Jump to content

Aether Raids General Thread


redlight
 Share

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Tree said:

@Anacybele

In all honesty, I miss when descriptions were simple and easy to memorize. I think they are trying to increase complexity through skills rather than map size (probably because this makes it easier to sell new units), but I'd much prefer a game with larger maps and simpler skills.

The problem with map size is that the movement ranges on units are too low to be usable on larger maps without increasing them, but that then runs into problems with skill effects and ranges that are tailored for our current, smaller movement ranges.

Imagine Rival Domains without the ability to teleport units from the spawn point to a forward base. It'd be virtually unplayable with infantry and armors.

 

For skill descriptions, they need to start using keywords instead of explaining everything in-line.

For example, Chaos Manifest could easily be shortened to "Res+3. If a 【penalty】 or a 【negative status effect】 is active on foe, grants Atk+6 during combat and unit makes a guaranteed follow-up attack." with a game option to show or hide keyword definitions after the effect description. (If the setting is set to "show", then you'd get the description underneath like with Gjallarbru or Sudden Panic.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 5.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

26 minutes ago, Ice Dragon said:

The word "debuff" normally refers to an adverse status effect of any kind. In Heroes, there are two different types of debuffs: "penalties", which are decreases to individual stats, and "negative status effects", which are things like Panic and Gravity. Both "penalty" and "negative status effect" are official terminology, whereas "debuff" is not officially used.

I think you're confusing "debuff" and "penalty" with each other.

Oh, really? I didn't know debuff wasn't actually an official term. Thanks for clarifying, that clears up even more confusion.

19 minutes ago, Tree said:

@Anacybele

In all honesty, I miss when descriptions were simple and easy to memorize. I think they are trying to increase complexity through skills rather than map size (probably because this makes it easier to sell new units), but I'd much prefer a game with larger maps and simpler skills.

Yeah, same here. Though I'd think that they do this because making bigger maps on a tiny phone screen isn't practical, especially for those such as myself that don't have the eye sight for it. I'm farsighted, so things up close are blurry, and you have to hold smaller screens closer to you. So if I have to hold it even CLOSER because of a bigger map making everything look smaller...yeah. This is the main reason I'm not as big on Rival Domains and GC as other modes. Those and VG are my least favorite modes.

EDIT: Ice Dragon's got a point about movement ranges too.

Edited by Anacybele
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, NekoKnight said:

Huh, interesting idea. A shame I don't have Special Fighter fodder. I suppose Winter Celica and/or Halloween Jakob could pull off that build but then I'm not sure if they'll survive Ophelia who is also a terror.

Yeah, Winter Cecilia is one of the stronger mega tanks for Astra, due to her naturally high res.

I know a few people who are planning to use the build below for one shot counters (just add 10 or 15 hp/def onto it to account for the Nagas present)
Unfortunately it's incredibly expensive, requiring not only Special Fighter, but also DD4 or Fort Def/Res and Pulse Smoke if you want her to hard counter the annoying IP teams.
 

Spoiler

Screenshot_2019-06-04_013202.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NekoKnight said:

On topic again. Do any of you fine folks have a good counter to L!Alm? Maybe I'm just too lazy to number crunch but he rofl stomps my 'super' tank and I don't really know how to deal with him besides praying I'm not in range of his attack and hope to kill him on player phase (not easy with dancer shenanigans).  TA Gronraven user?

Oh... right. In addition to the list I posted earlier, there's also Distant Counter + Vantage Ares, though you'd need either Velouria or Quickened Pulse + Ostia's Pulse to get Bonfire pre-charged (and then step on a Bolt Trap).

Or you can just hit someone and get hit back to charge Bonfire and ready Vantage if you can do so safely.

Edited by Ice Dragon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NekoKnight said:

On topic again. Do any of you fine folks have a good counter to L!Alm? Maybe I'm just too lazy to number crunch but he rofl stomps my 'super' tank and I don't really know how to deal with him besides praying I'm not in range of his attack and hope to kill him on player phase (not easy with dancer shenanigans).  TA Gronraven user?

