LB Nerf

There are bigger problems the admins should spend time on, such as mapmaker or the expanding of the modteam. that being said;

LB should not be weakened in its strength, it should be changed costwise. Something like +12 cost for all units instead of +10. Therefor making lb even more costly and money being spent more carefully, which fits in with the theme of the strategy.

Qu0t3:

Wr1tt3n by Leo, 19.05.2018 at 10:39

what you're saying is, the game should remain stale and never change. we should always play the same things with no variety whatsoever right?

that is just plain wrong, change is necessary and has to be made. the ideal world would be where all strats have viability somewhere and a winrate of 50%. we don't have that in atwar, but if we did the game would be much better. the meta should never be stale and should constantly change every once in a while to give the game a breather of life and introduce innovation.

Not really, I'm just saying that we should not do it for a single strategy, I think it's for bad reasons that players want to change it as soon as possible. because before that weirdly it does not pose any problem.

I am for change, if it is done once a year as Laochra said, but for all strategies and not for a selection among 2-3.

Wr1tt3n by Kame Sennin Taz, 19.05.2018 at 10:46

I'm far from losing myself with "my peace and my love", but thank you for worrying it's nice of you.

I think you did not understand the meaning of my comment.
I just do not agree on changing this strategy, because it is a problem for some of the players who were at the top of the ladder and who is upset by players can be "lambda" for them, and suddenly want to pressure to quickly change before losing face, because they do not find a solution in the game to this problem. so they choose the easiness.

But I agree with you, do it once a year but for all strategies and not a selection among 2-3.

This is actually more offensive than your last comment. Your meaning was pretty clear in both so i dont think it's a failure of understanding on my part. So now you're using that old cliché "you can't beat it so you want it nerfed". A great insult and attempt to annoy me but again this fails to address my argument of why a strat should get roughly+1 att/def to all units with hardly any cons to the strat.

also an attempt to get strat changes was already made here:

https://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=36144

but blocked by clovis. He did relent that the lb nerf could be agreeable so here i am trying to get at least that much done.

Wr1tt3n by Permamuted, 19.05.2018 at 08:09

Wr1tt3n by Witch-Doctor, 19.05.2018 at 00:42

+10 cost.

When nerfing strats add to it's weakness rather than nerf it's strengths.

We already had +10 cost on inf and militia a patch ago and nobody played it. Unless we add the cost back just to the infantry. But even then that will reduce the strats current versatility which imo is a good thing. I dont want to see lb rendered obsolete again.

I think lb will still be used. back then it was a matter of lb not being widely used enough for people to see it's potential. I say +10 cost is a pretty good nerf since it still retains it's attractive crit, but it won't be able to absolutely demolish with tank spam anymore since it will have a lot less money.

And then this strategy will get nerfed, and another strategy will become 'op' out of nowhere, and then that strategy will get nerfed...

And the circle continues..

Wr1tt3n by Waffel, 19.05.2018 at 14:32

And then this strategy will get nerfed, and another strategy will become 'op' out of nowhere, and then that strategy will get nerfed...

And the circle continues..

Thats life my beautiful molester.

LB is fine as it is go fix DS for once xD

Wr1tt3n by Permamuted, 19.05.2018 at 11:07

This is actually more offensive than your last comment. Your meaning was pretty clear in both so i dont think it's a failure of understanding on my part. So now you're using that old cliché "you can't beat it so you want it nerfed". A great insult and attempt to annoy me but again this fails to address my argument of why a strat should get roughly+1 att/def to all units with hardly any cons to the strat.

also an attempt to get strat changes was already made here:

https://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=36144

but blocked by clovis. He did relent that the lb nerf could be agreeable so here i am trying to get at least that much done.

Sorry if I offended you that was not my intention.

I was not aware of this post, thank you for sending it to me.

I see again my judgment, because you proposed to do it for several strategies 6 months ago.
which seems to me more correct than to take care of one as this post was.

Wr1tt3n by Kame Sennin Taz, 20.05.2018 at 02:40

Wr1tt3n by Permamuted, 19.05.2018 at 11:07

This is actually more offensive than your last comment. Your meaning was pretty clear in both so i dont think it's a failure of understanding on my part. So now you're using that old cliché "you can't beat it so you want it nerfed". A great insult and attempt to annoy me but again this fails to address my argument of why a strat should get roughly+1 att/def to all units with hardly any cons to the strat.

also an attempt to get strat changes was already made here:

https://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=36144

but blocked by clovis. He did relent that the lb nerf could be agreeable so here i am trying to get at least that much done.

Sorry if I offended you that was not my intention.

I was not aware of this post, thank you for sending it to me.

I see again my judgment, because you proposed to do it for several strategies 6 months ago.
which seems to me more correct than to take care of one as this post was.

i have never played with you but a hypocritical unintelligent attention whore and a hater is good description for you
Plus Nice saying some random senseless generalized bs then claiming it as a "point" to continue spamming (change all strategies dont change 1)

-4crit

No nerf LB sucks

Wr1tt3n by SyrianDevil, 20.05.2018 at 04:10

No nerf LB sucks

you can not compare Don and LB..

Wr1tt3n by SyrianDevil, 20.05.2018 at 04:05

i have never played with you but a hypocritical unintelligent attention whore and a hater is good description for you
Plus Nice saying some random senseless generalized bs then claiming it as a "point" to continue spamming (change all strategies dont change 1)

Thank you for this wonderful comment that you made us,
you thus show your great intelligence.
You must surely not be happy in your real life to dump this kind of talk.
But I do not blame you, we are all different.

Wr1tt3n by JF., 17.05.2018 at 18:15

I'd say increase the cost, but leave the power.

