General Weapon Refinery discussion/speculation/creation thread

[Anacybele]

Oh yeah, now that Freddy is FINALLY getting his turn at a prf and refine, I'm hoping for Silas next!

[Ice Dragon]

9 hours ago, MasterSlayerX said:

Looking at these I agree . Il rethink Hawkeye . +8 def and res sounds better for Gunter . Canas could always have a ability that lets his specials drain a % of life or for his regular attacks to drain a % of life based on the damage he deals . Rebecca ballista the only reason I said limited ammo was to prevent a soft lock if a AI somehow got into a situation of moving away from a armoured unit and with Rebecca’s strength was dealing no damage it would be a infinite loop without a fail safe . Would be more than 3 shots and it would only impact the max 3 range shots so eventually it could unsoft lock itself if that situation ever happened and the armor unit would be able to fight . I would say maybe take the -1 move but prevent the unit able to travel in forests and prehaps If not a limit to ammo a super effective vs armored units may solve any chance of a lock 

Hawkeye is literally an infantry Sheena with low Spd and high mixed bulk. Any weapon effect he receives should enhance that role.

Due to the inability to dodge attacks in this game, self-healing is only viable in two cases: either the unit is extremely tanky and therefore only needs to heal off chip damage or the occasional strong attack or the unit heals an absurd amount of damage with each attack. Canas has 36/21/33 defenses, which are not high enough to count for the former case without significant team support, and healing large amounts of damage with each attack is something that I assume the development team wants to avoid.

Gunter's problem is that he is 12 points of stats behind current-generation melee cavalry. Adding +8 Def and Res would be okay from a simple numbers perspective except for the fact that his Res is trash and any points of Res short of ~20 or so added to it are basically wasted.

If the unit is going to use a ballista, they might as well just be implemented as an armored unit to begin with. The inheritable Beast weapons are already locked by movement type, so we already have precedent for movement-type-restricted weapons. There's no good reason to shoehorn in ballista mechanics into a weapon when it can just be implemented using the movement type.

 

5 hours ago, Jotari said:

I don't see them ever implementing three range weapons with the Heroes is set up, both in the UI and weapon types. If they're to implement traditional long range weapons then it'll probably just be regular two range weapons but with Savage Blow built in to represent splash damage.

The only long-ranged weapons with splash damage are the onager-type weapons. Ballistae do not deal splash damage.

 

1 hour ago, MilodicMellodi said:

At the very least, I feel like Poison Dagger+ needs to be bumped up to 12 Might in its refine and have the same basic options as other refines (HP+2 and either Atk+1, Spd+2, Def+3, or Res+3), and other weapon types should have access to anti-infantry options (naming them Venin would definitely be within the realm of possibility).

Now, I know I argued a long time ago that infantry was the weakest class in the game. That, however, was before infantry-exclusive skills were prevalent or even available. Infantry Pulse itself is widely known as the most busted of them, potentially granting a dedicated Infantry Emblem team's lowest HP unit in a defending Aether Raids battle full charge on their 5-cooldown special before they even move on Turn 1. They also have inheritance exclusivity to the Null Passives and Time's Pulse, three of the most versatile skills currently in the game. So I think it seems clear that Infantry needs to be taken down a notch, especially when there are a multitude of high-Might weapons that deal effective damage to the other movement types while there's only 1 single low-Might weapon to deal with the majority of available units.

No. Infantry might be stronger now, but having a 12-Mt weapon that deals effective damage to 215 of the game's 428 units (that's more than 50%) is absurd.

Null passives have the huge downside that they occupy the skill slot with the highest opportunity cost, and Null C-Disrupt is also plainly a niche skill.

Poison Dagger deserves to be forgotten. Infantry-effective weapons should not exist.

[XRay]

1 hour ago, Ice Dragon said:

No. Infantry might be stronger now, but having a 12-Mt weapon that deals effective damage to 215 of the game's 428 units (that's more than 50%) is absurd.

Doing effective damage against half the cast does not really matter if half the enemies we face on the battlefield are not even infantry to begin with. If fliers made up half the cast, I still would not consider bows to be overpowered since we only see maybe about 25% of the enemies being fliers.

I think what matters for Effective Weapons is whether or not you see the targeted class on the battlefield, not whether it affects a percentage of the cast. Most of the cast are benched and are not really worth utilizing, so I do not think factoring in benched units matters for the meta.

1 hour ago, Ice Dragon said:

Poison Dagger deserves to be forgotten. Infantry-effective weapons should not exist.

