IG Balance - Currently Discussing Notion 2)

[Torpid]

I want to start a new series of balance topics. Please in the discussion below can try and keep on topic to the things being addressed in the thread and also we will work through each discussion one at a time.

I will propose below some changes I would like to made to some of the IG units/globals/wargears at the moment and explain why. I would propose that we firstly discuss whether 1) should be changed and then once we reach a conclusion on that we should then move onto 2) and so on until we have covered each of these issues and come to a decisive conclusions on what we as the forum community think ought to be done about these so called "issues".

1) I propose reverting the sentinel's stomp back to its retail version wherein if it stunned a single model of a squad the whole squad would become stunned, rather than only stunning models it does damage to.

Reasoning:
Sentinels no longer start with stomp in elite and so a lot of the early pressure that came with sentinels is now gone. Having to pay 15 power for stomp is often not even worth it considering how rare it is that a foe gets melee vs IG yet sometimes such as when an apothecary gets ASM, or a chaos goes double KCSM or with stormboyz in T2 - essentially durable fast moving melee squads, it seems unfair that the stomp no longer stuns all models, it often means that the sentinel ends up dying to melee squads when it tries to stomp them because it only stuns a few models and the rest move in after their friends were knocked back and finish it off. Squads like ASM can exploit their melee charge burst thing to easily dodge stomps and all in all I think it just has devalued stomp too much, I think the 15 power requirement was a large enough nerf to the sentinel alone.

Verdict on 1):
Scrap it - The sentinel stunning an entire squad when it knocks back a single model is too gimmicky and can severely disadvantage players who wish to or are otherwise forced to use melee squads against IG in scenarios in which some models get stuck on pathing and so on. It allows for no real counter-play and would make the sentinel too powerful in T1 - a place where it already dominates.

Counter-proposal - Instead of stunning the entire squad when it hits one model with the stomp why not increase the range of the stomp and if needs be decrease the time it takes to stun the model from 7 seconds to 6 or 5seconds? This will make the ability generally more reliable without making it too strong in T1 and also making the sentinel has a bit more of a defense vs T2 melee squads such as KCSM which it often has to defend against even though with its current it is largely ineffective against such units.

Counter-Counter-proposal - No, learn how to stomp noob. No need to nerf the duration, just need to stomp better. Stomp is not meant to counter things like ASM in T2 and stormboyz or KCSM, it is more for dealing with T1 melee.

2) Nerf assail so that it is channeled again OR reduce its casting range.

Reasoning:
The ability is absurdingly strong at the moment. Jump units may not even jump out of assail and so when combined with the servo skull the inquisitor can immobilise jump squads from afar in an instant preventing them from jumping on a HWT that may be shooting down a walker while she simultaneously runs around with her holy brazier countering ranged and melee units. This ability effectively takes a squad out of play - ranged or melee due to the suppression - within an instant for 8 seconds from range 45. It's too powerful to not be channeled and it alone sways engagements entirely for a mere 20 power while the armour gives the IQ +100hp too, it's practically a no-brainer vs anything other than eldar. It's even brutally effective at just pinning lone heroes/ranged units when they are out of cover so they are forced off by guardsmen fire. You can also use it vs a set-up team to suppress them then force melee with your IQ.

If it was channeled it would make it a bit fairer considering there is no counter-play. The inquisitor may still shoot while channeling it anyway so it would synergise well with her melta pistol which does tend to be quite niche.

Verdict on 2):


3) Increase the damage of the incendiary shell when buying the T3 "heavy mortar shells" upgrade from 20 damage +7DOT for 20seconds to 25damage+10DOT for 20seconds - subject to minor numerical changes if deemed more appropriate.

Reasoning:
The upgrade is a bit underwhelming at the moment and it does really do too much considering the additional req cost. Noting of course that req itself is more valuable at this late stage of the game than earlier on - especially for IG. It also serves as an incentive for more late game incendiary shell, something that is otherwise lacking as the incendiary shell does start to become less and less useful as units begin to level more and more.

Verdict on 3):

May we please start by only discussing "1)" and move onto the others once a verdict has been reaching on that.

[Cheah18]

1) I unequivocally concur

2)...

