#New Blocking Type to Potentially Counter Indirect Attacks / Indirect Spam

73 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)

queen jasper
#

The way things are in Battle Nations, attack types (Contact, Direct, Precise, Indirect) function as a scale from best to worst with Contact being the worst (only hits whatever is in front) and Indirect being the best (hits whatever is in range). In healthy metas, there are counters to every strategy. Contact, Direct, and Precise all currently have counters, but indirect doesn't, this leads to situations where players can't really do anything to protect a unit such as during the recent Yazul boss strike where the Sandworm one shot a unit almost whenever it attacked.

Adding a new blocking type which gets in the way of indirect attacks, but not precise or direct attacks would add another layer of strategy and complexity to the game by providing a counter to indirect attacks. Doing so would also pave the way for creating more interesting encounters and improving unit diversity.

This blocking type could be given to units with a theme/focus around disruption such as the Field Agent or Saboteur with the justification being the unit disrupting targeting systems or something similar. It could also be given to certain planes with the justification being their strafing the battlefield making it difficult to line up a clean shot.

hot vector
#

Indirect is tightly linked to artillery, and in my belief artillery should have its overall damage reduced and/or be more RNG dependant, such as random tiles hit

I mean I handled the whole game (boss excluded) til 49 with 3 frontlaners and 3+ TF2 soldiers, that shit's op and make ennemy frontlaners obselete

limpid acorn
#

barring chuckers and tf2 soldiers and demo if you count that as artillery, artillery as a whole is hilarious underpowered at this stage of the game

#

nerfing them further would make them even more unuseable

hot vector
hot vector
limpid acorn
queen jasper
limpid acorn
#

whether or not demoman or heavy chem counts as arty is debatable, but I will concede on the brimstone

queen jasper
#

I mean, if soldier counts…

#

Also Allied Raider Cannoneer is comparable in power to Soldier and Chucker at the current level cap

limpid acorn
#

cannoner is still held back by the skull costs, which are not easy to obtain large amounts of in the early game, and by level 40ish, you have better options even if it is not completely outclassed.

limpid acorn
hot vector
queen jasper
queen jasper
# hot vector Chucker is a straight ugprade of cannoneer and soldier has the advantage of havi...

Chucker is only better 65% of the time… less against targets with higher defense.

Soldier’s also needs to hit its rng to out-damage ARC against 3 or fewer targets at the current level cap, and against a single target it just doesn’t.

Better, kind of, but it’s not like there aren’t situations where ARC will outperform either.

Regardless, this thread is about adding a new blocking type due to indirect not really being counter-able currently (and more importantly in the future.)

queen jasper
#

A new blocking type such as this could also pave the way for other attack type specific blocking types or other blocking types and encounter modifiers where only one type of attack could get through

latent storm
#

I don’t really see how anything would… block artillery shells in the first place

#

Nor what kind of unit would have that kind of blocking

queen jasper
#

my idea for which units could have it was ones which could thematically be seen as disrupting their targetting, not really stopping the shells

latent storm
#

Still unclear to me what that would be

queen jasper
#

Saboteur, Field Agent, and similar units. Planes, given how low to the ground they seem to fly, could potentially actually be seen as stopping the shell, though a lot of artillery also can't target air so planes are much more questionable, maybe LTAs?

It's more for balance than thematic reasons

latent storm
#

Hmmm

#

So is this a class above full blocking then or something entirely different?

queen jasper
#

something entirely different, the idea is that it stops indirect, but not precise or direct attacks

latent storm
#

I see I see

queen jasper
#

and possibly not contact either

latent storm
#

Yeah I’ll be real this idea doesn’t really resonate with me thematically or balance-wise

queen jasper
#

I probably should've let it cook more before posting it

latent storm
#

The cited example of Firemod Groundshakers doen’t make a ton of sense to me seeing as it would just move the problem from “my backline got spat on and instantly died this game sucks” to “I had to use Field Agents as my frontline because of Sandworms and now I’m out of bars”

#

Idk, this community seems to really have a thing for wanting a silver bullet for every problem they might face

#

And maybe I’m weird for not seeign it

queen jasper
#

That was an issue I thought could come up. It could just shift the post to other another problem, or optimal thing and I couldn't think of an immediate solution for it beyond it might end up just not being an issue, it would definitely need to be tested to find out if it would be.

