Help us find a solution to the recent defence bonus changes

As you all know, the recent fix to make the city & defence line defence bonuses actually work had affected the game balance. We release that this had made some people unhappy and frustrated, hence the need to find some sort of solution.
So may I suggest that everyone posts their solution to this problem (nerfs/buffs/etc) or upvotes if someone's already proposed it? Please no offtopic or discussion here, just the proposals. Also make sure you've checked the existing ones first to avoid duplicates. Simply upvote if it's already been posted. I must stress that completely reverting the changes and reintroducing the bug back is not an option.

Also, please check out this thread first: http://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=21511

Cheers!

After this "PD-Nerf", everthing looks fine to me

) -1Def for PD infants.
) Undo the bug fix

Maybe not introduce the bug but set the inf bonuses in cities to 0 (to all). discuss HERE.

Add +1 attack to tanks infantries marines bombers destroyers and helicopters to offset the defence boost.(defence will be slightly stronger than it was originally).

Revamp RA as proposed on the modforum since it was never meant to be boosted to its current power in the first place(long overdue)

For Relentless Attack:

-1 attack +10 cost to tanks
+1 range and -50 cost to destroyers
+1 range and -30 cost to bombers
-10 cost to militia

If possible reduce infantry neutral defence from 7 to 6. The offence boost helps but this weakens countries which have infantry neutrals mainly to expand against.

This will restore some semblance of the previous balance we had, there will be still work needed.

For Perfect Defence (PD)
- 1 defence for infartries
+10 cost for infartries

Perfect defence is, well, perfect defence. I feel that the best solution is one that reduces PD's offensive capacity, not making PD's defence weaker.

-1 range to infantry, -1 range to tanks, +100 cost and -5 capacity to transports, +400 cost and -1 capacity to air transports will serve nicely.

Don't change anything

Perfect Defense

Militia
+1 City Defense Bonus
Infantry
-1 City Defense Bonus to equal 0 like when it was bugged.
+1 Defense bonus vs tanks to balance out RA some more indirectly

+1 attack of tanks against only infs for strats like gc ,ra , imp , hw
+1 attack of bombers against only infs in sm
+1 attack of helicopters against only infs in DS
+1 attack of stealth marines against only infs in mos and gw
+1 attack of destroyers against only infs in nc(this one I am not fully sure is required)
I have left out IF and lb since I don't feel they individually need nerf. Nerfing of pd makes no sense now since it wasn't boosted. Simply 1 bug was fixed.

Laos nerf to RA is too much, tanks should be strong in offence, nerf to 110 cost though, -2 range to inf, -1 range to tanks and remove 10 cost to mil, or instead of mil cost, -40 to bombers and destroyers and -1 defence.

Rebalancing in a sweep (a huge strat overhaul, keeping def as it is, is not a good idea), infs -1, and pd -1, -1 in city mil. Oh and remove bonus against tanks.

-1 defense bonus to standard infantries.

This would make the neutral infantries to return to the normality.

If not the above, then remove the 'bonus from cities' to both infantries and militias. We can always implement those bonus back after a discussion.

Wr1tt3n by clovis1122, 11.09.2015 at 08:50

-1 defense to standard infantries.

This would make the neutral infantries to return to the normality, while also Nerfing PD (they would have 8 defense, which is the value that most of the offensive units have). I believe this is the proposal that many of us supported in those threads.

i proposed that on the modforum, but unfortunately it affects 3 way battles. The other option is to remove city defence bonus, but amok said he wont do that, hence my proposal which is the only other viable option available.

and to those posting that the ra nerf is too much, if amok boosts default tanks offence, ra tanks will still have 9 attack which is plenty. Its not just pd vs ra we need to consider.

Wr1tt3n by clovis1122, 11.09.2015 at 08:52

If not the above, then remove the 'bonus from cities' to both infantries and militias. We can always implement those bonus back after a discussion.

Myself desu and chess sought this ^^. Before the defence changes there was an internal discussion on strat changes. The following had been agreed upon.

Great Combinator: +2 crit to infantry
Desert Storm: +1 range +1 defence to militia
Imperialist: - 10 cost to militia
Naval Commander: +3 capacity to destroyers.

For Relentless Attack:

Tanks: 8/4, 8 range, 100 cost (+1 range and -30 cost)
Destroyers: 8/7, +1 range, 200 cost (+1 range and -50 cost)
Bombers: 6/6, +1 range, 130 cost (+1 range and -30 cost)
Infantry: -1 defense, -1 defense bonus in city, -1 range

Overall:

+2 range to Anti-Air
-30 cost to stealth planes.(+30 to Master of stealth to balance)
-50 cost to sentry planes.