[Ven]

1) im not sure about this one. i mean if the sent doesnt get the stomp, then swarmy melee units, especially in the case of heretics completely pwn sentinels. i consider it to be an essential upgrade.

however, i do i think its a little nuts that sometimes a sent dies even if it stomped. but i dont think changing the stun to a "whole squad gets stunned" thing is the solution. i think perhaps that the models are hit should be stunned, but the models that wern't hit get a temporary damage/speed debuff or something to allow the sent to get away. i think the whole squad stun would be really weird and potentially gamey if the melee squad is split up oddly.

2) agreed. assail is a little nuts. i would atleast like to see an increased cast time or something because it seems instant to me, and even things like crippling voley and hammer of the witches have a cast time.

3) also in agreement with this. by the time T3 comes around the effectiveness of the incendary shell falls flat a lot of the time.

[enasni127]

1) agreed, it's sometimes annoying if can't stomp them all cause some of them are around a corner or the squad is too big/spread. if we pay for an ability, it should at least work as intended.

[Nurland]

There should be. In the upper right side of the post pen icon

[Torpid]

1) im not sure about this one. i mean if the sent doesnt get the stomp, then swarmy melee units, especially in the case of heretics completely pwn sentinels. i consider it to be an essential upgrade.

however, i do i think its a little nuts that sometimes a sent dies even if it stomped. but i dont think changing the stun to a "whole squad gets stunned" thing is the solution. i think perhaps that the models are hit should be stunned, but the models that wern't hit get a temporary damage/speed debuff or something to allow the sent to get away. i think the whole squad stun would be really weird and potentially gamey if the melee squad is split up oddly.

Reading comprehension time Ven.

I want to try and stick to one topic at a time. Starting with 1) first please. This is so the discussion is actually apt and we can note the points being raised as we move along and try and agree to a conclusion.

I suppose one less gimmicky change to the same effect would be to buff the range of the sentinel stun/knockback?

[Deuce Bigalow]

1)

I like how the stomp used to work. Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe it would "soft-stun" the whole squad if a model was hit such that they could still fire their ranged weapons (not sure if it did knockback, but I am in favor of keeping that). The radius was larger too.

[Sub_Zero]

1) I am against this change. It will kill counter-play, something that should always exist. And this counter-play is balanced. Let me explain. Let's imagine that your guardsmen are about to be engaged in melee by some melee unit, this case is more likely to happen because engaging a sentinel in melee (if it has the upgrade) is even a worse idea. So you move in and immediately "stomp" the threat. It was predictable and the melee unit pulled back for a split second and avoided the stomp completely/only few members suffered. Then you become more wise and you understand that your opponent is capable of doing it. Next time the same thing happens you just stand next to your guardsmen and see them (the melee unit) dance while they receive ranged damage, and once they fully commit you use the stomp. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. You even say yourself that melee is ill-advised against IG, so why make this whole situation even worse for melee? Now at least you can minimaze this harm, even if one squad of guardsmen is tied up in melee the other one (there can be 3 of them now due to the reduced pop-cap) can shoot down stunned models who will take full damage because they are not in melee and the sentinel itself keeps firing its weapon while moving backwards, for T1 it is balanced. You mentioned T2. But why should a T1 upgrade be great in T2/T3? Still I think it is not a bad upgrade since in most cases you have at least one melee oriented unit to deal with and being able to shut it down so efficiently (for 7 seconds) is worth this cost.

[Cyris]

1) I am always in favor of making executions easier and more consistent, then finding balance afterwards. I was in favor of the tracking improvements to the FC's fist and was very happy way back when scout shotgun skill was changed to effect the whole enemy squad with suppression, as opposed to just effecting the models that were hit. In short, making stomp consistently CC an enemy squad hit makes a ton on sense to me. However, I would strongly advocate for a reconsideration of the stun time in addition to a change like this. As mentioned, melee is largely a horrible mistake against IG, and while I am all for making stomp consistent, it's potency should likely be modified to compensate.

As a side, I could even see the upgrade cost reducing a bit (maybe only 10 power) if the duration came down.

(gonna keep going, tough!)

2) Hell yes, this thing is too strong. Heavy range or duration reduction might work too. That it works on suppression immune troops is already incredibly strong, it doesn't need all it's other benefits.