Infantry is in a good state right now. Putting in Refinable Poison Dagger is not going to suddenly push them down to oblivion. I would argue that it is a necessary check on infantry units since there is not much reason to use armor units anymore outside of scoring for first place in Arena or something.

[MilodicMellodi]

1 hour ago, Ice Dragon said:

Poison Dagger deserves to be forgotten. Infantry-effective weapons should not exist.

Nothing implemented into the game deserves to be forgotten. Especially not for some small excuse like that, since the other 213/428 units in the game have a plethora of high Might weapons dealing effective damage to them not just based on movement types but weapon types as well.

Edited October 1, 2019 by MilodicMellodi

[Jotari]

4 hours ago, Ice Dragon said:

Hawkeye is literally an infantry Sheena with low Spd and high mixed bulk. Any weapon effect he receives should enhance that role.

Due to the inability to dodge attacks in this game, self-healing is only viable in two cases: either the unit is extremely tanky and therefore only needs to heal off chip damage or the occasional strong attack or the unit heals an absurd amount of damage with each attack. Canas has 36/21/33 defenses, which are not high enough to count for the former case without significant team support, and healing large amounts of damage with each attack is something that I assume the development team wants to avoid.

Gunter's problem is that he is 12 points of stats behind current-generation melee cavalry. Adding +8 Def and Res would be okay from a simple numbers perspective except for the fact that his Res is trash and any points of Res short of ~20 or so added to it are basically wasted.

If the unit is going to use a ballista, they might as well just be implemented as an armored unit to begin with. The inheritable Beast weapons are already locked by movement type, so we already have precedent for movement-type-restricted weapons. There's no good reason to shoehorn in ballista mechanics into a weapon when it can just be implemented using the movement type.

 

The only long-ranged weapons with splash damage are the onager-type weapons. Ballistae do not deal splash damage.

 

No. Infantry might be stronger now, but having a 12-Mt weapon that deals effective damage to 215 of the game's 428 units (that's more than 50%) is absurd.

Null passives have the huge downside that they occupy the skill slot with the highest opportunity cost, and Null C-Disrupt is also plainly a niche skill.

Poison Dagger deserves to be forgotten. Infantry-effective weapons should not exist.

I don't know what you mean by onager weapons, but Ballistas dealt splash damage in Fates. And even if they didn't, I don't see that as a decent reason not to retool them to feature them in Heroes that way which wouldn't involve creating a whole new weapon type. I could buy siege tombs like Swarm and bolting doing splash damage too even if we never had anything resembling that in the main series. It's not like it breaks suspension of disbelief to think a giant thunder bolt could deal damage to things aside from its target.

[Ice Dragon]

11 hours ago, XRay said:

Doing effective damage against half the cast does not really matter if half the enemies we face on the battlefield are not even infantry to begin with. If fliers made up half the cast, I still would not consider bows to be overpowered since we only see maybe about 25% of the enemies being fliers.

I think what matters for Effective Weapons is whether or not you see the targeted class on the battlefield, not whether it affects a percentage of the cast. Most of the cast are benched and are not really worth utilizing, so I do not think factoring in benched units matters for the meta.

Infantry is in a good state right now. Putting in Refinable Poison Dagger is not going to suddenly push them down to oblivion. I would argue that it is a necessary check on infantry units since there is not much reason to use armor units anymore outside of scoring for first place in Arena or something.

I don't know about you, but about half the enemies I see are named one of Alm, Seliph, Ophelia, Corrin, Sonya, Lilina, or Sothe.

Infantry currently serves 2 important niches in the current meta, (1) glass cannon and (2) spiky tank. With a few beefier exceptions (Alm and Fury Sothe builds), the former dies to a counterattack from a stiff breeze where infantry-effective damage is less helpful than stacking more defensive stats to tank the hit, and the latter is a role that would cease to exist with the introduction of infantry-effective damage.

As infantry get beefier and more units receive dragon- or armor-effective damage, infantry will gain traction as the new tank class, and I personally want to see infantry actually succeed at doing so.

 

8 hours ago, Jotari said:

I don't know what you mean by onager weapons, but Ballistas dealt splash damage in Fates. And even if they didn't, I don't see that as a decent reason not to retool them to feature them in Heroes that way which wouldn't involve creating a whole new weapon type. I could buy siege tombs like Swarm and bolting doing splash damage too even if we never had anything resembling that in the main series. It's not like it breaks suspension of disbelief to think a giant thunder bolt could deal damage to things aside from its target.