With the changes, the boosts to gc and ds are no longer necessary. The NC boost is a nice addition so should still be added. The imperialist boost will also be needed. Of all the strats, a defence boost hurts imperialist the most, since it had weak attack to begin with.

In my opinion, this is the best bet we have at rebalancing the strats, it's a mess at the moment. Offensive strats like gw mos sm and gc have all been crippled. Doing nothing is definitely not an option.

Wr1tt3n by clovis1122, 11.09.2015 at 09:33

Wr1tt3n by Permamuted, 11.09.2015 at 09:18

i proposed that on the modforum, but unfortunately it affects 3 way battles. The other option is to remove city defence bonus, but amok said he wont do that, hence my proposal which is the only other viable option available.

How does it affect 3 way battles?

I can see, however, how the current form affect expansions.

Wr1tt3n by Permamuted, 11.09.2015 at 09:18

and to those posting that the ra nerf is too much, if amok boosts default tanks offence, ra tanks will still have 9 attack which is plenty. Its not just pd vs ra we need to consider.

I won't post about RA here, but I highly disagree with those changes.

5 defence inf outside of cities, will affect att/def priority of combined stacks of ds helis/sm bombers and infantry.Also yea, inf outside cities dont need a nerf. Punishes moving troops into the open a little too much.

Wr1tt3n by Permamuted, 11.09.2015 at 09:42

inf outside of cities

Fixed.

Qu0t3:

Myself desu and chess sought this ^^. Before the defence changes there was an internal discussion on strat changes. The following had been agreed upon.

Great Combinator: +2 crit to infantry
Desert Storm: +1 range +1 defence to militia
Imperialist: - 10 cost to militia
Naval Commander: +3 capacity to destroyers.

For Relentless Attack:

Tanks: 8/4, 8 range, 100 cost (+1 range and -30 cost)
Destroyers: 8/7, +1 range, 200 cost (+1 range and -50 cost)
Bombers: 6/6, +1 range, 130 cost (+1 range and -30 cost)
Infantry: -1 defense, -1 defense bonus in city, -1 range

Overall:

+2 range to Anti-Air
-30 cost to stealth planes.(+30 to Master of stealth to balance)
-50 cost to sentry planes.

With the changes, the boosts to gc and ds are no longer necessary. The NC boost is a nice addition so should still be added. The imperialist boost will also be needed. Of all the strats, a defence boost hurts imperialist the most, since it had weak attack to begin with.

In my opinion, this is the best bet we have at rebalancing the strats, it's a mess at the moment. Offensive strats like gw mos sm and gc have all been crippled. Doing nothing is definitely not an option.

I would add -1 def for militia for ra also, and dest capacity is useless in my opinion. +2 critical could be added to gw militia and to gc inf to balance it out a bit

Wr1tt3n by International, 11.09.2015 at 05:45

Perfect defence is, well, perfect defence. I feel that the best solution is one that reduces PD's offensive capacity, not making PD's defence weaker.

-1 range to infantry, -1 range to tanks, +100 cost and -5 capacity to transports, +400 cost and -1 capacity to air transports will serve nicely.

this, but without taking away tansport capacity, and only +100 to ATs

Thanks for making this thread. I believe everything is fine now after the PD nerf.

Put everything back to the way it was before you fucked things up plz

Wr1tt3n by joedtaxi, 11.09.2015 at 11:02

Put everything back to the way it was before you fucked things up plz

I think you're forgetting how strong RA tanks (and most offensive units, but mainly RA) were before the bugfix, and how having that kind of bugs is a bad thing . The bug didn't happen 100% of the times which made some offensive units from some strats weaker than they should be compared to RA tanks, etc. I think the bug was related with the strats and units. Fixing the bug and compensating for it is better than reverting the bugfix imo. Now after the PD nerf and when some RA changes happen I believe it's gonna be fine.

Wr1tt3n by Guest, 11.09.2015 at 11:12

Wr1tt3n by joedtaxi, 11.09.2015 at 11:02

Put everything back to the way it was before you fucked things up plz

I think you're forgetting how strong RA tanks (and most offensive units, but mainly RA) were before the bugfix, and how having that kind of bugs is a bad thing . The bug didn't happen 100% of the times which made some offensive units from some strats weaker than they should be compared to RA tanks, etc. I think the bug was related with the strats and units. Fixing the bug and compensating for it is better than reverting the bugfix imo. Now after the PD nerf and when some RA changes happen I believe it's gonna be fine.

my main problem is the extra inf boost to neutrals if im honest i failed yesterday with 9 gc tanks vs 8 inf and 10 gw marines vs 8 inf which is bullshit and makes these strats harder to use so its nearly not worth using them.