3) No opinions.

[Atlas]

For 1), yes. For the kind of matchups where the stomp is the only really means of control of a unit (vs CL, vs LA etc etc) it's an engagement loss if the sent doesn't completely neutralize the enemy melee horde.

While I play the Inq quite a lot, I would also have to say yes to 2) as well. Maybe not to all of it at once, but I think increasing the price by 5 power and lowering the range would be good starts. I would really like to keep no-channeling though because she has so many abilities that already require her to channel.

I don't feel like 3) will actually change anything. Honestly, the incendiary shells feel just sort of useless. I much prefer the knockback towards my army that the normal mortar provides. Idk, maybe if it shared cooldown with smoke instead?

[Surprise Attack!]

1) I propose reverting the sentinel's stomp back to its retail version wherein if it stunned a single model of a squad the whole squad would become stunned, rather than only stunning models it does damage to.

Reasoning:
Sentinels no longer start with stomp in elite and so a lot of the early pressure that came with sentinels is now gone. Having to pay 15 power for stomp is often not even worth it considering how rare it is that a foe gets melee vs IG yet sometimes such as when an apothecary gets ASM, or a chaos goes double KCSM or with stormboyz in T2 - essentially durable fast moving melee squads, it seems unfair that the stomp no longer stuns all models, it often means that the sentinel ends up dying to melee squads when it tries to stomp them because it only stuns a few models and the rest move in after their friends were knocked back and finish it off. Squads like ASM can exploit their melee charge burst thing to easily dodge stomps and all in all I think it just has devalued stomp too much, I think the 15 power requirement was a large enough nerf to the sentinel alone.

I disagree with the revert back to retail stomp, and I think SubZero put it pretty well, though I disagree in regards to melee being ill advised vs IG, as it is a rather general blanket statement than an absolute truth.

1) I am against this change. It will kill counter-play, something that should always exist. And this counter-play is balanced. Let me explain. Let's imagine that your guardsmen are about to be engaged in melee by some melee unit, this case is more likely to happen because engaging a sentinel in melee (if it has the upgrade) is even a worse idea. So you move in and immediately "stomp" the threat. It was predictable and the melee unit pulled back for a split second and avoided the stomp completely/only few members suffered. Then you become more wise and you understand that your opponent is capable of doing it. Next time the same thing happens you just stand next to your guardsmen and see them (the melee unit) dance while they receive ranged damage, and once they fully commit you use the stomp. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. You even say yourself that melee is ill-advised against IG, so why make this whole situation even worse for melee? Now at least you can minimaze this harm, even if one squad of guardsmen is tied up in melee the other one (there can be 3 of them now due to the reduced pop-cap) can shoot down stunned models who will take full damage because they are not in melee and the sentinel itself keeps firing its weapon while moving backwards, for T1 it is balanced. You mentioned T2. But why should a T1 upgrade be great in T2/T3? Still I think it is not a bad upgrade since in most cases you have at least one melee oriented unit to deal with and being able to shut it down so efficiently (for 7 seconds) is worth this cost.

I think we will all agree that balance should be the primary concern. A secondary concern, however, is diversifying gameplay and opening other avenues for new and different builds or ways to approach problems.

Before we even get to the secondary concerns SubZero talks about, however, we need to figure out whether the primary concern is existent, as balance does come first. In addition to addressing whether the current state of the sent stomp is unfair for IG, we also must consider whether your proposed revision would be fair for other factions. In my opinion, it would be fair when dealing with ASM backed up by an Apo.

However, this is not an IG problem or a sentinel problem. In your example, you specifically mentioned ASM and Apo, which is probably one of the toughest MUs for IG. I do not really see any other situation where this would present itself as a large problem for IG. In fact, recently, when I proposed my idea of using a double raptor build as CS to counter IG, you dismissed it as problematic, partly due to the sentinel, and partly due to bleed. ASM are flat out better in my opinion, and with a properly micro'd Apo, don't really bleed.

Now, let me present an alternate issue:

Two CSM squads are trying to focus down a Sentinel with retail stomp backed up by a GM. The sentinel walks between the two CSM, stomps, managed to catch a model in each squad, resulting in both squads getting stunned, causing everything to be forced off, which in turn causes the Chaos line to collapse.

