713: [balance] Han unit roster restructure.

seems like AIEND doesn't like crossbow cav? https://wildfiregames.com/forum/topic/83323-balancing-the-han-release-candidate-1/page/4/#comment-504997

Not sure what to do here now.

Thu, Jun 23, 3:06 AM

Wed, Jun 22

real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4713: [balance] Han unit roster restructure.
In D4713#200551, @borg- wrote:
In D4713#200338, @Stan wrote:

Might ask @AIEND specifically.

AIEND seems to support the following lineup, which is not very different:
p1: crossbow, spear, swordcav
p2: archer, Ji (halberdier), swordsman, spearcav, archer cav
p3: champions: infantry crossbow, infantry spearman, cavalry spearman, chariot archer.

For me it's perfect, the only thing i would add is crossbow cavalry. It's a different and unique unit, so why remove it without at least testing it on an alpha first? I think just a few tweaks are enough to make this unit viable.

Wed, Jun 22, 6:05 PM
real_tabasco_sauce accepted D4715: [balance] Han civil technologies adjustments.
Wed, Jun 22, 5:41 PM
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4714: [balance] Adjustments to Han art of war technology.

If no one else chimes into the discussion I would revert this to the 20% and we'll see how it plays out in the next RC

Wed, Jun 22, 8:01 AM
real_tabasco_sauce updated the test plan for D4674: [Gameplay A26] - Make Hyrcanian cavalry useful.
Wed, Jun 22, 7:58 AM · Balancing
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4721: [balancing] Han - adjust crossbow stats & training tech.
In D4721#200518, @borg- wrote:

If affects cavalry so stable need able to research this tech too

Wed, Jun 22, 4:55 AM
real_tabasco_sauce accepted D4721: [balancing] Han - adjust crossbow stats & training tech.
Wed, Jun 22, 3:41 AM

Tue, Jun 21

real_tabasco_sauce accepted D4720: [balancing] Han - adjust farming techs to the standard 20%.

OK, no objections. I would consider this a no-brainer too.

Tue, Jun 21, 6:13 PM
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4712: [balance] Nerf celtic jav chariot.

I’ve explained more fully in forum, but chariots haven’t been problematic in a25 so I see no reason to nerf them. All theoretical arguments don’t make sense if our real world experience doesn’t reflect these theoretical predictions.

Any nerf to a non-problematic unit can only do harm and make that unit become irrelevant.

Right now, chariots are a “sometimes” used strategy that isn’t the decisive factor in every game. In my opinion, that is the goal: create multiple strategies for each civ that can win a game. Anything less deprives the player of choice and makes the game predictable.

Tue, Jun 21, 5:49 PM
real_tabasco_sauce updated real_tabasco_sauce.
Tue, Jun 21, 7:25 AM
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4713: [balance] Han unit roster restructure.

In the spirit of keeping our civs unique and highlighting the interesting historic aspects of each civ (and after reading more in here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_the_Han_dynasty )

I would vote to not use archers for the Han, because it seem that while they were used, they just weren't nearly as popular as the crossbow.

And looking over to e.g. Gauls, we see that not every civ needs an archer.

(Damage value need still be adjusted, this is just about the rooster)

Tue, Jun 21, 4:47 AM
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4713: [balance] Han unit roster restructure.
In D4713#200338, @Stan wrote:

Might ask @AIEND specifically.

Tue, Jun 21, 4:41 AM
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4714: [balance] Adjustments to Han art of war technology.

Great! Thanks @marder
If someone else approves as well, I'll go ahead and accept it.

Tue, Jun 21, 3:54 AM
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4720: [balancing] Han - adjust farming techs to the standard 20%.

I agree, anyone disagree?

Tue, Jun 21, 3:37 AM
real_tabasco_sauce added inline comments to D4721: [balancing] Han - adjust crossbow stats & training tech.
Tue, Jun 21, 3:37 AM

Mon, Jun 20

real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4709: [balancing] Han - Hero adjustments .

Ok! thanks for the changes. It gets my approval, but I will wait to see what others have to say.

Mon, Jun 20, 9:55 PM
real_tabasco_sauce updated subscribers of D4712: [balance] Nerf celtic jav chariot.

I would approve, but I think @chrstgtr has an objection

Mon, Jun 20, 8:45 PM
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4710: [balance] Adjust cost of mer cav (again).
In D4710#200177, @borg- wrote:

Not better just add limit of trained mercs?

Mon, Jun 20, 8:43 PM
real_tabasco_sauce updated subscribers of D4709: [balancing] Han - Hero adjustments .

55 damage is fine by me. I overshoot with the 28/ forgot about the lower repeat time.

I would be ok with having the hero on foot.
I am with @borg- the 50% is too much (for all soilders). 20% seems fair to me (15% seem too little) and I think will still make a considerable impact.

maybe we should just remodel the art of war tech.