Plus gw needs an urgent nerf. The attack is just too high for the price it is.. 70 cost for 7 atc units, is too high. 90 reduction of the cost when selected, no other strat has that. Let alone the milita boost. Something needs to be done.

we also need more buffs.

What... you leave GW the hell alone, there's nothing wrong with it.

Wr1tt3n by Dr Lecter, 20.05.2018 at 08:09

Wr1tt3n by JF., 17.05.2018 at 18:15

I'd say increase the cost, but leave the power.

Plus gw needs an urgent nerf. The attack is just too high for the price it is.. 70 cost for 7 atc units, is too high. 90 reduction of the cost when selected, no other strat has that. Let alone the milita boost. Something needs to be done.

we also need more buffs.

What... you leave GW the hell alone, there's nothing wrong with it.

eye they forget that imp main used units get +1 damage with general while gw doesn't and with sucks range and sucks transportaion D:

I changed my mind, LB does need adjusting, a few games played and I see the issue.

Lmao u guys complaiining about lb in ww1 outa all maps where only the team banks can afford to use it xD

Buff RA .
This would make more viable strats = less lb = less crying

Dont nerf lb. in team games only bank can afford or only has funds for one person weakening all fronts. in 1v1 you cant get as many units made which hurts more. examples you used are the minority of times not the majority.

I don't support nerfing LB. The strategy is very weak, it should be even strengthened. How can you compare LB with IF, for example? LB is one of the worst strategies of the game and it needs change but in its favor.

Wr1tt3n by SyrianDevil, 20.05.2018 at 13:25

Who was UK at that game?

Wr1tt3n by Permamuted, 17.05.2018 at 17:13

Clovis and ivan already shut down any chance of that. But clovis did relent that lb might need a nerf so here we are. I believe with enough support theyll add it. If you want other strat changes badger clovis.

lol

saying this, how does it make you feel?

Either reduce the crit or increase the cost of LB. The strat is too consistently good in all stages of the game, whether early game, middle game or late game.

Compare LB to Imp for a moment. Both strats seem to be each other's counterparts. Imp gets -30 cost for -1 atk, but LB get more or less +1 atk/def for only +10 cost??? Doesn't add up, as you can see.

Making LB +30 instead would seem like the obvious way to solve this issue then. But that's not very reasonable. Sure... you can argue that the +1 atk/def buff that LB has is inconsistent. But, the buff is not inconsistent enough to not pose a problem. The rolls in this game can already be considered fucked up as they are bu some, even before LB got the buff. Stuff like this just makes the game more about chance and less about skill.

Don't listen to me though. I've only been playing for 2 months.

EDIT: Something worth exploring would also be the unit maintenance cost for LB. What do you guys think?

-2 crit to keep it good and relevant but not more. any more and it will die

-3 crit sounds perfect to me

Wr1tt3n by Lelouch., 21.05.2018 at 12:15

Compare LB to Imp for a moment. Both strats seem to be each other's counterparts. Imp gets -30 cost for -1 atk, but LB get more or less +1 atk/def for only +10 cost??? Doesn't add up, as you can see.

Well Imp makes the units more cost efficient?

Wr1tt3n by sfhgo, 21.05.2018 at 13:01

Wr1tt3n by Lelouch., 21.05.2018 at 12:15

Compare LB to Imp for a moment. Both strats seem to be each other's counterparts. Imp gets -30 cost for -1 atk, but LB get more or less +1 atk/def for only +10 cost??? Doesn't add up, as you can see.

Well Imp makes the units more cost efficient?

Correct. What's your point?

Wr1tt3n by Lelouch., 21.05.2018 at 12:15

Either reduce the crit or increase the cost of LB. The strat is too consistently good in all stages of the game, whether early game, middle game or late game.

Compare LB to Imp for a moment. Both strats seem to be each other's counterparts. Imp gets -30 cost for -1 atk, but LB get more or less +1 atk/def for only +10 cost??? Doesn't add up, as you can see.

Making LB +30 instead would seem like the obvious way to solve this issue then. But that's not very reasonable. Sure... you can argue that the +1 atk/def buff that LB has is inconsistent. But, the buff is not inconsistent enough to not pose a problem. The rolls in this game can already be considered fucked up as they are bu some, even before LB got the buff. Stuff like this just makes the game more about chance and less about skill.

Don't listen to me though. I've only been playing for 2 months.

The +10 cost is fine, what isn't fine is the fact that inf and milli doesn't have that nerf, which makes the strat absurdly strong and spammable. The best bet is to add a +5 cost imo, doesn't make the strat dumpster tier, but still prevents spamming.

Wr1tt3n by Leo, 21.05.2018 at 15:20

Wr1tt3n by Lelouch., 21.05.2018 at 12:15

Either reduce the crit or increase the cost of LB. The strat is too consistently good in all stages of the game, whether early game, middle game or late game.

Compare LB to Imp for a moment. Both strats seem to be each other's counterparts. Imp gets -30 cost for -1 atk, but LB get more or less +1 atk/def for only +10 cost??? Doesn't add up, as you can see.

Making LB +30 instead would seem like the obvious way to solve this issue then. But that's not very reasonable. Sure... you can argue that the +1 atk/def buff that LB has is inconsistent. But, the buff is not inconsistent enough to not pose a problem. The rolls in this game can already be considered fucked up as they are bu some, even before LB got the buff. Stuff like this just makes the game more about chance and less about skill.

Don't listen to me though. I've only been playing for 2 months.

The +10 cost is fine, what isn't fine is the fact that inf and milli doesn't have that nerf, which makes the strat absurdly strong and spammable. The best bet is to add a +5 cost imo, doesn't make the strat dumpster tier, but still prevents spamming.

What about making a significant increase to unit maintenance cost?
The initial price of units isn't the only thing that can be changed.