Another major reason I made this post is wanting to see more complexity and niches in the game

short ibex
#

I mean I guess if you had like an interceptor or like a bubble shield thing that basically taunted any indirect attacks, was limited to one, and not unreasonably tanky it could work

warped field
#

Disruptive units could work if their blocking type was more like an area of effect rather than just their own square. Saboteur and field agents could reasonably achieve this effect through their gadgets like smoke screens or jamming devices. Flying units are iffy if they don't have some legitimate reason for having disruptive blocking.

frosty hemlock
#

The main thing this reminds me of would be the CoD trophy systems that stop 'nades and such, but not the guys throwing said 'nades

#

I can't really think of a clean way to implement that short of special agents prepped for the worst or veteran Frontier units with particularly itchy trigger fingers

hoary raft
#

New bubble shield unit that protects from indirect fire and starts showing up past level 70 would be sick

queen jasper
#

I think units that do this should start showing up before level 70

idle kite
hexed veldt
#

just throwing an idea out there

but how about a new status condition? one where it turns indirect attacks into a "random target", like it temporarily turns attacks into something like the hailstorm's attack?

or potentially instead of having it target the enemies, have the status target your side of the battlefield (like a buff instead of a negative status effect)?

halcyon berry
#

I like the idea of a heavily armored air unit that blocks indirect attacks that would normally try to go over your tanks, but doesn’t block contact/direct/precise attacks that would go “under” it. So like it would float in the air and artillery would have to shoot through it to reach their target, but a ground unit would just be shooting under it. Currently all aircraft are generally row 2/3 units, this would open the door for aircraft that instead act more like tanks and are designed to sit in the front row

meager maple
#

Plasma shield or something

jagged basalt
#

CWIS! Maybe some kinda tempest-looking tank or an emplacement like the AA gun

digital onyx
placid widget
#

We could go full circle and make the bubble shield protect against indirect and precise attacks but not contact attacks

#

kinda like the shields in Dune (minus the nuclear explosion)

meager maple
#

Tbh that’s kinda what I was thinking

#

It’s unfortunate the pickle BN balancing has put itself in but this is at least a way to turn it into something interesting

queen jasper
#

Yeah indirect is an issue currently that is only going to get worse and its one I hope Madrona tries to solve

jagged basalt
placid widget
#

This reminds me of a mechanic the game Gun's Up had, where you strategically placed AA turrets to shoot down missiles, paratroopers, etc. So hear me out: we make the AA turret relevant by giving it the point defense ability at a high rank

latest.png latest.png
digital onyx
#

I like that idea a lot but the problem is there's only 1 AA gun, and AA attacks in BN are largely... Haphazard.

placid widget
#

if the AA turret was given the ability to protect adjacent units from indirect fire attacks, that would likely become its sole purpose in lineups. no need to use its normal attacks

#

AA attacks across the board probably need a rebalance but that's a whole nother' can of worms

digital onyx
#

Well what I am saying is this requires a very... Difficult teardown. Because though I like your idea- and believe me, I really like that idea! We have 2 issues. The AA Turret is gained early on, because Z2 really half-ass implemented planes. But it's not really meant to stick around all game. So what is the power up for level 20, 30, 40, etc? Well, we have more AA attacks but as you said it's a can of worms. While I like this idea, and again, I really do, it has it's own issues.

