Heavy Infantry

[magian]

I'm hearing the pro +10 def arguments, but I'm finding them rather unconvincing.

The current heavy inf is very good at defending cities (too good IMO), but they are also very good at defending anywhere. When attacked by orcs in the swamp, they are equally strong. When attacked by light cav in the open, they are stronger. They are only 5 strength less than pikemen attacking them in the open. Only when attacked by the dwarf in mountains are they at a serious (-10) disadvantage.

Also consider that this +10 def can not be negated in any way. Now that the unicorn has become more prominent, the terrain bonuses of the other 1 turn units are much less reliable, but the HI's +10 def is guaranteed.

Something seems pretty wrong with that picture.

[LPhillips]

Well, there's someone finally presenting a valid argument for the other side. Thanks Magian!
The answer is that defense is a battle players don't control. The attacker *always* has the advantage in Warbarons, as it is their turn and they choose where and when to engage. So +10 defense is not as powerful as +10 attack, nor as powerful as +10 terrain, which works both ways. It's hard to negate terrain bonuses; only one specialized unit does it.

Yes, a 1-turn heavy infantry is equal to an orc attacking it in swamp, but the heavy infantry isn't threatening anything. It's weak on attack. So it's never a threat and there is no earthly reason to engage it. The only reason to attack something that isn't a threat is when you can't walk by it. The attacker always chooses when, where, and what to engage. A defense bonus therefor is the least effective in the game, unless it's on a taxi unit with good movement like the Mammoth. It's only effective in 50% of the game, the 50% that it cannot control.

The only real issue here is whether 10 strength, +10 in some situations, is too much for a level 1 unit at 200 gold. Statistically speaking, a base 15 strength unit is stronger than the Heavy Infantry. And 15-strength level 1's are fine, are they not?

KGB, won't we see 2-turn units used less when 1-turn units become too cheap? I'd like to see Dwarf at 375 or 350 maybe, but I think you're going too far with 300. No 15-strength unit should cost less than 350. If players want to have more expendable income and buy more production, they can design/play richer maps.

[KGB]

LPhillips,

Pikemen already only cost 300 (less than your 350) and I don't see a rash of them being made. In fact I don't think I see them any more frequently than I did in prior Beta's. Mostly on maps with lots of open terrain or with narrow open terrain areas they can easily control. So I am pretty sure Dwarves could go down to the same 300 cost (or 325 tops) without a horde of Dwarves appearing the game.

With the costs in the latest Beta being a LOT better/more reflective of units value (just need the siege units to be cheaper: Ram 400, Catapult 800 since they aren't that great compared to other bonus's), I am seeing a lot more 2 and 3 turn units made. Especially ones that have good combat use on the map they are on (like Hv Calv/Worms/Elepthans/Scorpions on the Outlands desert map). Since you can easily afford them now, it's natural for players to dump 1 turn units for the 2+ turn ones since those units tend to move further, have better bonus's, better combat etc.

For example with 3 hits, an Elemental is now a very good buy compared to 3 Dwarves since the overall numbers work out to a roughly even battle (both win when attacking since both have attack bonus's). Other units like Spiders/Gryphons with their improved city bonus and less cost have become really good too. For example 8 spiders attacking 8 Hv infantry in a +5 walled city (40 strength vs 25) win that battle 97% of the time with anywhere between 2-6 spiders left. That's impressive enough to make Spiders a natural buster of Hv Infantry cities.

So those players who continue to make only 1 turn units and not progress to the better ones are going to lose a lot of games. The only thing my costs do is make it a nicer when you are on a map with a lot of nearby hills and don't get Dwarf production. You'll now be able to afford some to help move around.

KGB

[magian]

Lphillips, I see a few problems with your argument.

While it is true that your opponent is never forced to attack you, you are likewise not required to attack him. Because of this you have total control of whether or you receive a defense bonus. If your opponent cannot afford to attack you (because of your defense bonus) then the initiative passes to you and you become the default attacker.

You also failed to address the strategy of active defense. Consider a group of heavy inf walking past your front lines towards your more vulnerable rear. Now you have a very good reason to attack them. But, no matter what terrain they are moving through, they will always be 20 strength a pop. They may also be shielding a powerful offensive unit like an elemental or sandworm. So, flatly stating that they are too weak to be any threat seems rather ill-considered.

I have often seen pikemen used (very effectively) to screen offensive units and bypass heavily defended cities. But, pikemen are very slow and limited to open terrain. HI are more versatile and much speedier, so I expect to see them take over this role.

No, I don't think that 15 strength is too high for a level 1 unit. But 20 is getting to be a bit much, especially in a cheap to build, relatively speedy package. A unit that defends well is not highly specialized I defend quite a bit, and mostly with 1 -turn units.

[LPhillips]

Magian, quite simply: Heavy Infantry units are only unbalanced against low-skill players, and utilizing them heavily is not a winning strategy. That's the way it works out. To take Heavy Infantry out of this vacuum, examine them beside... Light Cavalry. Very fast, 18 strength almost all the time, and cheap to produce and maintain. No one has abused Heavy Infantry successfully yet, and I'm betting based on reason and math that they won't be able to. As KGB points out so well, they're easily overcome by 2- and 3-turn units.

