v3xt wrote:

topkilla wrote:The King is perfectly fine. The problem is with specialist stacking.

A lot of the ideas in here are way too complex. And they don't address the problem. Which is that the King's negative effect:

• In no way counters it's positive effect. (Unlike other specialists like the Tycoon and Minster of Energy)
• Doesn't stack in a meaningful way. Unlike the positive effect.

Instead of the King's negative effect removing 20 shields at each base, it should instead cut your supply cap by 25-50/King.

What are the negative effects of a Tycoon, other than having to lose your smuggler?

Tycoon and the Minster of Energy both decrease production by 1 each cycle. While their positive abilities increase overall production. (The Tycoon with speed and the Minster with +300 Energy) This makes stacking them possible, but not appealing. It also means that their Positive and Negative abilities are related.

Unlike the King, which increases each subs driller amount by 33% in each battle. The negative ability of giving each outpost -20 shields is in no way related to the free drillers killed. And since its rare to have a bases with more than 20 shields, the addition of more Kings comes with no additional negative perks.

topkilla wrote:Tycoon and the Minster of Energy both decrease production by 1 each cycle.

No, only minister has that. Tycoon locally increases production by 3, meaning he technically has no negative drawback.

In practice though, tycoon has a natural drawback in that he can't produce once he hits the cap, so stacking him is often pointless because solo tycoon will likely cap by himself. ...unless of course you have minister of energy or tinkerer with a big shield. Then stack your way to victory!

kevlargolem wrote:

topkilla wrote:Tycoon and the Minster of Energy both decrease production by 1 each cycle.

No, only minister has that. Tycoon locally increases production by 3, meaning he technically has no negative drawback.

In practice though, tycoon has a natural drawback in that he can't produce once he hits the cap, so stacking him is often pointless because solo tycoon will likely cap by himself. ...unless of course you have minister of energy or tinkerer with a big shield. Then stack your way to victory!

Hmm... I could have sworn that the Tycoon also produced +3 locally, and -1 driller/cycle globally +40% production rate. But it seems that I'm wrong and you're right. At least about the Tycoon not having a negative ability. Stacking Tycoons is an excellent strategy and I will be doing so now that I know they don't make you produce 1 less driller/cycle.

Stacking tycoons is fine if you have a plan to use those drills to avoid capping

Personally I can think of lots of uses for drills

6payh wrote:Stacking tycoons is fine if you have a plan to use those drills to avoid capping

Personally I can think of lots of uses for drills

All ur base belong to us!


I would like to point out that also:

Admiral is overpowered. Thanks!

Each addition in speed literally "shrinks the map"

With tactical positioning so important this is literally game breaking.

Perhaps have each admiral increase global speed by .3 or .2

yottawatts wrote:

6payh wrote:Stacking tycoons is fine if you have a plan to use those drills to avoid capping

Personally I can think of lots of uses for drills

All ur base belong to us!


I would like to point out that also:

Admiral is overpowered. Thanks!

Each addition in speed literally "shrinks the map"

With tactical positioning so important this is literally game breaking.

Perhaps have each admiral increase global speed by .3 or .2

Dudddeee kings get used way more and you know it. Every game I'm in now has multi kings. If you don't have em then go home.

Also, there are similar specialists to admiral for less hires...helmsman/smuggler. Obviously it isn't global, but a lot of the time you only need the speed in a few strategic positions and 2 helmsmen do as much as 2 admirals for half the hires.

Admiral is OP, Tycoon is OP, King is OP, and... *drum roll* Minister of Energy is also OP. Engineers might also be OP, but I havnt experimented with them enough to say for sure.

So the take-away from this is basically that the promotioned specs are OP. The counter arguement to this is "well they take 2 hires, so they should be." It would take like 3 hires to make these specs in line with most of the non-promotable specs. Add to that the fact that they can be promoted away from the queen and most have a global effect (most single hires do not), and yes, they are easily stronger than the other single hires. The drawback for Admiral and Tycoon is that you must lose extremely useful single-hires in Smug and Nav, and the drawback for king is that Hypno is usually completely worthless for 18 hours.

But this is not a MOBA. You can't just choose any OP spec you want to dominate with every game. You must play the hand youre dealt. Its actually ok that the specs arnt perfectly balanced for this reason.

The King is different though. Not because King itself is so OP, but as discussed previously, the stacking is just ridiculous because the negative cant stack.

Now in creative writing, a person critiquing your work can very often hone in on the problem with great accuracy. However, the suggested soloution to that problem coming from anyone but the writer often feels totally wrong, even if the critiquer is a skilled writer themself. And even if the critiquer did manage to nail the solution perfectly, the writer never uses it because it is their brain child, they are the creator, and they dont want some other outsider intruding on that. I think game design is the same way.

So we can talk all day about solutions, but what is really important is that the problem is fully exposed and agreed on by the majority. I just hope the devs see it, agree... then they can come up with a solution that matches the brilliance in design that the other specs have.

kevlargolem wrote:Admiral is OP, Tycoon is OP, King is OP, and... *drum roll* Minister of Energy is also OP. Engineers might also be OP, but I havnt experimented with them enough to say for sure.

So the take-away from this is basically that the promotioned specs are OP. The counter arguement to this is "well they take 2 hires, so they should be." It would take like 3 hires to make these specs in line with most of the non-promotable specs. Add to that the fact that they can be promoted away from the queen and most have a global effect (most single hires do not), and yes, they are easily stronger than the other single hires. The drawback for Admiral and Tycoon is that you must lose extremely useful single-hires in Smug and Nav, and the drawback for king is that Hypno is usually completely worthless for 18 hours.

But this is not a MOBA. You can't just choose any OP spec you want to dominate with every game. You must play the hand youre dealt. Its actually ok that the specs arnt perfectly balanced for this reason.

The King is different though. Not because King itself is so OP, but as discussed previously, the stacking is just ridiculous because the negative cant stack.

Now in creative writing, a person critiquing your work can very often hone in on the problem with great accuracy. However, the suggested soloution to that problem coming from anyone but the writer often feels totally wrong, even if the critiquer is a skilled writer themself. And even if the critiquer did manage to nail the solution perfectly, the writer never uses it because it is their brain child, they are the creator, and they dont want some other outsider intruding on that. I think game design is the same way.

So we can talk all day about solutions, but what is really important is that the problem is fully exposed and agreed on by the majority. I just hope the devs see it, agree... then they can come up with a solution that matches the brilliance in design that the other specs have.

Agreed.
Besides, I get the sense that the devs don't have the time (or maybe the patience ) to read the forums anymore. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, devs.
Regardless, kevlargolem is absolutely right. We, as the consumers, have no clue how much there is behind the scenes. There's a great podcast (99% Invisible) that talks about how 99% of design is behind the scenes and that the consumer only sees that 1%. The devs certainly are the ones qualified to fix the problem, and we can only speculate as to what that is.

I'm kinda late to the party, I may be in the minority because I think he's balanced (In outpost mode). My reasoning is because I'm currently in an outpost game with 4 kings! Great right..?
Not really, during this time everyone has most of their specialists in one area. By the time I got the kings, most players nearby have sentries and princesses (Yes plural for both). A few players have at minimum 1 security chief. (Yes a few have more). Currently I can't gain any land at all. Not due to having enough power, but I lose 5-15% subs every 2 hours in transit ( Different players with overlapping sentries makes it much worse) and even if I do reach the target I have to consider shields and their specialists. Even if I do capture the target, I have to defend it which is almost almost impossible. Ironically I want an enemy to have a king, so then it will be easier to attack.

P.S. I think it's balanced in outpost mode! I'm not sure about regular (Mining) version.