Ballistae in every pre-Awakening game did only direct damage. I haven't played Awakening enough to encounter ballistae, and I haven't played any of the games after Awakening, so I can't say without actually looking things up. I can only assume that ballistae in Fates are just being weird, like most other weapons in that game.

Onagers are stone-throwing long-range map implacements usable by bows that deal undodgeable splash damage in exchange for not being effective against fliers.

[Fabulously Olivier]

As far as I'm concerned, Ballistas are our best shot at canon armored archers, and that's all they need to be.

[Diovani Bressan]

16 hours ago, Anacybele said:

Oh yeah, now that Freddy is FINALLY getting his turn at a prf and refine, I'm hoping for Silas next!

I don't expect Silas so soon. He is a Book 2 Hero, and we still are in Book 1 Heroes. But he is one of the Book 2 Heroes that needs a prf weapon, alongside Soleil, Rhajat, Shigure, Libra and Legault. I could add Nanna and Silvia in this list, but no prf staves yet, and since Olivia didn't get a prf yet, I don't expect Silvia to get her first than Olivia.

Also, these are the 4* Heroes. We still have Book 2 5* Heroes with no Prf Weapons, like both Kanas, Sumia and Female Morgan.

[Fabulously Olivier]

14 minutes ago, Diovani Bressan said:

I don't expect Silas so soon. He is a Book 2 Hero, and we still are in Book 1 Heroes. But he is one of the Book 2 Heroes that needs a prf weapon, alongside Soleil, Rhajat, Shigure, Libra and Legault. I could add Nanna and Silvia in this list, but no prf staves yet, and since Olivia didn't get a prf yet, I don't expect Silvia to get her first than Olivia.

Also, these are the 4* Heroes. We still have Book 2 5* Heroes with no Prf Weapons, like both Kanas, Sumia and Female Morgan.

Yeah. I wish they'd stop releasing new heroes with inheritable weapons only. It just makes more work for them later (or leads to a lot of forgettable units if that later never happens).

[Jotari]

1 hour ago, Etheus said:

Yeah. I wish they'd stop releasing new heroes with inheritable weapons only. It just makes more work for them later (or leads to a lot of forgettable units if that later never happens).

I wish they'd make inheritable weapons able to compete with prfs so I it's don't need prf weapons to stand out.

4 hours ago, Ice Dragon said:

I don't know about you, but about half the enemies I see are named one of Alm, Seliph, Ophelia, Corrin, Sonya, Lilina, or Sothe.

Infantry currently serves 2 important niches in the current meta, (1) glass cannon and (2) spiky tank. With a few beefier exceptions (Alm and Fury Sothe builds), the former dies to a counterattack from a stiff breeze where infantry-effective damage is less helpful than stacking more defensive stats to tank the hit, and the latter is a role that would cease to exist with the introduction of infantry-effective damage.

As infantry get beefier and more units receive dragon- or armor-effective damage, infantry will gain traction as the new tank class, and I personally want to see infantry actually succeed at doing so.

 

Ballistae in every pre-Awakening game did only direct damage. I haven't played Awakening enough to encounter ballistae, and I haven't played any of the games after Awakening, so I can't say without actually looking things up. I can only assume that ballistae in Fates are just being weird, like most other weapons in that game.

Onagers are stone-throwing long-range map implacements usable by bows that deal undodgeable splash damage in exchange for not being effective against fliers.

Well that's the way they do work in Fates. I'm aware they're single target in all the other games, but like I said, even if they were single target in every game I'd still think making them normal weapons with Savage Blow would be sensible way to approach them.

3 hours ago, Etheus said:

As far as I'm concerned, Ballistas are our best shot at canon armored archers, and that's all they need to be.

Makes sense, especially considering that's almost exactly what they were in the first game. But they've already released seasonal armoured bow units, so I'm not all that sure it'll happen. Beck and Jake also have other classes from New Mystery to default back on (and neither are all that popular as far as characters go).

[XRay]

6 hours ago, Ice Dragon said:

I don't know about you, but about half the enemies I see are named one of Alm, Seliph, Ophelia, Corrin, Sonya, Lilina, or Sothe.

I have not actually counted, but I feel like I see a relatively equal mix from all movement types, with infantry being a bit more common than others and armors being a bit less common than others. The most common team compositions I see are a hodgepodge mix, followed by cavalry line and flier balls. SK!Alm is relatively common, but I have not seen as much Pulse or Blazing mages as much lately.

I do not remember seeing much Seliph, DW!F!Corrin, or Sothe, although that might be because I do not have much trouble with them so I do not remember encountering them.

