Basic units limit

Legendaries are gone. Players stopped using them due to the recent nerf so what is the next lame-train stop? back to the origins, a good ol' zerg of basic units which block the path while the uber ranged take care of the rest. Unfortunately this applies only to lion and ram as wolven cannot really zerg efficiently. My feeling is that basic units are ok right now but what is not ok is the amount you can deploy. I'm seeing this sad trend of having often 4+ ranged and/or 4-5 melee units. This in my opinion is bad for the game as there is much less build diversity going on and certain units (especially elites) are not played enough.

I think that ranged units should be limited to 3 and the melee units to 4 or even 3. What you think about it?

the idea is good but im not sure how will it impact on 800 ap games (if anyone plays them )

4-5 archers builds are indeed problem of mindles laming being able to go to the top... but i was never fan of unit limits...
and for example i really want to play 4-6 sparkling army one day

but 5 archers builds maus be dealt with.


In battle game where im main designer - ranged units are weaker than they should (considering ap cost and killing potential) but they are still useful as a tactical advantage forcing enemy to attack. So having shightly better archers than opponent makes you in good tactical position but if you have them too much than you wont be able to shoot hth companies in time.

So propably lowering STR (or ACC) or rising AP cost (but im for lowering STR - because in TT conf - lion archers was cheap and good only in groups of 3 and only Vs non armored enemy) of both Lion and Ram bowmans can do the trick even better - becouse you can still play with 5 bowmans and try to be effective - but only if you are really good

i think that 400 ap as 800 and 250 ap games should be balanced separately.

in case of limits - yes (and partialy faction tactics)

but in case of balancing abused units by stats/ap this should nor be necesary

I like the idea.
Maybe something like :
250 pts = max 2 units of each type
400 pts = max 3
800 pts = max 4

I like the idea.
Maybe something like :
250 pts = max 2 units of each type
400 pts = max 3
800 pts = max 4

but

- units are not exacly equal - so 3 Alahan bowmans is more (archers in archers) than 3 skeleton bowmans
and 3 skeleton warriors is more (abusive) than 3 swordsmans
- dividing limits into format will totally change current company limits and matchmaking proces

and it still don't replace balancing

Of course it doesn't replace balancing, but it forces some variety inside the armies compositions, which is good regardless of balancing, in my opinion. Even in a perfectly-balanced game, having armies of same-unit-type-clones looks pretty lame (except for Dirz, of course )

And while I agree with Deep Blue that such a limit should depend on the game format (250/400/800), I don't think it should depend on the unit type (sparkling/crossbowwolf/golem). I can see why you would want it, but I don't think it would be worth the complexity.

I don't think it should depend on the unit type (sparkling/crossbowwolf/golem)

so up to 3 golems in 800 bracket ?

Mmmmh... I suppose it may be ugly too... right.

I don't think it should depend on the unit type (sparkling/crossbowwolf/golem)

so up to 3 golems in 800 bracket ?

i think that 3 is the sweet spot for everything minus the legendaries, which are obviously unique units.