TimeField

[BloatedChamp]

What is up with the farseer's Time-field?

I am not here to say its OP or suggest fixes. I just want to see what peoples opinions are of this ability.

"It Slows in a pretty wide radius

It slows for about 10 seconds, which is a long time, when quick decisions need to be made.

All units but the Farseer herself have their speed reduced by 40%

All units cannot attack or use abilities.

It has a long cast range Range 40



That's a whole lot of utility and value given to that ability. You can pretty much shut down an advancing army with a click of a button.

It's like a mini global on it's own.... kinda feels like overkill....

[Thunderhost]

It's also a t3 rather expensive armor only useable by a single commander. It's also avoidable, move out of it, even if that can rather hard during the heat of combat. I honestly don't have any issues with TF.

[Element]

What is up with the farseer's Time-field?

I am not here to say its OP or suggest fixes. I just want to see what peoples opinions are of this ability.

"It Slows in a pretty wide radius

It slows for about 10 seconds, which is a long time, when quick decisions need to be made.

All units but the Farseer herself have their speed reduced by 40%

All units cannot attack or use abilities.

It has a long cast range Range 40



That's a whole lot of utility and value given to that ability. You can pretty much shut down an advancing army with a click of a button.

It's like a mini global on it's own.... kinda feels like overkill....

The Farseer has always been the most "scaling understanding commander" in the game. Meaning that often as is the case, only someone who truly goes about that of concieving a sense of the vast nebular webway of connections, concepts, and complexes can one actually go about that of "mastering" her. She has undoubtedly the grandest "individual learning curve in the game". Very few players have ever, can, and will ever be able to go about that of playing the Farseer in that of such a way "as it currently stands now" where you could, would, shall even see that of the fully capabilities of such an upgrade being utilized; "but people will come to one day". I personally having played her a lot now and naturally coming to have a true sense of appreciation for her supportive relational conveniences, know that this upgrade in the consciousness of someone who truly knows how to go about that of "improvising amongst wargear", often attunes to that of a capability spectra ranging usually in correspondence to that of a.) used incorrectly, b.)good, c.) great, d.) utterly broken, ~~~ e.) Rather pretty Mesmerizing not because it is over the top, but because of the naturally progressive, possible, & potentially absurd relational outreach of influence you have in correspondence with "everything". I mean when you reach T3 the farseer is the commander that goes from lv3- lv -5- lv 7. in rather almost like 3-4-5 minutes, practically a level per minute given her beyonst vast amazing supportive capabilities as it stands already. and she becomes capable of practically spamming out impacutal buffs, debuffs, augments, heals, and c.c's like as if nobody ever placed an energy cap on her. She at level 10 is personally at least to me, better than any super heavy, collosal, and/or/for say/ gargantuan creature/vehicle/infantry unit in the game xD. Whatever the case, the truth is, this upgrade does most likely need to be adjusted for future game references. You can pretty much win a game with this upgrade relatively outright just because of the massive field presence force augmentation, modifiers, multipliers, stabilizers, & considerable relational outreach that are presented from such an ability...It's like the Grey Knights standing "Dark Excommunication" Global bar ability except better to be quite honest. Personally to me, its the best support wargear upgrade in the entire game if not the best upgrade in the game probably only next to that of the Tyranid Ravener Alpha's tunneling network capabilities (when not balanced- "you allow them to become present throughout the entire map"), and that of the chaos sorcerer's warp rift ( that of when used considerately to establish faction wide mobility, craft potential skirmishes, and utterly flank the other individual into that of oblivion).

[Thibix Magnus]

(big biased answer and assumed as such) It's been nerfed a few times already, IIRC it was 70% slow back then. We should also maybe accept that the (one of the) hardest to play heroes, in the hardest to play faction, could have it easier late game
It's also quite hard to land correctly and catch more than one squad in 1v1 as units are (should be) spread out. In 3v3 yeah it's really good, but Eldar suffer the most from 3v3 blobbing otherwise.

