please NERF the king

Strategy, feedback, or anything SUBTERFUGE-related
Sat Dec 26, 2015 2:27 pm

  • I know that the king is one of the most beloved specialists, and that this wont be popular, but the king needs a nerf. Its too powerful. I am not going to belabor you with details or a prolonged explanation of why the King is overpowered. I think the proof comes from its overuse in games. In the recent TET final, there were 8 kings in the game and the results of every battle hinged on hoe many kings one player had at that time. I was in the holiday tournament final and 2 players had 3 kings. The game became boring because I got three kings relatively early, and no one else could really even touch me.

    I suggest decreasing the ability to destroy 1 driller for every 4 of the players driller and then going from there.
    connor3491
     
    Posts: 116
    Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2015 6:10 am

Sat Dec 26, 2015 4:29 pm

  • I think it's the stacking which makes the King seemed OP, not the King himself.
    There have been propositions in the past about turning the second Hypnotist into a Duke or Prince or something like that which will reduce the nerf, and I would support that, but the King himself is a balanced specialist.
    Reporting from the Bridge
    User avatar
    pandasecret
     
    Posts: 648
    Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2015 3:53 am

Sat Dec 26, 2015 4:33 pm

  • I am not 100% on the topic because that kind of King heavy gameplay is not all too common and usually only occurs very late in the game. You can nip these plays in the bud by getting to mining early on rather than drawing out military conquest.

    However that aside I think the primary problem with the king is the stacking effects, maybe the second King is a 4-1 driller damage and the next is 5-1 etc.
    pgroot
     
    Posts: 24
    Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2015 1:18 pm

Sat Dec 26, 2015 7:51 pm

  • I agree that the positive stacking effect (the number of drillers destroyed per 3 drillers that you have) cannot be balanced by the negative stacking (-20 to shield). I think a good solution (although perhaps complex to implement) would be to have the possibility of negative shield. So, say if a player had 3 kings, a heavy shielded generator would have -40 shield. After 48 hours, the shield would reach min charge (-40). What would happen on combat of an outpost would be that the shield at the outpost becomes the 'shield' of the sub that is attacking the outpost. So then the sub would have 40 'shield' which would have to be destroyed before the drillers at the outpost could touch the drillers on sub. Of course, if the sub arrived when the outpost only had a -26 shield charge, then the sub would have 26 shield. The infiltrator would probably be useful for the player with the kings as it would destroy 20 'shield' from the sub, etc. A player cannot deactivate a negative shield charge.

    EDIT: I forgot to mention that unused sub shield charges the outpost shield accordingly IF the enemy takes control of that outpost. So suppose a player had 2 kings, and one of the outposts was at -18 shield. If he had 12 drillers there, and an attacking sub had a lieutenant and 6 drillers, the outpost would be taken and would have a lieutenant and 8 shield.
    Last edited by tw2000 on Sat Dec 26, 2015 10:52 pm, edited 3 times in total.
    Kings aren't OP

    "Imagination is more important than knowledge"
    ----Albert Einstein
    User avatar
    tw2000
     
    Posts: 1135
    Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 3:52 pm
    Location: New Zealand

Sat Dec 26, 2015 8:16 pm

  • Yeah, I think that a "negative" shield does a lot to balance the king too.
    "Can I make a suggestion that doesn't involve violence, or is this the wrong crowd for that?" -Hoban 'Wash' Washburn, Serenity
    User avatar
    roadkiehl
     
    Posts: 777
    Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2015 12:43 pm
    Location: Above It All

Sat Dec 26, 2015 8:22 pm

  • Hm. I personally don't love the negative shield but I do like the idea of diminishing returns on king stacks. There would be less and less of a benefit after two kings. I'm also on board with my idea of just decreasing the ration from 1-3 to 1-4.

    I'm glad that people realize that the king is OP. I also wanna say that I love the king and use it often. I just feel that it's too strong and actually discourages the use of other specialists that can make for more interesting and innovative games.
    connor3491
     
    Posts: 116
    Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2015 6:10 am

Sat Dec 26, 2015 8:37 pm

  • The only problem I have with the idea of negative shields is the fact that you would start to feel the negative shield even if you only have one king. Many bases only have a shield of ten, and the king diminishes all shields by 20, so your first king would already get you into negative trouble. At that point the king's disadvantages become worse than his advantage. However, I do agree that king stacking does seem to be a very dominant strategy and may need to be adjusted.
    Zyxe? Now that is a name I haven't heard in a long time.
    User avatar
    zyxe
     
    Posts: 833
    Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2015 10:12 am

Sat Dec 26, 2015 8:39 pm

  • zyxe wrote:The only problem I have with the idea of negative shields is the fact that you would start to feel the negative shield even if you only have one king. Many bases only have a shield of ten, and the king diminishes all shields by 20, so your first king would already get you into negative trouble. At that point the king's disadvantages become worse than his advantage. However, I do agree that king stacking does seem to be a very dominant strategy and may need to be adjusted.

    That's very true...
    I will say, though: back in the beta days, everyone said that about the king as it is today. It was only after the exhibition game that people started hiring kings often.
    "Can I make a suggestion that doesn't involve violence, or is this the wrong crowd for that?" -Hoban 'Wash' Washburn, Serenity
    User avatar
    roadkiehl
     
    Posts: 777
    Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2015 12:43 pm
    Location: Above It All

Sat Dec 26, 2015 8:45 pm

  • I will say that I would want the negative shield simply to boost the infiltrator. It would be nice if he got his full usage by dropping shields into the negative when he attacks a not fully-charged shield or someone who has a king so he has no shield. The infiltrator needs all the love he can get.
    Zyxe? Now that is a name I haven't heard in a long time.
    User avatar
    zyxe
     
    Posts: 833
    Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2015 10:12 am

Sat Dec 26, 2015 9:30 pm

  • I've had a guy go for double king in 6 of my 8 games I'm currently in

    A negative shield seems like a pretty awkward and hard to understand concept for players don't ya think? I mean I still see people derping around when it comes to stuff like double agents- A pretty straight forward specialist, Kill drillers, swap specialists whenever in a fight.

    I really do think Diminishing returns might be a way to go, and I did bring up a Duke or Prince in a later post (essentially a king with a local effect instead of global with a few other minor perks).

    I feel that every other specialist has a kind of obvious counter, but Kings are just a pain in arse to deal with. Many specialist combos can be dealt with a single hire at times- For every specialist there is a another specialist that more or less counters it
    Queen Hunter- Smuggler, Pirates, Reverend Elders
    General Diplomat- Assassins
    Security Chief- Infiltrator
    Local effect Specialists- Assassins, Reverend Elders, Double Agents

    But the double King? Pray to God for cooperation of everyone or become his waifu.
    "Nobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. We're all going to die. Come watch TV."
    User avatar
    janitorialduties
     
    Posts: 550
    Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2015 1:27 pm
    Location: Idaho- USA

Next


Return to General




Information
  • Who is online
  • Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 25 guests
cron