I find that the retail stomp is problematic in and of itself.

While I'm sure that someone will fire back and tell me that "no pro/experienced/skilled player" would allow something like that to happen - it still stands that until a player becomes pro, in this scenario against the revised sentinel, he stands at a significant disadvantage. For one, it would make baiting stomps very difficult, as SubZero pointed out, and essentially removes something that requires awareness, reaction time, and micro from the game. If stunning one model stunned the squad, what's the point of executing the bait to begin with? On top of this, only a few select squads actually have the speed to execute a bait perfectly in the current state of the stomp.

Balance is our primary concern, which is why we are here discussing this issue. But, if you implemented the retail sentinel stomp, you would be changing balance not for just IG vs SM, but IG vs Everybody based on a concern that is ultimately not directed at everybody, but only towards very specific MU that IG suffers greatly against.

I am against this proposed change.

This being said, I do feel that the Sentinel could use buffs. In my opinion, reverting to the retail stomp makes the Sentinel too powerful in T1. While it does address and fix a specific compositional issue of IG armies in specific MUs, it does not fix the problem specific to the Sentinel itself, which is that it grows increasingly irrelevant as the game progresses. Compared to units with similar costs, this, in my opinion, is a huge problem.

Whether this amounts to increased armor in the late game or increased utility, I do not know, but as you know, I am constantly cooking up new ideas. I would really, really hate for a change like this to distract from potential upgrades to the Sentinel that would make it useful throughout the game.

[Cheah18]

it still stands that until a player becomes pro, in this scenario against the revised sentinel, he stands at a significant disadvantage.

Thhis point is invalid given that balance is done around the performance of the best players.

[Surprise Attack!]

it still stands that until a player becomes pro, in this scenario against the revised sentinel, he stands at a significant disadvantage.

Thhis point is invalid given that balance is done around the performance of the best players.

Before even debating the merits and problems associated with what you're suggesting: Is it, actually? or are you saying that it should be done around the performance of the best players?

I mean, if we are just using the performance(and thereby opinions) of the best players, then why aren't the best players simply being polled for their ideas and opinions as opposed to us have an open discussion in the forums? Why are we involving the community in this debate?

Honestly, if you ask me, balancing the game to pro-level play causes huge issues down the food chain. Certainly the situation I described may not happen in ideal scenarios, but take double sent openings, for example. What's to stop a medium-skill player from capitalizing on the buffed stomp to roll all over his peers because they don't have the micro to deal with the kind of pressure coming from a long t1 with two upgraded sentinels?

I certainly understand that "pros" would not get the stomp in many matchups versus other "pros", because those other "pros" would have the know-how and micro to avoid the stomp(at least, in its current state) but what percentage of this community consists of "pros" and what percentage of the community consists of people who A) would get the stomp because they don't know not to get it against B) people who would have no idea how to deal with the gratuitous amount of stompy stun power in T1?

You're potentially messing up the balance in almost every matchup versus IG with exception for maybe the top 10% of the community, which, to the best of my knowledge, is not a very large number.

It's all very nice to talk about balancing around the ideal, but it isn't all that practical. Feel free to disagree. At least the K-nob stunbomb requires a fair bit of timing/luck to hit.

[Cheah18]

It isn't 'fair' so to speak but for something to be competitive it has to be based around the top tier players. And it should be and it is.

[Ven]

we're going off topic here people. torpid wants us to stay on topic here.

[Atlas]

I don't think the stomp is the key to making the sentinel more relevant in T2/3. I just feel that at that point its weapons can't keep up even with the missile launcher and there's just so much on the field at that point that it can get dakka'd down way quickly. FoF banshees/MoK CSM/Puris and those similar to it are the only ones that are really going to notice this stomp change.