[Dark Riku]

We should also maybe accept that the (one of the) hardest to play heroes, in the hardest to play faction, could have it easier late game

We should also maybe not accept lies like this.

Hard to land? It's a point and click with a huge radius °_O

IIRC, SM's were supposed to have the best T3 around. Too bad that never became a reality

How does Eldar suffer from blobbing? That's what Elderp does in 3v3. Go gank one side with gates, then gank the complete other side of the map.

[Thibix Magnus]

We should also maybe accept that the (one of the) hardest to play heroes, in the hardest to play faction, could have it easier late game

We should also maybe not accept lies like this.

:/

(big biased answer and assumed as such)

that was meant to keep it relax and subjective

well more than a personal opinion that's the overall understanding I have from the forum. You might disagree and I would respect your longer experience but feel free to correct me nicely <3

Hard to land? It's a point and click with a huge radius °_O

IIRC, SM's were supposed to have the best T3 around. Too bad that never became a reality

How does Eldar suffer from blobbing? That's what Elderp does in 3v3. Go gank one side with gates, then gank the complete other side of the map.

By hard to land I mean catching an army together, incorrect words from me.
Da best of da best T3 is a matter of design and choice, back in retail it was Eldar, then big T3 came for other factions too, which was cool btw. But there is a nice discussion on Eldar design where this topic could be included.

And well gate mobility means indeed fast doubling, but I feel, strictly in terms of blobbing together at equal army size, that the sum of say HI squads is better than the sum of eldar squads, even if individually these squads are matched. Maybe sort of emerging property or something.

[Broodwich]

Eldar are spess elves, elves always have the best late game. SM have the best late game infantry

Also TF is pretty nasty with runes

[Element]

hard to land? It's a point and click with a huge radius °_O

Respectively Dark Riku, no "Customly- Well- Adept- Eldar Farseer" player will ever just "point and click" with that of such an exquisite master piece of a collection ability like that of time field, or any poisitioning, locationg, and manuevering (movements), wargear/ upgrade choices, unit build order choices, abilities (what have you) for that that matter. There is just too vast a conceivence of simplistic, intricate, and complexive connective progressionary thought which naturally facilitates every mannerism of corresponding play as they attune to relatively flow within, during, and throughout one another (I'll spare everyone the full spectra of relationary thought.)...that is why Eldar are deemed "O.P." because they have some of the most "absurd" naturalistic synergetic play in the entire game; in addition, The very means as to which one goes about that of playing the farseer is in essence the very fabrications of art in itself, and no artist "just places their sketch art tool of mastery onto a piece of paper and just begins drawing." There is always purpose, there is always spirit, there is always focus, direction...vision.

IIRC, SM's were supposed to have the best T3 around. Too bad that never became a reality

I definitely think they are supposed to be quite well capable indeed in T3 though i wouldn't necessarily say the best. The best faction in T3 will tend to be the factions which are capable of establishing great field presence in T2 and relatively extending those capabilities into T3...Chaos have always had a really great transitionary T2, and their T3 is rather spectacular if you can go about that of playing them in a way which naturally neutralizes their losses. By my standing personally, Eldar, S.M., and Chaos will always probably contend to have the best T3's in the game, with the new introductory Grey Knights (now also placing their hat in contention) alongside Orks because of their Call in da boyz ability in addition to their unit faction choice verstaility which enables them to deal quite well effectively with just about any situation. They just lack the refinement, abilities, synergy, quality of play, and mobility of units like that of the Eldar.