I use my Vantage Jeorge. Parthia's refine and fierce stance usually gives me enough attack to one shot him. And since Jeorge isn't an actual tank anyways, if he's full hp he can take a hit then kill him with the counter. If he's running HB though your best bet is to smite into a player phase kill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NekoKnight said:

On topic again. Do any of you fine folks have a good counter to L!Alm? Maybe I'm just too lazy to number crunch but he rofl stomps my 'super' tank and I don't really know how to deal with him besides praying I'm not in range of his attack and hope to kill him on player phase (not easy with dancer shenanigans).  TA Gronraven user?

SAME I need this!

All i've been able to think up is have bowbreaker on of your units, I have that on Aversa to counter Surtr.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Michelaar said:

SAME I need this!

All i've been able to think up is have bowbreaker on of your units, I have that on Aversa to counter Surtr.

Most Alms will stick with their default B skill which will ignore Bowbreaker, and his high Spd means most units are assured a double, which even tanky units can't handle. That same high Spd does sometimes work against him if it makes him the target of Chill Spd, which can allow a fast unit to either bait or get the jump on him without threat.

An important AI thing to note about Alm is that his bow pretty much guarantees that he will always take the shot when he can, even if he has the option to Rally someone instead. This is due to the 5-damage rule, which means that as long as the battle forecast reads at least 5 damage on his end (regardless of whether or not he actually gets to do 5 damage), he'll attack over Rallying. What works great about this is that if you've got Panic and other debuffs on him, you don't have to worry about him using his turn on Rally, getting Dance'd, and then taking a fully buffed shot, which is something most players set up with Ophelia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Ice Dragon said:

Imagine Rival Domains without the ability to teleport units from the spawn point to a forward base. It'd be virtually unplayable with infantry and armors.

I actually think Rival Domain size maps (without the teleportation) would be more fun even with infantry and armors. The turn limit is the main reason lower movement isn't very viable on Rival Domains currently. Larger maps could really shine if they didn't always have a turn limit and featured additional objectives.

43 minutes ago, Anacybele said:

Yeah, same here. Though I'd think that they do this because making bigger maps on a tiny phone screen isn't practical, especially for those such as myself that don't have the eye sight for it. I'm farsighted, so things up close are blurry, and you have to hold smaller screens closer to you. So if I have to hold it even CLOSER because of a bigger map making everything look smaller...yeah. This is the main reason I'm not as big on Rival Domains and GC as other modes. Those and VG are my least favorite modes. 

Some simple scrolling could work and would allow everything to be regular sized rather than shrunk. I think two Rival Domain maps side by side would be a nice size. Even two regular maps side by side would be really nice and would only require horizontal scrolling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Anacybele said:

They are not debuffs. Stat debuffs are the only real debuffs. A unit's stats don't change when triangle advantage changes or movement changes. They can still attack and defend with the same strength as before. That does not sound at all like a debuff. They should be referred to as status changes, not debuffs. If they want a weapon or skill to affect both debuffs and status changes, then by all means. Just make that clear.

So this is bad game design.

I’m not trying to shit on you here for the sake of it, since I have seen the rest of the conversation. As you said, you tried improving on admitting when you were wrong and you did so right here, so good on you for recognizing your own improvements. 

Just wanted to add that though debuffs are not an official term, the community uses it in a all encompassing way, and I’d like to clarify why. 

You said triangle adept didn’t change stats and neither did movement since they could attack and defend with the same strength as before. That is not true however. Movement is tied to a value of one, two and three, so gravity would reduce the movement stat of a unit. We consider this a debuff.

Triangle adept status does not  affect stat, but is does affect calculations in battle, so the affect does change the outcome of battle. Trilemma can also work in your favor, but when you are afflicted it usually bites you in the ass in AR. So though no stats change, battles doe change, which is why the community refers to it as a debuff.

 

It’s like the ‘all cows are animals but not all animals are cows’

’all penalties are debuffs but not all debuffs are penalties’ (since we also refer to status effects as such on SF and other feh related sites)

same as ‘all status effects are debuffs, but not all debuffs are status effects.’

‘Debuff’ is just easier to say than ‘penalties and status effects’ all the time since the game pretty much always combines them when explaining what skill x does.