I mean if we just started giving units like this point defense or something, we're going to end up having them as a hard requirement in my opinion. You can forsake tanks, and just run troopers in a suicide mission, or veterans even. Tanks are optional! They tend to be strong, but you don't really need them truthfully. However, unlike tanks, I feel this would make AA non optional you'd want to have that for everything. So now every lineup is at least gunna have 1.

placid widget
#

I'm not sure that argument holds water considering that a formation that replaces all of its frontline blockers with AA turrets is gonna get absolutely decimated by contact/direct attacks. The efficacy of point defense units would also heavily depend on the range and cooldown of their protection. I'm envisioning something like "only the 4 adjacent units to the AA turret, with a cooldown of 2 turns", although there's a lot of room for balance there. I'm also not saying that every unit with AA attacks would get point defense, I just brought up AA turrets because I was reminded of a similar unit in another game. imo there should only be a handful sprinkled through the various levels, ideally units like the Tempest that don't otherwise have a place in the meta and thematically make sense to have AA capabilities

#

I also think it's worth pointing out that AA turrets themselves have 9 ranks like the other units meant to scale into the higher levels

digital onyx
#

Just throw them second row / between 3 tanks in the front. This does make me think though someone should... Really just comb through and, rethink planes for an entirely seperate reason. I never gave it much thought but they just, completely bypass all logic of the game. In Naval they get crit and instantly destroyed because Z2 didn't want to add machineguns to everything, meanwhile in Ground Battles certain units can just do nothing to them.

-# What if planes when attacking, became vulnerable to all forms of ground attack for 1 turn?

placid widget
#

Planes having immunity to most ground attacks is kinda in-line with this suggestion threads' train of thought, just reversed since they're especially susceptible to most indirect attacks instead. I think that's what makes them exciting on paper; they become a win condition and it makes you re-evaluate your target priorities

queen jasper
#

I like the AA turret and other units just blocking indirect attacks instead of protecting 4 adjacent, it's easier to balance that way because you'd need more than one to protect your comp from indirect attacks and it wouldn't stop indirect attacks from taking out that unit.

placid widget
#

that could be interesting, but it would restrict them quite a bit considering that formations can only be 3 units deep. So at most you're only protecting 2 units, and if you want a row of blockers in front you only get to protect 1 unit and that's only useful for units that can attack from the back row

queen jasper
#

Because tanks exist as a frontline so having it just protect adjacent squares instead would either make it pointless due to a cooldown, or make indurect attacks borderline worthless, if it only protected the adjeacent squares and not it's own, it could be interesting.

Ultimately there is a reason I said this I idea is undercooked earlier in the chat, a lot needs to be considered when it comes to indirect attacks, game feel, and balancing; while I considered some of it, there was a lot that got missed that I don't really have an answer for or a good enough answer for, it's the type of thing that would need to be tested and thoroughly looked at because of the unit breaking potential it has.

Take a look at Ancient Sentinel or Big Bada Boom, they suddenly become less threatening with an suggestion like this, because you could protect units from their attacks, which is something I failed to consider.

But at the same time, how much of an impact would that actually have,? Would it mean anything? I didn't test anything or look at numbers to figure that out, and that would need to be done for a lot of units and bosses, probably even adding in a multiple different types of indirect and indirect blocking for thematic reasons because a depth charge being blocked by a plane is silly.

Regardless, the point of indirect attacks being in an inherently unbalanced position at the moment stands, and is important to discuss.

digital onyx
# queen jasper Because tanks exist as a frontline so having it just protect adjacent squares in...

I think Indirect is necessary as it adds a counter. The problem is inherently that some units don't need it (Sandworm...) because their standard attacks are stupidly strong.

Artillery embodies this perfectly. Light Artillery, Aries, Heavy artillery, Earthshaker, Rocket Truck. These exist, to punish heavy usage of backline units. Units that do a lot of damage, but maybe are glass cannons. In turn, Artillery can't hit frontline units in certain instances.

so the reward is you do usually so-so damage, but the benefit is that you can hit any unit on the board. However as we all know, as the game progresses Z2 just makes everything strong why not. So we end up with Artillery effectively being replaced in role by Sandworms which are just monstrosities. Artillery? Why bother! While the initial idea is generally the same, it evolves into just being straight up murderous like the sandworm.

I don't think we necessarily need counters to artillery, but I wouldn't be opposed necessarily to reduction. That's what makes it hard to like this, it suggests essentially gutting a system that helps me do things like snipe brutal bombardiers, because the alternative is that they snipe me, or brutal boom boom's blowing the whole board sky-high.