How does Eldar suffer from blobbing? That's what Elderp does in 3v3. Go gank one side with gates, then gank the complete other side of the map

-Just to let you know though Dark Riku, Eldar Webway Gates while good in regardance to some 3v3s are very difficult to utilize against good conscious players in 1v1's who note Eldar's capabilities to utilize said gates. A good player may buy a unit just for the keep sake of checking to make sure that there are no webway gates being placed around the map, and essentially are relatively at the mercy of the compentency of the other individual whom one is trying to use them relatively against. I personally would never rely on a Farseer webway gate even though they are shrouded given this understanding and more rather would always go about that of asking myself whether 50 red were worth the one teleport I "may be able to use". When you have such a great global bar of abilities *They are all amazing* one does not look to spend red needlessly trying to to build bridges when they can just own the whole town. (That is if they are not discovered upon being built which can lead to an utter disaster if the other player creates a counter-initiative gate discovery play just to punish you for trying to make them in the first place) given the natural creative healthy initiative which comes upon the first establishment of the said webway gate.
As for blobbing, there is no greater spiritually felt tragedy in the world than a blobbing eldar player.

[BloatedChamp]

Anomaly......Your descriptive analysis and superfluously adjunct reverberations on such matters is strikingly filled with hints of uncanny prose. Your depiction in which to provide the appropriate imagery on the concept of the topic, is said with much thought that interprets beyond the simplicity of common understanding. Er go, such manner of communication, delves into the realm of phantasm. Such that which, creates a rather far fetched perspective hindering quick interpretations for those that gleam for a much needed skim over at the topic at hand.

[Thunderhost]

Anomaly......Your descriptive analysis and superfluously adjunct reverberations on such matters is strikingly filled with hints of uncanny prose. Your depiction in which to provide the appropriate imagery on the concept of the topic, is said with much thought that interprets beyond the simplicity of common understanding. Er go, such manner of communication, delves into the realm of phantasm. Such that which, creates a rather far fetched perspective hindering quick interpretations for those that gleam for a much needed skim over at the topic at hand.

I, for one, salute our new rhetorical overlord! Well played sir

[Element]

Anomaly......Your descriptive analysis and superfluously adjunct reverberations on such matters is strikingly filled with hints of uncanny prose. Your depiction in which to provide the appropriate imagery on the concept of the topic, is said with much thought that interprets beyond the simplicity of common understanding. Er go, such manner of communication, delves into the realm of phantasm. Such that which, creates a rather far fetched perspective hindering quick interpretations for those that gleam for a much needed skim over at the topic at hand.

Hahaha, well said mate, I have nothing to go about that responding with other than I apologize to everyone that such shapage, mannerism, and formulation of speech may be frustrating. I do not try and go about that of coming off as phantasmal because phantasmal is often overstretching the boundaries of realitative thought, however Indeed, I have been rather, vastly, indeed possibly quite excessively expressive as of late, and I am very much indeed quite that of consciously aware and sensitive with that of an outlook and perspective to that of the said matter and have been actively in that of search for that of what would be curtailing, polishing, or more rather as of late knowing how to go about that of choosing the best places as to where, when, & in projective relation to that of as how it may be, to express such elaborative> which should be improvised (creative, yet limited, yet progressionary), and essentially adaptive(originating) relationships so as to make them more so that of ...quenchable...to understand.

I, for one, salute our new rhetorical overlord! Well played sir

Oh gosh, I truly, sincerely, and remorsefully apologize if it's that bad.

[Lesten]

Timefield was already nerfed in elite. Like it's been said in the Eldar thread, many of Eldar's abilities are by design frustrating to fight against if you're caught off-guard (that's really how they SHOULD be), that's probably why some people scream OP as soon as someone mentions Eldar. (Then again, I admit to have screamed OP myself when SM steamrolls me like they usually do )

Anyway, I think timefield is fine... but a change I wouldn't mind seeing is: (if it is to be changed at all)

• Units in timefield take less damage from ranged weapons (make it less bonkers in combination with wraithguard and eldritch). (Including the farseer.)
• Units in timefield take more damage from melee (will only apply to the farseer herself, since she's the only one who can attack, so it would have to be a pretty big damage increase to have some kind of impact).
• Turn slow back to 50% (from 40%?) if above changes were to be applied (to compensate a bit for the reduced ranged damage and to help the farseer get in to melee with units in the field).
• MAYBE also reduce cast range slightly, but then the armor should give slightly more HP (+50?) to the farseer to help her get into range (which is already not all that easy).