I hope that clarifies why we use the term ‘debuff’ =]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Tree said:

I actually think Rival Domain size maps (without the teleportation) would be more fun even with infantry and armors. The turn limit is the main reason lower movement isn't very viable on Rival Domains currently. Larger maps could really shine if they didn't always have a turn limit and featured additional objectives.

It generally takes a full 2 or 3 turns just to move a 2-movement unit from the spawn point to the closest camp.

The current Rival Domains map has your fortress and camp 6 squares away from each other. Your fortress and your opponent's camp are also 6 squares away from each other. Your fortress is 10 squares away from your opponent's fortress.

Normal maps may have comparable differences between your units and your opponent's units, but enemy units move, whereas enemy structures do not. An enemy 6 squares away from you with 2 movement and melee reach can be baited from only 3 squares away.

 

Also, how often do you try to capture an enemy camp with melee units in a single turn (especially if there are existing enemies around the camp)? Getting a surround on a camp is difficult with 2-movement melee units, especially with all of the terrain that exists to make it hard for you to do so (and even more so if the enemy can attack with the same action as teleporting), and getting a unit to stand on the camp to defend it afterwards is even worse if you cannot teleport to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ice Dragon said:

It generally takes a full 2 or 3 turns just to move a 2-movement unit from the spawn point to the closest camp.

The current Rival Domains map has your fortress and camp 6 squares away from each other. Your fortress and your opponent's camp are also 6 squares away from each other. Your fortress is 10 squares away from your opponent's fortress. 

Normal maps may have comparable differences between your units and your opponent's units, but enemy units move, whereas enemy structures do not. An enemy 6 squares away from you with 2 movement and melee reach can be baited from only 3 squares away.

 

Also, how often do you try to capture an enemy camp with melee units in a single turn (especially if there are existing enemies around the camp)? Getting a surround on a camp is difficult with 2-movement melee units, especially with all of the terrain that exists to make it hard for you to do so (and even more so if the enemy can attack with the same action as teleporting), and getting a unit to stand on the camp to defend it afterwards is even worse if you cannot teleport to it.

Those observations are correct, but I was mainly referring to Rival Domain size maps, rather than Rival Domains itself. There wouldn't necessarily be camps, fortresses, or any structures at all (at least not in the Rival Domains sense). The idea was that larger maps would be useful for more story based content like: the retelling of major events from past games, alternate outcomes, off-screen events, or even just for the current main story.

Larger maps would take a few more turns, but the team size in Heroes is relatively small (1-8) compared to traditional games so turns would still go fairly quickly. It would be significantly shorter than a traditional scenario from a main game, but could take 2-3 times longer than many other Heroes maps.

I don't think larger maps would work well for competitive modes like AR or Arena though, because players have to complete those types of maps repeatedly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Tree said:

Those observations are correct, but I was mainly referring to Rival Domain size maps, rather than Rival Domains itself. There wouldn't necessarily be camps, fortresses, or any structures at all (at least not in the Rival Domains sense). The idea was that larger maps would be useful for more story based content like: the retelling of major events from past games, alternate outcomes, off-screen events, or even just for the current main story.

Larger maps would take a few more turns, but the team size in Heroes is relatively small (1-8) compared to traditional games so turns would still go fairly quickly. It would be significantly shorter than a traditional scenario from a main game, but could take 2-3 times longer than many other Heroes maps.

I don't think larger maps would work well for competitive modes like AR or Arena though, because players have to complete those types of maps repeatedly.

Moving across terrain to reach the next objective is still easy to turn into a chore, though. Most main-series maps are comprised of groups of enemies that just stand still until you either pass a certain point on the map or, even worse, until you actually move into their threat range, and both of these result in you having to spend turns just moving to reach the next group of enemies after you clear each one.

What could be done as one giant map with multiple objectives could just as easily be done as a series of small maps, each one covering a single objective. Chain mode mechanics could be used for sequential objectives, and assault mode mechanics could be used for parallel objectives, and you could skip all of the moving around getting to the next objective.