[enasni127]

@ Stomp: I think it would be absolutely wrong to increase the stomp radius and on the other hand reduce the stun-duration! how would this make anything better? imho it would just punish everybody who has learned to make good stomps for 2 reasons:

1. their "stomp-skill" won't be rewarded anymore cause of the higher radius

2. stomp is less effective than before cause of its shorter duration

before this happens it should better stay as it is now ;(

[Protagonist]

I think increasing the range but reducing the stun time as was suggested by Crysis is a good idea. While it does make it easier to use, i think it'll stop the sentinel from being as overwhelming in t1 while allowing the sentinel a minor quality of life improvement to increase its chance of survival against some of the scary t2 melee squads.

[Surprise Attack!]

we're going off topic here people. torpid wants us to stay on topic here.

We're talking about how to balance changing the effect of the stomp, which is entirely relevant to the discussion at hand. If we go by Cheah's point of view, for example, we would be balancing the Sentinel under the assumption that everyone will use the Sentinel in a specific way and that everyone knows exactly how to deal with a Sentinel.

Please actually read our posts instead of looking at it, not finding certain words, and just calling it off topic.

It isn't 'fair' so to speak but for something to be competitive it has to be based around the top tier players. And it should be and it is.

Or maybe we aren't talking about balance anymore? Isn't the point of the mod to provide fair gameplay? Reverting to the retail stomp might be balanced in the specific situations that you and Torpid are thinking about, but for the vast majority of the playerbase, you're making something that's already pretty powerful and potentially difficult to deal with even harder to deal with.

Please recall that I feel the Sentinel is lacking in many ways, but making it even more powerful in T1 just so that a few bad MUs become easier for IG is going to cause balance issues. There are other ways to fix the overall competitiveness of IG in tier 1.

[Ven]

we're going off topic here people. torpid wants us to stay on topic here.

We're talking about how to balance changing the effect of the stomp, which is entirely relevant to the discussion at hand. If we go by Cheah's point of view, for example, we would be balancing the Sentinel under the assumption that everyone will use the Sentinel in a specific way and that everyone knows exactly how to deal with a Sentinel.

Please actually read our posts instead of looking at it, not finding certain words, and just calling it off topic.

It isn't 'fair' so to speak but for something to be competitive it has to be based around the top tier players. And it should be and it is.

Or maybe we aren't talking about balance anymore? Isn't the point of the mod to provide fair gameplay? Reverting to the retail stomp might be balanced in the specific situations that you and Torpid are thinking about, but for the vast majority of the playerbase, you're making something that's already pretty powerful and potentially difficult to deal with even harder to deal with.

Please recall that I feel the Sentinel is lacking in many ways, but making it even more powerful in T1 just so that a few bad MUs become easier for IG is going to cause balance issues. There are other ways to fix the overall competitiveness of IG in tier 1.

the posts i was reffering to what you and cheah discussing if balance should be from a "pros" perspective. that seems off topic to me.

[Cheah18]

Its not about perspective really its about objectivity. And it was in response to his point that we should balance it around a lower level.

[Atlas]

Honestly the stomp is pretty bonkers at how good it is in T1. I don't really mind the new proposal since it can still help greatly in anti-melee while technically not being as good. I'd sacrifice a little performance for reliability. Plus it might encourage some other strategies besides double sent like more catachans
------------

I just had a random idea. We can keep the stomp as is, but what about adding a small self-repair for the Sentinel come T2/3? It would work just like wraithbone but not nearly as bonkers strong.

Skill:
Field Repair
Requires T2/3,100/30
Cooldown: 70 seconds
The Sentinel shuts down all motivators and weapons and repairs itself at 15 hp/sec (<- exactly 2 gm worth I believe) for 30 seconds (total 450 hp roughly 60% assuming Sent gets level 2 by T2). The Sentinel can't move, stomp or attack while using this ability. This ability can't be canceled.

This way you can have the sentinel be more able to roam around by itself when you'd rather have your guardsman meatshielding in T2 fights while at the same time making sure the Sentinel can't just sit in the middle of a battle and regen like mad and do dps. I envision this to be your skirmisher on the quiet side of the map decapping points while screening from flanks. If you use the ability too far up as well the Sent is going to get caught with its pants down and doing over 15 dps to HI come T2 should not be a problem to basically anything except maybe vanilla scouts.