KGB, I can see your point. It will work as long as it's low-movement level 1 units we're making cheaper. The low movement of Pikemen and Dwarfs is a strong deterrent to purchasing, and it's likely many people wouldn't prefer them to other 1-turn units even if they were 225 each.

[magian]

Seriously, light Cav are 18 strength almost all the time? I would say that city terrain is the most frequent battlefield, then open, then other. Light cav are poor city defenders, and city attackers (probably the two most critical roles in the game).

The current heavy inf are too good because they make other units (particularly the pikemen) less attractive. Having a 20 stength lvl 1 unit also reduces the value of many lvl 2 units (since many are only strength 20 themselves). Heavy inf behind +5 walls are as strong as giants or heavy cav, behind +10 walls they are as strong as minotaurs (units specialized in attacking cities that take twice the time to produce). Of all the lvl 2 units, spiders are the only lvl 2 units that can 'easily' overcome fortified heavy inf.

This means folks will build spiders and avoid most other lvl 2 units, bypassing them for lvl 3s that can actually take cities reliably.

I thought the braintrust was finally catching on that overpowered lvl 1 units were not the way to go, this seems like a very regressive debate to me :/

[KGB]

Magican,

Seriously, light Cav are 18 strength almost all the time? I would say that city terrain is the most frequent battlefield, then open, then other. Light cav are poor city defenders, and city attackers (probably the two most critical roles in the game).

Agreed. Lt Calv are primarily raiding and scouting units. That was their role in real life too.

The current heavy inf are too good because they make other units (particularly the pikemen) less attractive. Having a 20 stength lvl 1 unit also reduces the value of many lvl 2 units (since many are only strength 20 themselves).

Do you say this because the cost is so cheap relative to Pike/Dwarf or because you genuinely believe 20 defense is over powering? In other words, if the cost for Pike/Dwarf gets lowered down to 275 and 300 respectively (where I believe they should be) would you still say the same thing? I'd be especially curious to know what you'd do if every 1 turn unit cost either 50 (crow, scout, lt Inf) or 100 gold (every other 1 turn unit). What would you build and would you build it exclusively or 'as needed'. Because the easiest way to see if somethings out of control is to do what I just suggested and see what happens.

Despite Hv Inf power, I still buy more Elves than I do Hv Inf. I still buy other 1 turn units too. As I said, I only ever buy them on the front line cities.

This means folks will build spiders and avoid most other lvl 2 units, bypassing them for lvl 3s that can actually take cities reliably.

So you are saying this is a bad thing?

I make plenty of L2 units other than Spiders. I don't use them against Hv Infantry behind walls unless I have a lot of bonus's with them. Typically I use L2 units to control ground between cities thanks to their better move, higher strength that allows them to bless easier, go in hero/bonus unit stacks.

Then as you guessed, I use L3+ units to take cities or heavy bonus stacks with Elves/L2 units.

Not sure what's wrong with that concept.

KGB

[LPhillips]

KGB's generally on the forefront of employing units. If there's an abuse, he'll find it. And he's dead to rights on this one. There's simply no problem here.

In the end, you can dislike the Heavy Infantry and want them changed. But it's a completely nonviable argument to state that they are overpowered and ripe for abuse. No one has nor can successfully abuse them. We could play a hundred matches where you could make them and I couldn't, and it wouldn't be a hardship at all. Make all you want. If anything, the only problem is that they're so rarely useful.

[magian]

Well, heavy infantry have been the most commonly produced unit in almost all the games I have played in this beta. So, most folks don't seem to see them as 'rarely useful'.

I never said anything about 'abusing' the HI. There is more subtlety to balancing units than 'produce only this unit and win the game'. We need to consider the roles of various units and how effective they are at those roles when pitted against other units (especially those in their own weight class).

The role of light cavalry is to scout, and to dominate areas of open terrain. HI can now simply walk through those open areas and will have the advantage if attacked by a unit specialized in fighting in that terrain type. I don't see this as a good thing. They are overpowered because they are undermining the ability of other units to do their jobs, and that is not (IMO) desirable. Will they totally unbalance and ruin the game? I don't believe so. Will they be over-produced because they are too good at a very generally useful role? Yes they will (and are now).

[KGB]

Magican,

Well, heavy infantry have been the most commonly produced unit in almost all the games I have played in this beta. So, most folks don't seem to see them as 'rarely useful'.

Since they are the best city defenders in terms of raw strength I don't find that surprising. If you are looking to defend your cities with 1 turn units, they are a good choice *if you have lots of money to pay the upkeep*. I would only find it surprising if you didn't see lots of them.

The bigger question is, how many players are using them to attack with or expand in the initial game? My guess is not many. I would also guess many players buy them because they are saving money for production of better units and the Elf/Pike/Dwarf and even Lt Calv are too expensive to buy in masses for defense (which is why I say those units need to become cheaper).

The truth is that there are always going to be tons of units that don't get made much when a game has 60+ units to chose from. Many will be situational units only (If the map has a lot of swamp, you will buy Orcs because of their combat bonus and their movement) and there is nothing wrong with that.

Will they totally unbalance and ruin the game? I don't believe so.

Isn't that the ultimate test of whether they need to be changed? If they aren't unbalancing and ruining the game I don't see why they need to be changed.

Incidentally one of the other reasons Hv Inf have value is because they can construct towers/rebuild cities. It many be a minor thing but many other 1 turn units can't. It might be time to remove that power from the Hv Inf.

KGB