6 hours ago, Ice Dragon said:

 Infantry currently serves 2 important niches in the current meta, (1) glass cannon and (2) spiky tank. With a few beefier exceptions (Alm and Fury Sothe builds), the former dies to a counterattack from a stiff breeze where infantry-effective damage is less helpful than stacking more defensive stats to tank the hit, and the latter is a role that would cease to exist with the introduction of infantry-effective damage.

 As infantry get beefier and more units receive dragon- or armor-effective damage, infantry will gain traction as the new tank class, and I personally want to see infantry actually succeed at doing so.

I prefer armor units to remain as the preeminent tank class. If infantry becomes the new tanking class, there would basically be no more place for armor units. Armor units have a low mobility problem AND now a low combat performance problem. The mobility problem has always been there and is already bad enough, but now they also have to deal with no longer excelling in combat as infantry units now rivals armor in combat performance.

[Hilda]

36 minutes ago, XRay said:

I have not actually counted, but I feel like I see a relatively equal mix from all movement types, with infantry being a bit more common than others and armors being a bit less common than others. The most common team compositions I see are a hodgepodge mix, followed by cavalry line and flier balls. SK!Alm is relatively common, but I have not seen as much Pulse or Blazing mages as much lately.

I do not remember seeing much Seliph, DW!F!Corrin, or Sothe, although that might be because I do not have much trouble with them so I do not remember encountering them.

I prefer armor units to remain as the preeminent tank class. If infantry becomes the new tanking class, there would basically be no more place for armor units. Armor units have a low mobility problem AND now a low combat performance problem. The mobility problem has always been there and is already bad enough, but now they also have to deal with no longer excelling in combat as infantry units now rivals armor in combat performance.

low combat performance? with stuff like special/bold/vengefull? not really, of course you can counter those skills but you give up your own combat performance. Also less movement is not allways detrimental. For Defense teams in AR less movement means easier stacking of buffs, especially for Armor emblems.

[XRay]

3 hours ago, Hilda said:

low combat performance? with stuff like special/bold/vengefull? not really, of course you can counter those skills but you give up your own combat performance. Also less movement is not allways detrimental. For Defense teams in AR less movement means easier stacking of buffs, especially for Armor emblems.

Yes, low combat performance relative to others. Bold Fighter and Vengeful Fighter are good skills, but they are not that amazing anymore when infantry can achieve similar if not better performance with Blazing mages and Lunar Arc. On Enemy Phase, we got Seliph and BH!Ike. For dual phasing, Counter-Vantage got infantry covered and is vastly superior to dual phase armor units. Special Fighter is not that special, as the above Fighter skills are better at their respective phases and Counter-Vantage still outshines it for dual phasing.

On defense, armors are a joke. They still occasionally time me out, but 9 times out of 10 I steam roll them. Their movement is so slow that I can just pick them off one by one on Player Phase. No amount of stat stacking can save them from having their HP shaved off with Firesweep-Poison Strike and then be vulnerable to raw damage nukes.

[Fabulously Olivier]

So, with three (!) of my most desired weapon refines being knocked out all at once, I figured this was a good time to update my most desired weapon refines.

 

 

(1) Sigurd (and Seliph)

Divine Tyrfing

Res +3

Reduces damage of foe's first attack by 50%. (No longer just magic).

Guard 5

 

(2) Barst

Woodsman's Hatchet

Slaying

Lull Spd/Def 3

 

(3) Arvis/Saias

Valflame/Wargod's Tome

Atk Ploy 3

Res Ploy 3

Lull Spd/Res 3

 

(4) F Corrin

Breath of Fate

Slaying

Fury 3

Adaptive Damage

 

(5) Jakob 

Butler's Bootknife

Peshkatz + Bonus Doubler 3

 

(6) Sothe

Peshkatz + Slaying

 

(7) Ragnell/Gradivus/Alondite/Siegfried/Etc.

Just give them stat refines, with the addition of the Duel effect on all of these weapons. It would help Xander and Camus in particular.

 

[Hilda]

1 hour ago, Etheus said:

(7) Ragnell/Gradivus/Alondite/Siegfried/Etc.

Just give them stat refines, with the addition of the Duel effect on all of these weapons. It would help Xander and Camus in particular.

 

Or just release a an A-slot tier 4 skill that has 2-3 effects on it, one of them being a permanent slaying effect.

[Fabulously Olivier]

13 minutes ago, Hilda said:

Or just release a an A-slot tier 4 skill that has 2-3 effects on it, one of them being a permanent slaying effect.