[Torpid]

Honestly the stomp is pretty bonkers at how good it is in T1. I don't really mind the new proposal since it can still help greatly in anti-melee while technically not being as good. I'd sacrifice a little performance for reliability. Plus it might encourage some other strategies besides double sent like more catachans
------------

I disagree completely about stomp being "bonkers" in T1. I think it's largely useless. by using the stomp you put the sentinel massively in the line of fire of ranged units while exposing your guardsmen to melee since they must follow it to repair it. If thye don't then the sentinel risks dying. This, on top of the fact that it often fails to stun entire melee squads as well as the fact that it costs 15 power and that IG do not enjoy prolonged T1s vs foes since their T1 is so dire in performance compared to their T2 is a massive reason not to get stomp. Sentinels already perform well as anti-melee when back-peddling away from melee units infinitely while shooting at them. I think stomp performs terribly right now in T1 and I never buy it except vs tyranids or the apo and to answer surprise that's also why I want it buffed. Not specifically because it fails in a given MU, rather, because it just fails for 15 power in general.

The second point about the additional sentinel ability is going off-topic Atlas.

[Ven]

i would disagree and say that the sentinel stop is well worth the 15 power. you can buy it before the first engagement provided you capped power, and it stops pretty much all squads in their tracks in the first few engagements. not to mention the stomp gives a health buff aswell.

imo it should be used exclusively for counter initiation and nothing more, unless there isnt enough dps to endanger it so you can go for an aggressive stomp.

that being said, i do think the stomp could do with some changes, like i said in my first post. its effectiveness drops off too quickly in its current state.

[Atlas]

What Torpid said.

I prefer to use the stomp for almost pure anti-melee and it works fine in that role since the stomp bait games is just more time for the guardsman to cut them down to a manageable size. Stomping on ranged blobs and setup teams feel like targets of opportunity rather than a deliberate strategy. We got spotters now to help deal with those kinds of things.

I buy the stomp for the guardsman and not the sentinel itself. The sent might be able to kite all day provided you have the map real estate but the same can't be said for the guardsman. If my sent wants repair support then it needs to help keep guardsman on the field and the stomp is really awesome for when that half damaged melee squad breaks through the initial volleys of lasfire and is forced to retreat after getting stomped.

I think the stomp might need some revamping, but I don't think it's useless for the cost.

[enasni127]

What Torpid said.

I prefer to use the stomp for almost pure anti-melee and it works fine in that role since the stomp bait games is just more time for the guardsman to cut them down to a manageable size. Stomping on ranged blobs and setup teams feel like targets of opportunity rather than a deliberate strategy. We got spotters now to help deal with those kinds of things.

I buy the stomp for the guardsman and not the sentinel itself. The sent might be able to kite all day provided you have the map real estate but the same can't be said for the guardsman. If my sent wants repair support then it needs to help keep guardsman on the field and the stomp is really awesome for when that half damaged melee squad breaks through the initial volleys of lasfire and is forced to retreat after getting stomped.

I think the stomp might need some revamping, but I don't think it's useless for the cost.

this explains pretty much why i wouldn't like to see a reduction of the stomp stun-duration. it would heavily affect the synergy with guardsmen and just give us nothing in return because this "higher radius" is not even defined yet. we don't know if it will do anything good for anybody who has a bit of stomping practice.

[Commissar Yarrick]

*Pops out of his Baneblade*

Let us not start shouting IG ballance for further buffs, it only brings the impending banhammer ever so closer

*Pops back into his baneblade*

[Torpid]

*Pops out of his Baneblade*

Let us not start shouting IG ballance for further buffs, it only brings the impending banhammer ever so closer

*Pops back into his baneblade*

And with that we come to a conclusion on notion 1) - Bullshit and it's being dropped.

Done.

Now onto notion 2 please. What do we think of assail in its current, non-channeling form, 20 power form? <---- Not a leading question.

[Ven]

2) agreed. assail is a little nuts. i would atleast like to see an increased cast time or something because it seems instant to me, and even things like crippling voley and hammer of the witches have a cast time.

[Atlas]

As I said earlier, I'm ok with nerfs to assail with the exception of making it channeled again. Inq already has so many abilities that require her to sit still and be vulnerable. Yes, the Farseer is very similar to that but IG doesn't have the same pushing power that Eldar does.

I would look at armor cost and cast range first imo.