 

The most common map type that involves enemies that will actually move towards you on their own is defense maps, which I don't think work particularly well in Heroes due to the combat mechanics. It would basically end up as Relay Defense without the relay, and you'd either be able to hold out indefinitely because you have an impervious tank or you'd be crushed by overwhelming numbers because your tank can't handle enough rounds of combat during a single turn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ice Dragon said:

Moving across terrain to reach the next objective is still easy to turn into a chore, though. Most main-series maps are comprised of groups of enemies that just stand still until you either pass a certain point on the map or, even worse, until you actually move into their threat range, and both of these result in you having to spend turns just moving to reach the next group of enemies after you clear each one.

Putting a couple of the current size maps together wouldn't really be giant, but I get your point. The real advantage to larger maps is the freedom to tackle objectives in any order. In the absence of larger maps, it would be nice if some scenario branching options were available to simulate taking different routes to get to the same location. This would need HP/special charge, etc. to be brought over from the previous scenario in order to effectively link the maps together. You can somewhat accomplish this by playing the story out of order, but there is no continuity from the previous map. (This would also improve re-playability which would be a welcome change considering how many times they want us to repeat each map through the various story difficulties, quest rewards, and Chain Challenges.)

2 hours ago, Ice Dragon said:

What could be done as one giant map with multiple objectives could just as easily be done as a series of small maps, each one covering a single objective. Chain mode mechanics could be used for sequential objectives, and assault mode mechanics could be used for parallel objectives, and you could skip all of the moving around getting to the next objective.

I like the continuity that Chain Challenges and TTs provide with HP/special charge carry-over. Individual objectives could fit well within that. I'm not sure what you mean by "assault mode mechanics could be used for parallel objectives." It sounds interesting, but I don't fully understand it.

2 hours ago, Ice Dragon said:

The most common map type that involves enemies that will actually move towards you on their own is defense maps, which I don't think work particularly well in Heroes due to the combat mechanics. It would basically end up as Relay Defense without the relay, and you'd either be able to hold out indefinitely because you have an impervious tank or you'd be crushed by overwhelming numbers because your tank can't handle enough rounds of combat during a single turn. 

My biggest issue with Relay Defense was actually the relay portion. It took too much team planning. 🙂

Before Aether Raids was announced I was really hoping for a scenario editor. AR in its current implementation doesn't leave much room to have fun with design without sacrificing summoning currency. You either have to create a decent defense or leave some mythic/blessed units permanently placed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Tree said:

I'm not sure what you mean by "assault mode mechanics could be used for parallel objectives." It sounds interesting, but I don't fully understand it.

Squad Assault and Arena Assault where you cannot deploy units that you already deployed in a previous map. For example, if the story requires you to capture fortresses A and B, but they are in different directions, they could have one map to capture fortress A and a separate map to capture fortress B, but restrict you from using the same units as you used in the previous map.

Obviously, they'd also be able to use chain mechanics for additional objectives beyond fortresses A and B using your existing teams you brought to those maps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GG, Snowdust, Spring Breeze, and Abandoned Castle are to be nerfed in the next update. No more or reduced unbreakable wall + defense fortress blockades/chokepoints.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It took them way too long to realize that unbreakable walls too close to other impassable terrain or the edge of the map are too easy to wall off sections of the map completely with a fortress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spoiler

3VpYyYC.png

So uh, is there a reason / in-joke I should know about that explains the presence of this unarmed summer Xander?

Regardless, Deathea took great pleasure or maybe it was just me in feasting on this Eirika Emblem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Tybrosion said:
  Reveal hidden contents

3VpYyYC.png

So uh, is there a reason / in-joke I should know about that explains the presence of this unarmed summer Xander?

Regardless, Deathea took great pleasure or maybe it was just me in feasting on this Eirika Emblem.

Self insert maybe?

5 hours ago, Hilda said:

not fond of the defense nerfs. All I am reading is: please summon dark and anima mythics. there is no legit defense map left

I haven’t invested into a defense team yet, and now I probably won’t bother. It’s way too expensive and people in high tier AR will just wipe me if my defense is less than perfect.