That sounds like an awful idea, frankly, and it would hardly fix those specific outdated units. Unless you mean retroactively add it to them and only them, which doesn't seem to be on the table.

Edited October 3, 2019 by Etheus

[XRay]

1 hour ago, Etheus said:

(4) F Corrin

 Breath of Fate

Slaying

Fury 3

Adaptive Damage

Fury 3 forces her into a Player Phase/dual phase role. I think it would be fine it is Fury without the recoil so she can still tank; if Fury 3 without recoil is too strong, I guess they can do Fury 2 with no recoil to match M!Corrin's Refine.

[Fabulously Olivier]

5 minutes ago, XRay said:

Fury 3 forces her into a Player Phase/dual phase role. I think it would be fine it is Fury without the recoil so she can still tank; if Fury 3 without recoil is too strong, I guess they can do Fury 2 with no recoil to match M!Corrin's Refine.

Interesting thought. I was just thinking of something to patch her attack and keep her stats rounded. Perhaps Spectrum Bond would be more appropriate.

[XRay]

3 hours ago, Etheus said:

Interesting thought. I was just thinking of something to patch her attack and keep her stats rounded. Perhaps Spectrum Bond would be more appropriate.

Bonds just forces her into Enemy Phase though. You cannot Player Phase nor dual phase very well when you need to be glued to someone.

F!Corrin gets built a lot of different ways, so I think the less restrictions there are, the better it will accommodate her various play styles and builds.

[XRay]

Woops. Wrong topic.

Edited October 4, 2019 by XRay

[Ice Dragon]

10 hours ago, Etheus said:

(7) Ragnell/Gradivus/Alondite/Siegfried/Etc.

Just give them stat refines, with the addition of the Duel effect on all of these weapons. It would help Xander and Camus in particular.

I'd argue that Raijinto seriously needs an actual combat effect to be relevant. Ryoma's stats aren't well-suited for running enemy-phase builds, so it would help him out a lot to turn Raijinto into a dual-phase weapon instead. In particular, the Slaying effect would be nice to add to it.

Camus is the other unit that comes to mind who could use an actual combat effect. With Hardin no longer at the top of the heap for lance armors, I think it should be safe enough to not worry about breaking Hardin in the process.

 

17 hours ago, XRay said:

Yes, low combat performance relative to others. Bold Fighter and Vengeful Fighter are good skills, but they are not that amazing anymore when infantry can achieve similar if not better performance with Blazing mages and Lunar Arc. On Enemy Phase, we got Seliph and BH!Ike. For dual phasing, Counter-Vantage got infantry covered and is vastly superior to dual phase armor units. Special Fighter is not that special, as the above Fighter skills are better at their respective phases and Counter-Vantage still outshines it for dual phasing.

That's more of a case of Alm, Ophelia, Seliph, and Ike being broken as individual units, not infantry being good. All of them are good only because they have exclusive access to a skill that makes them and only them good. Only Infantry Pulse is a skill that is shared by infantry as a whole.

In contrast, Nagi and Grima would be good even without access to their exclusive weapons simply by having armor stat totals and access to armor-exclusive skills.

[XRay]

46 minutes ago, Ice Dragon said:

That's more of a case of Alm, Ophelia, Seliph, and Ike being broken as individual units, not infantry being good. All of them are good only because they have exclusive access to a skill that makes them and only them good. Only Infantry Pulse is a skill that is shared by infantry as a whole.

 In contrast, Nagi and Grima would be good even without access to their exclusive weapons simply by having armor stat totals and access to armor-exclusive skills.

On defense, Infantry Pulse alone is enough outclass all four Fighter skills, and any ranged infantry with decent Atk can be Pulsed to utilize Blazing and damage Specials. Fighter skills have a problem of being utterly useless because they are on units who cannot reach or threaten players effectively. Any player with a Player Phase team set up can bulldoze stall teams vast majority of the time.

On offense, there is no reason to even use armor when infantry can take the place of armor units. Trading a bit of BST for twice the movement is like a no brainer. A slight reduction in BST is not even going to matter once you factor in that players can force the AI to engage in unfavorable matchups, got access to Supports, and are better at utilizing buffs.

[Ice Dragon]

55 minutes ago, XRay said:

On defense, Infantry Pulse alone is enough outclass all four Fighter skills, and any ranged infantry with decent Atk can be Pulsed to utilize Blazing and damage Specials. Fighter skills have a problem of being utterly useless because they are on units who cannot reach or threaten players effectively. Any player with a Player Phase team set up can bulldoze stall teams vast majority of the time.

