t1 veh factory change , Samson ?? - Page 2

t1 veh factory change , Samson ??

Classic game design, maintained to please you...

Moderator: Content Developer

User avatar
sillynanny
Posts: 125
Joined: 20 Jun 2008, 14:26

Re: t1 veh factory change , Samson ??

Post by sillynanny » 29 Jun 2011, 11:42

Yes it improved a lot. I think the problem is that they are too cheap compared to the rest of t1.
0 x

User avatar
Pxtl
Posts: 6112
Joined: 23 Oct 2004, 01:43

Re: t1 veh factory change , Samson ??

Post by Pxtl » 29 Jun 2011, 17:28

The problem with the Samson is that it wears too many hats. This makes it *really* tricky to balance.

It functions as:
1) Artillery - it outranges T1 except for HLTs and artillery units.
2) Ranged fire-support, including swatting jeffies.
3) Spotting.
4) Anti-air.
5) It also functions as an (expensive and sub-optimal) skirmisher.

The incredible versatility of the unit means it's tricky to avoid making it either overpowered or worthless in one of its roles.
0 x

Manmax
Posts: 76
Joined: 19 May 2011, 13:57

Re: t1 veh factory change , Samson ??

Post by Manmax » 29 Jun 2011, 18:26

As someone mentioned it up thread, the game offers a way to fight off samson, ie. Hlt. The only argument speaking against Hlt as satisfactory counter to samson is that it entrenches the game along a front. Well, it can be argued that it also gives the player more time to build an army to destroy those damn samsons.
0 x

Drac
Posts: 22
Joined: 26 Jun 2011, 16:00

Re: t1 veh factory change , Samson ??

Post by Drac » 29 Jun 2011, 20:07

Manmax wrote:As someone mentioned it up thread, the game offers a way to fight off samson, ie. Hlt. The only argument speaking against Hlt as satisfactory counter to samson is that it entrenches the game along a front. Well, it can be argued that it also gives the player more time to build an army to destroy those damn samsons.
A multirole unit should never be that problematic to counter but i alredy said building hlt near the front might be harder than you think especially if their commander is present. Your best bet if you choose that path is to build it much behind your front lines losing territory,mexes,llt-ts to keep them busy.

But lets assume a situation you have
5 flash tanks
1 con vehicle( for teh migthy hlt plan)
Commander at the front

He has
1 riot tank
1 llt
2 samsons
Commander at the front

Now pretty obvious you cant send your units in expecting victory and you cant defend your llt othervise , if you start a hlt plan relatively undefended by llt-s he will try to dgun it but letting you build it up to a point where you wasted resources and buildpower while he builds 1-2 more riots which he will keep at his base if you decide to make a run for it. So what would you do ? :)

But lets say you build up your great army behind the defense of the hlt , he can match it and more he has economy advantage.

I dont like spamming them but in teamgames early i would buy 1-2 for 250 270 tops i am not saying it should cost that much since that would rob vehicle factory of a useful aa vehicle and this change would make no sense in 1v1 where their aa ability could use a buff and other roles dont matter that much.
0 x

User avatar
Beherith
Moderator
Posts: 4934
Joined: 26 Oct 2007, 16:21

Re: t1 veh factory change , Samson ??

Post by Beherith » 29 Jun 2011, 20:36

Drac, in that scenario, there is no reason to try and attempt to kill his riot, slasher and comm with the flash. Send the 5 flash around his forces and raid his eco-> no more eco to make hlt.
0 x

User avatar
Johannes
Posts: 1265
Joined: 17 Sep 2010, 15:49

Re: t1 veh factory change , Samson ??

Post by Johannes » 29 Jun 2011, 20:53

To beat someone pushing with his samsons and comm, just make stumpies or rockos and push with your comm. Don't try hlt, just attack him with full force. Just don't lose units (dgun or otherwise), but keep repairing. If he has janus it gets trickier but that's just natural, it's harder for core/slashers though.

Actually what can core veh even do vs bots on a map like geyser now? Mass raiders? That's not very good but other options seem worse.
0 x

HectorMeyer
Posts: 181
Joined: 13 Jan 2009, 11:20

Re: t1 veh factory change , Samson ??

Post by HectorMeyer » 29 Jun 2011, 22:35

Samson dynamics on DSD:

1. Samsons are built early as a counter to LLTs and Commander + dgun. Think about it, it is really the only reason. If the Commander would be removed, players would make Flash or Stumpies as their first army. Stumpies, Flash in small numbers can't do anything against LLT and dgun, while a few Samsons + Commander can put pressure on the enemy Commander effectively.

2. HLTs are added to protect position gains. Because Samsons can still hit HLTs relatively safe from a distance, often more Samsons are added. This makes sense, since adding a few more Samsons (especially when they are protected by own HLTs) is more effective for putting pressure on enemy HLTs than adding a few Stumpies or Flash, which would just get roasted when sent forward alone. In case more HLTs are added, it is often done to protect against anticipated Stumpy attacks, not against the Samsons.

3. Game shifts to Stumpies. If the frontlines are exceptionally resistant, T1 artillery, Guardians, or the first t2 units take care of that. The first frontlines fall, the game gets more open and mobile again, and Samsons are reduced to outdated cannon fodder. No unit outdates as hard like Samsons - well, maybe also the crappy T1 bombers,

To sum it up, what we get is some early fortifying supported by essentially weak "archer type" units, which then gets broken up inevitably after a while by a shift to tank like units. This is a good thing, because it helps the game to develop. What would be the alternative? The widely considered broken sea game, which is considered broken because of the early lack of defense options and being decided very early. What we have is good design, dynamics, and strategic options. I fail to see the design error in that. Yes, the Samson wears many hats, but the biggest hat is that he is an essentially weak unit with pathetic DPS. I really feel that hating Samsons is just flavor of the month, after hating on stumpies and flash, which also were accused of being "spammed" making the game "boring"

What I outlined is of course just one possible way the game can develop, of course you can also try some risky strategies like assasinate the enemy comm quickly with early flash spam. Keep in mind that different strategies are mostly the results of a certain skill disparity though.

It's a bit sad that these dynamics aren't appreciated or even understood by some BA maintainers.

I don't even want to comment on the other changes (fighters, 3rd Vulcan buff in a row (why didn't the Vulcan get the range nerf instead of Bertha?)). Best practice would really be to roll back all gameplay changes since 7.31 and then try a more sensible approach for solving balance problems.
0 x

User avatar
Pxtl
Posts: 6112
Joined: 23 Oct 2004, 01:43

Re: t1 veh factory change , Samson ??

Post by Pxtl » 29 Jun 2011, 22:50

No unit outdates as hard like Samsons
T1 Arty... well, if it were useful in the first place.
0 x

User avatar
sillynanny
Posts: 125
Joined: 20 Jun 2008, 14:26

Re: t1 veh factory change , Samson ??

Post by sillynanny » 30 Jun 2011, 15:12

You can _nuke_ a Vulcan that is still under construction and it survives to be finished by a new batch of cons.
0 x

User avatar
Pxtl
Posts: 6112
Joined: 23 Oct 2004, 01:43

Re: t1 veh factory change , Samson ??

Post by Pxtl » 30 Jun 2011, 15:53

sillynanny wrote:You can _nuke_ a Vulcan that is still under construction and it survives to be finished by a new batch of cons.
Considering that you could have like 5 silos for the price of a vulcan, why stop at one shot?

Use moar noook.
0 x

Post Reply

Return to “Balanced Annihilation”