Duma is finally useful for something

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the upside, the wall nerfs means it's more difficult for IP teams to safely hide their squishy units in the back. On the downside, it affects everyone else too, besides flier balls which didn't really care about walling off a section. But yeah it does feels like a subtle message 'go burn orbs for 2 Dumas/2 Yunes if you don't have incredibly deep pockets to invest the highest power skills on defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Ice Dragon said:

Squad Assault and Arena Assault where you cannot deploy units that you already deployed in a previous map. For example, if the story requires you to capture fortresses A and B, but they are in different directions, they could have one map to capture fortress A and a separate map to capture fortress B, but restrict you from using the same units as you used in the previous map.

Obviously, they'd also be able to use chain mechanics for additional objectives beyond fortresses A and B using your existing teams you brought to those maps.

Ah, OK. That sounds interesting especially with the divergence options. It actually makes sense that you would have to use a different team since the other party had been sent in a different direction. Maybe they'll implement something like that someday.

I don't think the new AR changes do all that much, but they certainly aren't bad changes. I hope that swapping to work on a different defense map doesn't automatically make it the default defending map. I don't want to get attacked without a mythic present while designing a completely different map.

2 minutes ago, Azuni said:

On the upside, the wall nerfs means it's more difficult for IP teams to safely hide their squishy units in the back. On the downside, it affects everyone else too, besides flier balls which didn't really care about walling off a section. But yeah it does feels like a subtle message 'go burn orbs for 2 Dumas/2 Yunes if you don't have incredibly deep pockets to invest the highest power skills on defense.

As expensive as they are in resources, defensive mythics do greatly reduce AR stress for casual players. I guess those on top didn't really value defensive mythics, so no one was trying to merge them like the offensive ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Azuni said:

It does feels like a subtle message 'go burn orbs for 2 Dumas/2 Yunes if you don't have incredibly deep pockets to invest the highest power skills on defense.

Assuming the defense Mythic heroes themselves were actually good (they aren’t) then it’s more efficient to pull for one or two copies than investing lots of feathers and orbs into a defense team with no Mythic.

The problem with these Mythics is that neither mesh well with common defense team archetypes. Duma on a defense team, for example, guarantees you will lose to anyone that attacks you. Yune is a bit better but she isn’t amazing outside of a heavily-invested flier ball.

In my case, I have a copy of Duma while I was rolling for Naga on the mythic banner. Since I’m just getting started with AR it’s better to invest in my offense team than my defense. In the latter I just throw Duma in there and assume I will lose against anyone that attacks me. As long as I do well in my offense matches the lift loss shouldn’t be a problem.

In short, between pulling a defense Mythic and having no defense team or making a perfect, likely very expensive defense team without a Mythic, I’d take the former.

Edited by MrSmokestack
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Tree said:

As expensive as they are in resources, defensive mythics do greatly reduce AR stress for casual players. I guess those on top didn't really value defensive mythics, so no one was trying to merge them like the offensive ones.

 

Just now, MrSmokestack said:

Assuming the defense Mythic heroes themselves were actually good (they aren’t) then it’s more efficient to pull for one or two copies than investing lots of feathers and orbs into a defense team with no Mythic.

The problem with these Mythics is that neither mesh well with common defense team archetypes. Duma on a defense team, for example, guarantees you will lose. Yune is a bit better but she isn’t amazing outside of a heavily-invested flier ball.

Even some of the other top rankers I hang out with use double Yune/Duma setups, so it's not limited to casual players (although most of them didn't invest more than a few merges in either).

You'd be surprised how well Duma works, he gels perfectly with small-scale IP/pseudo-IP units that benefit from boosting attack (Ophelia, Lilina, etc). Outside of Witchy Wand/Pulse Smoke/Bride Fjorm support or specific strats like Galeforce, this kind of setup usually generates some kills. The aforementioned top rankers I know typically pick up 1-2 kills or better, which is a -20 def loss at worst. A full success is actually unfavorable since then you don't get a free rematch against a weaker opponent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, MrSmokestack said:

Duma on a defense team, for example, guarantees you will lose to anyone that attacks you.

That's only the case if you're too lazy, poor, or unlucky to actually build Duma (or his teammates) to do something, which is the case with pretty much every unit in the game aside from a few that actually come pre-built with a near-optimal build (Surtr, Alm, Azura, etc.).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...