[Forestradio]

blocking abilities is kind of annoying but i don't think that time field needs a nerf

if t3 super-wargear is going to be adjusted in general (ie cost reductions and effectiveness reductions) then i guess it could be re-examined, but honestly there are way bigger issues to address at the moment

you only need to look at the wse and phase shift trolling to see one of those issues after all

i can't respond to anything else written in the thread unless someone translates it into english for me

[Flash]

BloatedChamp that was an awesome response. Sorry Anomaly but it was that bad. Dat's ok though. Live and learn.

I personally think Time Field is OP/broken mostly because it's bad game design. It's removes all player agency from anyone it's used on. It makes it very easy to set up nukes, singularities and the player has very little they can do about it except immediately retreat. Unless they're a terminator which it was designed to negate. Yes it's always possible to "git gud" and deal with it, but why not make it better and more fitting of the eldar theme?

Eldar are designed to be fast and flighty but not durable. They have to choose their engagements carefully (how well this is achieved can be debated but not relevant here). So here's a couple of ideas that tweak it towards that:

-No longer disable weapons and abilities. Keep the slow and and increase the duration and possibly the range. Ideally the slow could affect enemy ability usage in the field. Make it take longer to toss that grenade, or longer to reload weapons. Those changes would have to be small. Say an increased second for each for example (numbers open to change). Maybe not even that. Have the ability be channeled and apply to a radius around the Farseer rather than cast-able.

The idea behind this being that it allows the eldar to player to essentially take control of the battlefield for a time. The FS picks the location for an engagement forcing the opposing player to either engage them there with the subsequent penalties or backing off till it the duration expires. It would also allow for conterplay if the ability is used in the middle of an already ongoing engagement by making the FS vulnerable due to channeling and a priority target to be focused down. It ups the risk/reward factor which fits nicely with the eldar theme yet again.

I'm not sure if slowing ability use and/or weapon reload/cooldown/windup is technically feasible, but changing it to not disable weapons or abilities, removing the cast-able nature is.

[Kvn]

I'm sorry if I sound harsh, but I have to ask, how does that compliment the idea of being fast, fragile, and having to pick your engagements?

What you're suggesting would kill the AoA all together. You would be taking the Farseer's most expensive, hardest hitting wargear, and replacing it with something that is strictly worse than suppression. No damage, less slow, drastically less control over enemy fire, and she'd have to channel it too? She already has two wargears that lock her down in place and that she can't retreat out of. She absolutely doesn't need a third.

If anything, the Time Field fits perfectly with the Eldar theme. It allows the Eldar to pick an engagement, or back away at will, balanced out by being T3 and highly expensive. The version you're suggesting would force the Farseer to charge into the enemy lines, hit the ability button, and pray that nothing turns to shoot her in the meantime, for the ultimate goal of mildly slowing the enemy's reload times. That's pretty much like replacing the Commissar Lord's Emperor's Wrath with a normal artillery shell. Nobody is going to shell out 150/50 for that, and you'd be majorly hurting the Farseer's late game capabilities.

Time Field itself isn't overpowered. It's powerful, absolutely (as all expensive late game wargears are), but it can be played around by splitting your units properly. If you do that, it should never catch more than a couple squads, who can still walk out of it quite easily at times. Plus, it affects friendly units as well, so it's not like the Farseer can hack your guys to bits with melee while they're unable to move or fight back. It's not like she can spam it multiple times in an engagement either. Its cooldown isn't insignificant, and in a close match, placing it down in the wrong spot can make a big difference.

[Flash]

So there's a part of this I was thinking of that I apparently didn't put, which makes a massive difference. What I had in mind would be the slow affecting only enemy units. It now longer affects your own. It allows this to compliment your army more than just synergize with singularity and eldritch.

You just outlined the fast and fragile part yourself. I disagree about worse than suppression. With a larger radius you'd be affecting more units, and if they're slowed (movement, ability, fire rate) you have control of how that entire engagement pans out as this game revolves so much around positioning.