You almost never see more than 2 AoE Special skills on a defense team because it's difficult to get the HP spread to pull it off, meaning I really only see Ophelia and Sonya with that build. All other mages seem to use weaker Special skills that can be more easily tanked (since they affected by in-combat buffs, unlike AoE Special skills). I don't really know why because it should be pretty easy to fit 4 on a dedicated infantry team (5 infantry + Legendary Azura) if you have Ophelia and Sonya already, but... shrug.

The only thing that's keeping this team archetype afloat at all is the fact that Pulse Smoke has ass for availability.

In fact, I personally find Bold Fighter ranged armors (namely Cecilia and Flora) to be far more threatening than more than half of the Infantry Pulse teams I've run into. The team composition is rare, but particularly troublesome for me because unlike ranged infantry nukes not named Alm, ranged armor nukes don't just immediately roll over and die when you breathe on them. In fact, many of them don't even roll over and die when you breathe on them two or three times, either.

(And Bold Fighter ranged armors won't have a problem dealing with Pulse Smoke if they ever give us more sources of that skill.)

 

1 hour ago, XRay said:

On offense, there is no reason to even use armor when infantry can take the place of armor units. Trading a bit of BST for twice the movement is like a no brainer. A slight reduction in BST is not even going to matter once you factor in that players can force the AI to engage in unfavorable matchups, got access to Supports, and are better at utilizing buffs.

A slight reduction in defensive stats is very easily the difference between a win and a loss against Alm and Ophelia, and in Aether Raids, it is not always possible to force the AI to engage in unfavorable match-ups, namely when triggering the initial aggro.

Even without guaranteed Armor March (due to the need to avoid danced ranged units), low mobility for a few turns is not difficult to play around with some practice and the fact that Smite is a viable skill in Aether Raids. There's also the Guidance Sacred Seal, which is convenient because both of the current offense Mythic Heroes are fliers.

All I'm getting out of this part of the argument is that infantry have worse enemy-phase combat performance as a trade-off for more mobility, which contradicts the "armors have low combat performance" you made earlier that we are currently arguing with you about.

[XRay]

4 hours ago, Ice Dragon said:

In fact, I personally find Bold Fighter ranged armors (namely Cecilia and Flora) to be far more threatening than more than half of the Infantry Pulse teams I've run into. The team composition is rare, but particularly troublesome for me because unlike ranged infantry nukes not named Alm, ranged armor nukes don't just immediately roll over and die when you breathe on them. In fact, many of them don't even roll over and die when you breathe on them two or three times, either.

Player Phase teams can Dance/Sing-Reposition with impunity against armor teams. You do not need to kill armors in one hit as you can Firesweep them to lower health and then finish them off with a raw damage nuke. I find ranged armor easier to deal with because they have lower bulk in general so Counter-Vantage units make short work of them.

Against non-stall armor teams, armors are easy pickings. They lack sufficient Ward Armor stacking and they also lack Healing Tower support if they stray too far. Ones with Wary Fighter do not fare much better either since it does not protect the armor from one shot nukes.

Against stall armor teams, they can usually be broken up when you place something to the left or right of the armor ball as well as to the bottom of ball. Enemy armors will then attempt to chase both your units and break up. If the armor ball is not on a defense tile, you do not even need to break them up if you can overwhelm an armor's Def/Res.

 

4 hours ago, Ice Dragon said:

All I'm getting out of this part of the argument is that infantry have worse enemy-phase combat performance as a trade-off for more mobility, which contradicts the "armors have low combat performance" you made earlier that we are currently arguing with you about.

Armors have low combat performance relative to infantry. Armors are not worth using at all because infantry can match or surpass armor performance with twice their movement. Infantry have close to armors in performance without giving up mobility, and the latest infantry rivals armor in BST. And just having high BST does not mean a unit is guaranteed to have good combat performance.

[Fabulously Olivier]

At worst, armors have poor combat perfomance compared to the very best of infantry units (BIke, Ophelia, etc.). Not infantry units at large. Not infantry units as a whole. A few isolated infantry units.

 

And those few units do not justify, nor require an infantry effective weapon. Most infantry units are mediocre at best, and would be needlessly nerfed because of this. Those that are exceptional would rarely be substantially impacted by this. Ophelia's job doesn't get more difficult. She dies to a stray fart regardless. Brave Ike isn't going to take substantial damage from a dagger unit regardless and will chop their face off.