The great feedback thread

Dragon's, Major list, is pretty much my list for the first patch. I would only add

4. Scoring to start on second round.

This I feel will address most of the mechanics that is preventing unit and army balance testing.

The Minor I feel is a costing and numbers thing we could then test properly without randomness messing up game. ie. All the Elixers spawning on one side of the map.

This is more aesthetic feedback than actual gameplay.

The larger scale champions are a nice way to make them identifiable but the size of some of them just looks strange (e.g. Emerok/guardian of the runes character); any chance of a slight scale down on some of them? The halo/light above them already makes them fairly easy to identify.

Some variation on the actual look of the characters that have troop models too would be good too, at the moment they are just a big version of the regular version of that unit. Wouldn't need a complete redesign, a pauldron/chains/different weapon for example.

I get that this isn't as important as some of the gameplay fixes (e.g insta kill and points cost for legendaries) but something in the long run perhaps.

the good thing about 16 ap sparkling is that they are nice compared 19 ap skellys - to be hines they are far more better against skeleton warriors than swordsmans
the problem starts when they are combined with dannerans seal (maybe they should be immune to tis spell?)

Minor problems:

1. Unlimited swarm units (3 per type instead 10 for group)

This IMO should be considered as a major problem. But I think 3 for the group or 2 per type should make matches more about clashing war bands than about strength in numbers. In comparison to other systems I like Forces Organization Chart from WH40K, I know that unit composition is totally different there but the idea is that you are more restricted about what you can have. This is the factor that makes builds more variable - taking OP/best units is not restricted by points (assuming of course you have enough of them) but by THE LIMIT.

BTW dear Devs as other players I'm still waiting for you feedback about suggestions posted in this thread

The problem you have with a blanket limit is that it can also have the opposite affect of limiting builds. In this case we limit the units 2 because of say op sparklings. This now in turn limits wolves from fielding more than 2 Fangs.

You run the risk of setting the limit so low that you hurt build diversity on units that are in fact weak. I do agree there needs to be a limit but we would also need to address the units that are causing us to implement tho same restrictions.

Of course there is need to balance particular units however it is easy to imagine that nerfing one unit will cause the other to takes it place and in the outcome we would have (for example) swarms off skeletons instead of sparks. Limit of 2 was in restriction to single TYPE so because each unit has 3 types you could take totally 6 models of a single unit (2 from each type, 3x2=6). The limit of 3 was my idea for the whole group and considering AP costs it should have meaning only for cheapest units (its hard to believe that somebody would take 4 necros 75 AP each), although I played wolfs only in earlier patch i think that they should be ok with 3 fangs.

Im still not sure if unit limits can be replaced by some additional rules - like sparkling immunity (unable to be target of spell) for daneran seal for example - at least 16 ap version of it.

Maybe making some adjustments to the hero death penalty could help balance this. Say if the penalty was +2 elixir for you -2 elixir for your opponent. That would buy the dominating team more time to mop up an army like the one we are talking about. So the benefits of the sparkling army wouldn't be as great when they have to survive a couple more turns to get a win. Killing the enemy hero would also be less beneficial elixir wise when done early on in the match.

The problem comes not from those armies killing the Hero but much more from how dominant they are on the board. Since they can Contest and grab Elixers. Combat mechanics also benefits from numbers so it becomes a double whammy. The sparkling army as the final benefit from how well they couple with one of the Hero units.

The problem with saying 2 per profile doesn't fix the problem since you can still end up with 4-6 of the unit.

A hard limit of 2 of any unit kills diversity.

Personally I think it is going to take a combined approach of , profile or unit limits, mechanics changes and profile adjustments. This makes it very tricky since tweaking cost and numbers affects more than just one unit each time.

A hard limit of 2 of any unit kills diversity.

Yes you are correct and I agree, but suggested by me earlier limit of 3 should be ok.

The problem with saying 2 per profile doesn't fix the problem since you can still end up with 4-6 of the unit.

Yes you can end up with 4-6 units, IMO 4 is ok,but if you sum up all AP costs of taking 6 units it will probably appear to hight to be viable.

IMO generally the question is to put limit on profiles (unit types) or whole unit. I think there is just no simpler way to deal with all those OP swarms and the final limit value needs to be established only by testing. Personally I believe that the limit of 3 per unit (so all profiles taken together) is a good starting point for tests.