Mon, Jun 20, 8:39 PM
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4713: [balance] Han unit roster restructure.
In D4713#200267, @borg- wrote:

Yes, start with crossbow is unique and fun.

Mon, Jun 20, 6:52 PM
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4709: [balancing] Han - Hero adjustments .
In D4709#200262, @borg- wrote:

For sure 50% is an extremely unbalanced value. 20% is a fair value, but next to technology it can be op, so I would keep 15% for technology and 15% for aura.

Mon, Jun 20, 6:41 PM
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4713: [balance] Han unit roster restructure.

@marder
I think the cavalry_crossbowman_b should be removed. If this is done, the archer cavalry could be returned.

Mon, Jun 20, 6:36 PM
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4714: [balance] Adjustments to Han art of war technology.
In D4714#200253, @borg- wrote:

I don't think it's interesting to switch from technology to aura. This is a unique technology and we need more of that kind of technology in the game. I think 20% is a fair value.

Mon, Jun 20, 6:17 PM
real_tabasco_sauce updated subscribers of D4704: [balancing] allow kushite axe champions in p2.

@borg- thoughts on this? They will now join fanatics and athenian champions as p2 champions.
One issue could be combining these units with noba clubmen for a crazy siege attack, although I doubt the resources for that could be acquired in time.

Mon, Jun 20, 5:59 PM · Balancing
real_tabasco_sauce updated subscribers of D4714: [balance] Adjustments to Han art of war technology.

I would say it is better to replace it entirely because between the hero's aura and the global upgrade, I think the hero is far more interesting. In my opinion, it should be replaced with with @wowgetoffyourcellphone 's suggestion, and maybe the price should be adjusted accordingly.

Mon, Jun 20, 5:54 PM
real_tabasco_sauce accepted D4711: [balance] Move ptol heroes to the fortress.

This seems like a no-brainer to me. Is it wrong for me to accept? I think almost all balancers will agree on this.

Mon, Jun 20, 5:45 PM
real_tabasco_sauce added inline comments to D4709: [balancing] Han - Hero adjustments .
Mon, Jun 20, 5:42 PM
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4709: [balancing] Han - Hero adjustments .

Hi @marder
I have 2 suggestions:
The promotion experience hero can remain -50%, but I think he should be on foot. The mobility of the hero is very significant, because this means cavalry units will have a hard time benefitting from the hero if they are much faster. I have noticied it is a little unfair how some civs have all cavalry heroes (rome) while for some civs, they are all on foot (sparta).
One of the heroes should be on foot, and I would say the promotion experience one is the most appropriate.

Mon, Jun 20, 5:38 PM
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4704: [balancing] allow kushite axe champions in p2.

I think this is fine since they train from temples.

Mon, Jun 20, 5:32 PM · Balancing

Tue, Jun 7

real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4674: [Gameplay A26] - Make Hyrcanian cavalry useful.

Do all balancers refuse to accept the revision, or is there something I have yet to do?

Tue, Jun 7, 7:46 PM · Balancing

Sun, Jun 5

real_tabasco_sauce removed reviewers for D4674: [Gameplay A26] - Make Hyrcanian cavalry useful: borg-, ValihrAnt, LetswaveaBook.
Sun, Jun 5, 7:40 AM · Balancing

Sat, Jun 4

real_tabasco_sauce added a reviewer for D4674: [Gameplay A26] - Make Hyrcanian cavalry useful: LetswaveaBook.

Do you all think this decision should come down to the vote? If so, I would like at least 8 to 10 votes before we make a decision. It seems borg- doesn't really like the idea. I have yet to hear from @ValihrAnt, so I am adding @LetswaveaBook as a reviewer.
I can say for sure that people in the game lobby have been mostly supportive.
We need to decide on something fast, and I don't know if we could put together borgs suggestions in their entirety soon enough. I say better to balance axecav as a unit now and reconsider when they can be trained later as part of a larger Persia differentiation effort. Thoughts?

Sat, Jun 4, 3:48 AM · Balancing

Fri, Jun 3

real_tabasco_sauce requested review of D4683: [Gameplay - A26] Axe cav buff — Lite — edition.
Fri, Jun 3, 6:45 PM
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4674: [Gameplay A26] - Make Hyrcanian cavalry useful.
In D4674#199087, @Stan wrote:
Fri, Jun 3, 6:25 PM · Balancing
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4674: [Gameplay A26] - Make Hyrcanian cavalry useful.
In D4674#199086, @borg- wrote:

honestly I think the patch changes unnecessary things. I think that changing the ax cavalry to phase one, and lowering cost, would be enough to have a "special" unit. Its low cost would make it a unit capable of being trained quickly and in large quantities, being able to be very effective in small fights especially in phase 1. Maybe it would increase its crush damage a little, so that it would be more effective against buildings, and maybe also a higher capture rate.