I think the simple solution overall is to re-evaluate what is considered as having indirect, and what doesn't need it in the same mannerism that some units need it more than precise and some units need precise over indirect (Sandworm...)

But that's a long and tedious task, and mostly why I haven't made a vote. I am so-so either way. It's a difficult call to change how indirect works because the units that lightly make use of it are now defeated. (Dustwalker hiding behind a tower shanking your units? Light artillery it! Didn't kill it fast enough? It stabs your artillery...) and counterplay doesn't exist other than "shoot the thing blocking it", either some units should be excluded or units just need to lose it wholesale.

#

Also as for Ancient Sentinel, that unit is a boss and inherently supposed to be difficult to deal with so it having indirect makes sense. It's not player controlled, it's supposed to be difficult for the player. Difficulty is partly part of the fun.

Big Bada Boom, and Brutal Bombardiers are opposite. The AI is incredibly stupid, you can place Buoys in Naval, and only have 1 boat, and the AI will just shoot the spaced out Buoy's.

To compensate for the AI's stupidity, it gets these units that hit like a train, because it's stupid and generally doesn't have the consideration to target properly. This is good and bad because on one hand it's stupidity is compensated by hard hitting units that add difficulty, and on the other hand these units suck because they hurt too much (overly difficult)

However being overly difficult is justified due to the AI's stupidity.

queen jasper
#

I do think indirect should 100% exist, but the lack of a counter to it creates a glaring issue as far as balance goes.

There is so much to consider with stuff like this, but ultimately the answer to what’s best is always going to be that it depends on what direction Madrona wants to take things.

And we haven’t really been given a proper indication of that yet beyond rebalancing being a thing that will (probably) happen.

The other issue with indirect is that it pushes the game more towards units, even backline ones and dps’s, being tankier, just look at the AS frags or elemental trooper, or the tf2 units, or the infamous Plasma Artillery.

I do think a suggestion like this shouldn’t come about on its own, it’d need to be paired with other changes, but I do think the most balanced way of doing it is making it so it doesn’t block direct or precise, but does block indirect, whether it also blocks contact or not probably doesn’t matter. And making so it functions within the way blocking currently works.

As far as AS goes, an idea like this messing with its difficulty needing to be considered was the point I was trying to make.

One of my main purposes when making suggestions is to find ways to make the game more interesting and/or more strategic, which I think this would accomplish; it’s just a matter of how much balance would be thrown out of whack or if it’d meaningfully affect anything at all as well as how much would need to be changed to accommodate a change like this.

digital onyx
#

I think things like balancing the AS are rather simpler than something complex like this. As for fragments, that's a... Hot button topic I'd rather say. Players inherently are going to want something that's outright broken (Legendary Sandworm enjoyers make me retch) and trying to change that is almost always going to be universally met with disdain.

When it comes to the AS I think some just, generally easier solutions are going to be health or resistance related. But even then consider things like the Dreadnaught that exist in game. I consistently have beaten it with a single boat remaining, before I got the singular Ironclad from it. Now I can usually have about 3 boats left over. Roughly.

Players enjoy things like Dark Souls and will... For some reason assign that to Battle Nations. I guess it's the prestige (in a non mechanical way) of doing something deemed impossible that makes people want to flaunt "No it's fine!" when they beat it, even if it's a massive pain. Additionally if the frags are any good, the justification for it being difficult is going to be just that.

When it comes to changes like these, it would be interesting but like my naval rebalancing P2 proposal, the entire roster needs to be observed. And that is... time consuming. And even then for one person, you're going to end up with biases, and beliefs that maybe don't reflect things properly.

meager maple
#

To be honest, in my very limited experience with game development, the players actually have no idea what’s best for the game balancing and content wise and should for the most part be ignored, as a whole, the community doesn’t really have any idea of what they want and how to get there 😅

#

Like you said, stuff like the legendary sandworm and frags/AS are a great example of why

#

They are absolutely not healthy for the game in their present state, but adjusting them is gonna make a lot of people unhappy

patent coral