Saying that it forces her to run into enemy lines and pray is a silly argument. Super units aside, few no units can run into an entire enemy army and survive. That's not how you use eldar. But if you want to there would still be ways to do it. Infiltration from gates, rangers' holo-field, and even just plain old fleet. It's true that this has a greater advantage when they come to you, rather than the other way around. But that doesn't make it a defensive only piece.

[Kvn]

So there's a part of this I was thinking of that I apparently didn't put, which makes a massive difference. What I had in mind would be the slow affecting only enemy units. It now longer affects your own. It allows this to compliment your army more than just synergize with singularity and eldritch.

I had assumed already that it wouldn't affect your own units. Channeling abilities never do unless they specify as such.

just outlined the fast and fragile part yourself. I disagree about worse than suppression. With a larger radius you'd be affecting more units, and if they're slowed (movement, ability, fire rate) you have control of how that entire engagement pans out as this game revolves so much around positioning.

It really doesn't matter how many units it effects because the change is so insignificant... One second added onto reload time is almost nothing compared to how much work an actual suppression team can do. Especially in big T3 engagements. Especially especially if its locking down the Farseer which will almost certainly kill her in those situations. Once again, this is a T3, very expensive wargear. it is supposed to have a large impact, just like Emperor's Wrath, Purgatus, FoB, Rokkit Launcher, etc. What you are suggesting is nerfing it into uselessness.

that it forces her to run into enemy lines and pray is a silly argument. Super units aside, few no units can run into an entire enemy army and survive. That's not how you use eldar. But if you want to there would still be ways to do it. Infiltration from gates, rangers' holo-field, and even just plain old fleet. It's true that this has a greater advantage when they come to you, rather than the other way around. But that doesn't make it a defensive only piece.

Once again, you're putting your Farseer in huge danger for almost no benefit after spending a hefty chunk of power. Eldar is not a race that ever has excess power. That isn't a price tag to be taken lightly. And what enemy ranged units are going to be charging your army anyway? They wouldn't even be caught in the radius, meaning your Farseer either has to charge them, or the whole thing is pointless. I'll reiterate in saying that Time Field can be played against just fine by splitting your units so that you don't get caught out by it. There isn't any reason to so drastically kill its effectiveness.

[Flash]

"numbers open to change".

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree. I play eldar, I know how to use time field and I know how to avoid it. The ability has been controversial since...ever? Which generally implies poor game design. It's too good and it removes player agency. But it doesn't need nerfed. It needs to be better designed and better implemented. And I think we can and might as well try while it's the topic of discussion. So I'd like to see it changed into something different that's no longer as infuriating to play against while still being a strong piece of gear. This is one suggestion, bet we can come up with others. It's seems you do not wish to see it changed at all? Thus we are at an impasse.

[Oddnerd]

I hate facing timefield as much as anyone else - it is so cute when people tell you not to let your units blob in tight 3v3 lanes... but still, it isn't game-breaking levels of strong. Maybe if the more serious problems with game balance were out of the way they could afford to make some minor tweaks to it, but its not worth worrying about at this point.

[Flash]

Agree that there are bigger priorities, but seeing as we are neither Caeltos making design decisions, nor the modders implementing changes, we aren't really using valuable time or energy discussing this. It's not a zero sum game. Why not discuss possible changes to time field now since it won't detract from elsewhere?

[Kvn]

"numbers open to change".

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree. I play eldar, I know how to use time field and I know how to avoid it. The ability has been controversial since...ever? Which generally implies poor game design. It's too good and it removes player agency. But it doesn't need nerfed. It needs to be better designed and better implemented. And I think we can and might as well try while it's the topic of discussion. So I'd like to see it changed into something different that's no longer as infuriating to play against while still being a strong piece of gear. This is one suggestion, bet we can come up with others. It's seems you do not wish to see it changed at all? Thus we are at an impasse.

If that's your definition of poor game design, I'm afraid that there's a lot more wrong with Dawn of War than just Time Field. Pretty much everything has been controversial at one point or another, and a lot of it comes from people taking things out of context.