Fri, Jun 3, 6:22 PM · Balancing
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4674: [Gameplay A26] - Make Hyrcanian cavalry useful.

How do I increase train time? It just occurred to me that they need 1.5x longer train time.

Fri, Jun 3, 5:37 PM · Balancing
real_tabasco_sauce edited reviewers for D4674: [Gameplay A26] - Make Hyrcanian cavalry useful, added: ValihrAnt; removed: marder.

So any comments from reviewers? anything to change? @marder @borg-? other balancers?

I really have no strong opinion on it. If you really feel like this is a good idea you will probably need to get more people to test it and give their opinion on it.

Fri, Jun 3, 5:17 PM · Balancing
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4674: [Gameplay A26] - Make Hyrcanian cavalry useful.

So any comments from reviewers? anything to change? @marder @borg-? other balancers?

Fri, Jun 3, 6:52 AM · Balancing

Thu, Jun 2

real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4674: [Gameplay A26] - Make Hyrcanian cavalry useful.

I updated the mod with the new crush dps (thanks to @borg- ) so that balance can be investigated without a26. Just keep in mind the differences acceleration and spear cav buff will make in a26 vs a25.

Thu, Jun 2, 7:06 PM · Balancing
real_tabasco_sauce edited reviewers for D4674: [Gameplay A26] - Make Hyrcanian cavalry useful, added: borg-; removed: bb.
Thu, Jun 2, 7:03 PM · Balancing
real_tabasco_sauce updated the summary of D4674: [Gameplay A26] - Make Hyrcanian cavalry useful.
Thu, Jun 2, 6:58 PM · Balancing
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4674: [Gameplay A26] - Make Hyrcanian cavalry useful.

If you don't do promotion anymore, you could also just ditch the basic and advanced variants?

As for compiling, you could try a snap, it has quite an up-to-date development version for 0 A.D..

Thu, Jun 2, 6:16 PM · Balancing
real_tabasco_sauce added inline comments to D4674: [Gameplay A26] - Make Hyrcanian cavalry useful.
Thu, Jun 2, 5:12 AM · Balancing
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4674: [Gameplay A26] - Make Hyrcanian cavalry useful.
In D4674#198892, @Stan wrote:

You don't need to build anything on Windows. Just apply the files as a mod for instance.

Thu, Jun 2, 4:38 AM · Balancing
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4674: [Gameplay A26] - Make Hyrcanian cavalry useful.

I also have some concerns about this becoming impossible to counter. If a unit is so fast that it can't be caught by its natural counter (spear cav) then that is broken.

Alternatively, if you make a unit so fragile that it shatters in actual fights to other units in fights then that unit isn't good for actual fighting.

I think what has been put together here lies somewhere between these lines. It can be countered just not necessarily by spearcav, unless acceleration makes those engagements harder to avoid. Yet it's dps is high enough that it beats skirm cav, and trades against spearcav (a25) and spears. The tests I did with breakfastburrito were interesting, and I bet they will beat swordcav.

In other words, this runs this risk of being OP against women but useless in general fights (kinda like how naked fanatics currently are). Having such a limited usefulness may have a place in the game, but it is a small one and I don't think that is what you're looking for with this proposal.

To know how this really impacts things it will just have to be tested.

If this is implemented, I would like Persia to keep a useful melee cav unit for fighting (i.e., not a glass cannon). Perhaps they should get sword cav as a unit, so that they have this glass cannon for raiding and a sword cav for melee fighting.

Thu, Jun 2, 4:36 AM · Balancing

Wed, Jun 1

real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4674: [Gameplay A26] - Make Hyrcanian cavalry useful.

I've no real founded opinion on this, other than it looks like a very strong unit. Especially the walk speed is _very_ (too?) fast. Also thinking about the cav speed tech -> then it's 22.

Wed, Jun 1, 11:06 PM · Balancing
real_tabasco_sauce updated the diff for D4674: [Gameplay A26] - Make Hyrcanian cavalry useful.

increase parent crush dps to pre patch level, fix disabling of cavalry_axeman_b in stable.xml. (thanks @marder)

Wed, Jun 1, 11:00 PM · Balancing
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4674: [Gameplay A26] - Make Hyrcanian cavalry useful.
In D4674#198858, @borg- wrote:

I didn't really understand the changes only in the _e template. Will he lose armor reaching elite? Armor and velocity change cannot be done in unit_cavalry_melee_axeman.xml template? Why is it necessary to train in elite?
At the moment only Persia uses this type of cavalry but probably other civilizations will, so it makes more sense.
Getting cavalry moving at that speed makes it basically uncountable. Spearman cavalry cannot chase.

The concept is good, I think all ax cavalry should be great in raids. The idea behind him was that he was quick to destroy buildings and medium to fight. I think he released half of the objectives, should get better at destroying buildings, I would just change that. Increasing his crush damage would make him a little better in fights too.