Wr1tt3n by Croat, 11.09.2015 at 05:26

For Perfect Defence (PD)
- 1 defence for infartries
+10 cost for infartries

ok,i go play lb or if

We need things like they were before PD buff and before lowering price of RA tanks.

This try to brutally nerf RA again just because some guys here know PD will face needed nerf is funny.
Your smarty messing in strategies resulted by this unbalance, I dont know how you cannot stop finally putting your fingers in strategies every season.
I will end all my talks about strategies by HellRaiser's words:

Wr1tt3n by Helly, 08.09.2015 at 10:12

So stop messing and trying to fix strategies , your ruining a dalicate balance we have had for a long time.

Wr1tt3n by joedtaxi, 11.09.2015 at 11:21

Wr1tt3n by Guest, 11.09.2015 at 11:12

Wr1tt3n by joedtaxi, 11.09.2015 at 11:02

Put everything back to the way it was before you fucked things up plz

I think you're forgetting how strong RA tanks (and most offensive units, but mainly RA) were before the bugfix, and how having that kind of bugs is a bad thing . The bug didn't happen 100% of the times which made some offensive units from some strats weaker than they should be compared to RA tanks, etc. I think the bug was related with the strats and units. Fixing the bug and compensating for it is better than reverting the bugfix imo. Now after the PD nerf and when some RA changes happen I believe it's gonna be fine.

my main problem is the extra inf boost to neutrals if im honest i failed yesterday with 9 gc tanks vs 8 inf and 10 gw marines vs 8 inf which is bullshit and makes these strats harder to use so its nearly not worth using them.

Same, yesterday (or the day before idk) I failed like 6 times in a row in a game. I failed with 4 infs against 2 infs, etc. It was just crazy, and same happened for militias, I don't know why. I failed with 6 infs against 5 militias and with 5 militias against 2 militias, with PD, I freaked out when it happened. I don't even know why I failed against militias since they don't get +1 bonus or anything.
The inf bonus should be removed from neutrals, I always thought they intentionally disabled it for neutrals but apparently not, it was just the bug.

Un-nerf latest change, but -1 attack on inf. That's what perfect defense is, infantry spam has been there long enough.

Wr1tt3n by Dbacks, 11.09.2015 at 14:12

Un-nerf latest change, but -1 attack on inf. That's what perfect defense is, infantry spam has been there long enough.

So you saying PD INF should still have +2 but with -1 attack? That would make PD even more OP in west, it would be hard to cap enemy if a unit with -1 attack, attacks a unit with +2 defence bonus. That's my opinion though

Wr1tt3n by AlBoZzZ, 11.09.2015 at 14:17

Wr1tt3n by Dbacks, 11.09.2015 at 14:12

Un-nerf latest change, but -1 attack on inf. That's what perfect defense is, infantry spam has been there long enough.

So you saying PD INF should still have +2 but with -1 attack? That would make PD even more OP in west, it would be hard to cap enemy if a unit with -1 attack, attacks a unit with +2 defence bonus. That's my opinion though

It's supposed to be perfect defense, it's supposed to be hard to cap. But the nerf on attack ensures that PD can't expand that much. Yes it is hard to cap, but there are other ways around it

Just delete the city bonus... It is unlogical that we have this ''bonus'' in the first place. ON ALL STRATS.

Wr1tt3n by minusSeven, 11.09.2015 at 08:11

+1 attack of tanks against only infs for strats like gc ,ra , imp , hw
+1 attack of bombers against only infs in sm
+1 attack of helicopters against only infs in DS
+1 attack of stealth marines against only infs in mos and gw
+1 attack of destroyers against only infs in nc(this one I am not fully sure is required)
I have left out IF and lb since I don't feel they individually need nerf. Nerfing of pd makes no sense now since it wasn't boosted. Simply 1 bug was fixed.

This, but no boost to RA and give tanks +10 cost and the tweaks that were gonna happen before (boosting bombers and destroyers). Also +1 attack for HW militia, marines, and tanks against inf (maybe its finally more playable). I also think IF and LB need a boost because they have cost limitations (IF's being no cost nerf compared to PD). This way you slightly boost both offense and defense and keep it at the ratio it was before -at the expense of easier neutral inf expansion- and don't have one clearly stronger strategy.