What you're suggesting is not a change. It's a nerf. A change would keep something at roughly the same power level while altering the core function of the ability. There is no upside to what you're suggesting. It is straight up worse across the board. Less control. Less survivability. Less utility. All around lesser impact. All for the same cost. You took the same basic mechanics and made them less powerful. I'm not sure how that's meant to be interpreted as a simple change.

Just because something isn't super fun to play against doesn't make it broken. Terminators aren't fun to fight at all, but that doesn't mean they need to be nerfed.

Short version of what I've been saying: Time Field is fine. It's been nerfed enough already. No need to pound it into the ground.

[Flash]

Being controversial is not my definition of bad game design. It's a SIGN of bad game design. Aspects of Dawn of War that reduce player agency are bad game design. What do I mean by that? Player agency has to do with how much control over actions occurring to and by the player that a player has. It does not mean how skilled with a mouse or hotkeys you are. "A player with agency is one who is able to make meaningful decisions about their actions, with regards to the game world".

The PVP aspect of an RTS is entirely designed about this premise. For example, If t2 comes around and my opponent gets a dreadnought. I decide to upgrade my devastator to have a lascannon. Thus I have a counter that allows me to play on against a vehicle. My opponent responds by getting bloodletters. I have agency because I made a choice to upgrade that has a significant effect on how the game plays. I now have a means to kill the dred and prevent my opponent from winning. If I had no agency, there would be nothing I could do, weapons or abilities could harm the drednaught and the game would be over. My opponent has agency by having the ability to and deciding to purchase bloodletters to deal with my laz. Keep in mind agency is not a dichotomy, it's a sliding scale.

I argue that DoW generally does player agency well. You have counters, options and decisions to make that matter. However there are/have been aspects of this game that could be improved in regards to how much agency a player has in regards to an ability/unit/situation. I argue that Time Field is an ability that reduces the agency of any player it is used on significantly. It cannot be countered, you cannot fight it, you only have the option to retreat, conceding valuable ground/time/ resoucrces. There is little counterplay to it (other than not being hit in the first place). "There was nothing I could have done". The problem is exacerbated in team games compared to 1v1. Thus I advocate for changing time field to be an ability that lessens the reduction of agency. I think we can improve on what relic gave us.

I also argue that the elite mod already has precedent for this. Why was subjucate changed? Because it allowed you to quickly eliminate another unit from your opponents roster (usually terminators) significantly changing the balance of power. There was little counterplay, you could not dodge it, and could exercise little control over the outcome with either macro purchases or micro skills. Yes I'm aware you can shoot the sorcerer down, or not buy expensive infantry units. But again that reduces player agency. Eliminating expensive infantry units (which are important to most race's t3) as a viable option at all is a severe handicap. Now think about the original intent of subjugation. Was it's purpose to allow you to take near instantly destroy any infantry unit on the field? Or was it intended to allow you to take control of an enemy unit, turn it against them and use it to fight them temporarily? What did you see it used for instead? The answer is more often the former. THIS WAS BAD GAME DESIGN!!!! The elite mod changed it and shifted the purpose back to it's original intent thus restoring agency to the player who had a unit subjugated in the process. It was un-fun to play against and now it is better. Another was changing whether the chains from Abyss pulled in retreating units. Again a restoration of player agency. your choice to hit retreat allows you to survive. How quickly you do it determines how well you pull it off. Others, changing FC flamer so it no longer instagibs units and gens, changing chaos t2 so that not every unit could be used against vehicles (a reduction in player agency), changing banshee retreat killing (a reduction in one players agency that went to far perhaps) etc etc.

There are several instances still in this game where player agency (and thus the un-fun factor) could be improved. Many of the t3 wargears have/or used to have this problem. They're supposed to be powerful, but they're not supposed to ensure domination. Time Field is one of those. Menacing Visage is another. So let's improve Time field. We can always improve things. Perfection is a constantly shifting goalpost.