Wed, Jun 1, 7:51 PM · Balancing
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4674: [Gameplay A26] - Make Hyrcanian cavalry useful.

I tried making these changes in the mod as a means of testing, but I got simulation errors. Even including the unmodified stable or ship_trireme files in the mod results in errors.

Wed, Jun 1, 5:59 PM · Balancing
real_tabasco_sauce updated the diff for D4674: [Gameplay A26] - Make Hyrcanian cavalry useful.

now uses cavalry_axeman_a as the parent, which means the chain isn't broken. Still unsure if I am changing stable and trireme trainers properly. I can't build to test it because for me, spidermonkey fails to build.

Wed, Jun 1, 5:54 PM · Balancing

May 31 2022

real_tabasco_sauce updated the diff for D4674: [Gameplay A26] - Make Hyrcanian cavalry useful.
May 31 2022, 7:37 PM · Balancing
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4674: [Gameplay A26] - Make Hyrcanian cavalry useful.

You can try -cavalry_axeman_b?

May 31 2022, 7:33 PM · Balancing
real_tabasco_sauce updated the diff for D4674: [Gameplay A26] - Make Hyrcanian cavalry useful.

Allowed pers stables to train cavalry_axeman_e, adjusted cavalry_axeman_e, allowed triremes to train cavalry_axeman_e_trireme instead of _b_trireme.

May 31 2022, 7:32 PM · Balancing
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4674: [Gameplay A26] - Make Hyrcanian cavalry useful.

Hmm I can add the ability to train cavalry_axeman_e to structures/pers/stable.xml, but I can't get rid of cavalry_axeman_b from the parent. Will I need to delete _b and _a from the units/pers directory?

May 31 2022, 7:15 PM · Balancing
real_tabasco_sauce added inline comments to D4674: [Gameplay A26] - Make Hyrcanian cavalry useful.
May 31 2022, 6:59 PM · Balancing
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4674: [Gameplay A26] - Make Hyrcanian cavalry useful.

Ok, I will switch out the cavalry_axeman_b.xml file for _e, but where do I enable the stable to train the advanced unit? I didn't know so I just changed the _b file.

May 31 2022, 6:51 PM · Balancing
real_tabasco_sauce requested review of D4674: [Gameplay A26] - Make Hyrcanian cavalry useful.
May 31 2022, 6:19 PM · Balancing

May 30 2022

real_tabasco_sauce requested review of D4671: Perhaps an additional misc statistic?.
May 30 2022, 9:07 AM

Apr 29 2022

real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4625: [Gameplay] - buff for spear cavalry (attempt2).

Looks great! Thank you.

Apr 29 2022, 11:21 PM · Balancing
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4625: [Gameplay] - buff for spear cavalry (attempt2).

Looks great! Thank you.

Apr 29 2022, 10:11 PM · Balancing

Apr 24 2022

real_tabasco_sauce awarded D4390: [gameplay] Give persian both spear and jav in CC in p1 a Like token.
Apr 24 2022, 4:48 PM
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4587: [Gameplay] Enable bolt and artillery towers for Macedonians.

I don't think you will get a quick review on this one...
In general I think bolt/ artillery towers could be an interesting element in the game, but I'm not convinced that adding them to the macedonians without a bigger concept of how different civilizations should play is a good idea.

Macedonians are a siege heavy civ, which means they are (should be) a bit stronger in aggressive play. When adding these towers to them, they also get very good at defending which seems like a bad choice for overall gameplay.

Unfortunately I don't have a batter idea of how to integrate those towers, which is probably also why no one from the balancing team gave their opinion here.

Apr 24 2022, 1:42 AM

Apr 19 2022

real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4506: [Gameplay] more armor for citizen spear cavalry.

Hey everyone, this is my first time on here. I would eventually like to help write patches, but it will probably take me a while to get set up and stuff. It seemed there was some agreement on the spear cav buff being: +1 pierce armor, cav counter = 2.0. Apparently there is more time to make balance changes so thoughts on this making it into A26?

Agree on the counter multiplier.

But It seems like there is no agreement on armor. See Vali’s comment, which I largely agree with. If any armor is increased, I think it should be hack because speak cav already beat skins, slings, and archers pretty handily. The same is not true for swords and spears have to directly engage with melee to do dmg

Apr 19 2022, 8:00 PM
real_tabasco_sauce added a comment to D4506: [Gameplay] more armor for citizen spear cavalry.

Hey everyone, this is my first time on here. I would eventually like to help write patches, but it will probably take me a while to get set up and stuff. It seemed there was some agreement on the spear cav buff being: +1 pierce armor, cav counter = 2.0. Apparently there is more time to make balance changes so thoughts on this making it into A26?

Apr 19 2022, 5:16 PM