Now back to specifically my proposal. I'm not declaring that this is the way we should change it. It is a possibility. A possibility that can be tweaked. Or one that can be discarded entirely when a better one comes along. Your getting hung up on the minutia of what I proposed, something that had little to no numbers attached to it, no mention of cost at all, and something that I said would be open to change.

No time field is not fine. It sucks to play against. But it could be better. I refuse to believe that you cannot have a powerful piece of T3 wargear that allows reasonable counterplay and does not reduce opposing player agency too much. So why not brainstorm a way for it to be?

Edit: please don't try and pick tiny flaws in the letter of my examples. We could get lost in arguing just how much agency was gained or lost whether it was good or bad in a thousand changes elite has made from retail or even just about arguing itself. Debate the spirit and the intent behind the words.

[Kvn]

Player agency has to do with how much control over actions occurring to and by the player that a player has. It does not mean how skilled with a mouse or hotkeys you are. "A player with agency is one who is able to make meaningful decisions about their actions, with regards to the game world".

Again, if this is your definition of poor game design, there's a lot more wrong with Dawn of War than just Time Field. Take the Space Marine nuke for example. There is no real counterplay. You can't really predict it. You can't retreat out of it. The range is pretty massive. Once that beam lands, all you can do is eat it and hope for the best. But the Space Marine nuke isn't overpowered. I don't think I've heard anyone claim that it is in recent memory. Hard control abilities are an integral part of this game. If they were to follow the definition you have, then all stun abilities would fall under that same category since they remove the ability for the opposing player to counteract them other than just not getting hit in the first place.

I argue that Time Field is an ability that reduces the agency of any player it is used on significantly. It cannot be countered, you cannot fight it, you only have the option to retreat, conceding valuable ground/time/ resoucrces. There is little counterplay to it (other than not being hit in the first place). "There was nothing I could have done". The problem is exacerbated in team games compared to 1v1. Thus I advocate for changing time field to be an ability that lessens the reduction of agency. I think we can improve on what relic gave us.

I'm sorry, but this is a blatant lie. You can play around Time Field. Don't blob up. If your squads get caught in it, walk out. Sometimes that won't be feasible and you'll have to retreat, but that's no different than any hard hitting abilities. 40% slow isn't immobilization, and the radius isn't all that harsh unless you get caught in the center.

Why was subjucate changed? Because it allowed you to quickly eliminate another unit from your opponents roster (usually terminators) significantly changing the balance of power. There was little counterplay, you could not dodge it, and could exercise little control over the outcome with either macro purchases or micro skills. Yes I'm aware you can shoot the sorcerer down, or not buy expensive infantry units. But again that reduces player agency. Eliminating expensive infantry units (which are important to most race's t3) as a viable option at all is a severe handicap. Now think about the original intent of subjugation. Was it's purpose to allow you to take near instantly destroy any infantry unit on the field? Or was it intended to allow you to take control of an enemy unit, turn it against them and use it to fight them temporarily? What did you see it used for instead? The answer is more often the former. THIS WAS BAD GAME DESIGN!!!! The elite mod changed it and shifted the purpose back to it's original intent thus restoring agency to the player who had a unit subjugated in the process. It was un-fun to play against and now it is better. Another was changing whether the chains from Abyss pulled in retreating units. Again a restoration of player agency. your choice to hit retreat allows you to survive. How quickly you do it determines how well you pull it off. Others, changing FC flamer so it no longer instagibs units and gens, changing chaos t2 so that not every unit could be used against vehicles (a reduction in player agency), changing banshee retreat killing (a reduction in one players agency that went to far perhaps) etc etc.

Everything you have listed was changed because it was literally unable to be avoided once the situation had been set up. If a Sorc caught out your Terminator squad alone and he had a nuke, they were dead. If the FC got to your gens with his flamer, they were dead. If Banshees caught you in retreat, you were in for a world of hurt, and often would be dead. Time Field doesn't instantly remove all options. You can still play around it, or even in it. It's a control ability, not an I-win button.

are several instances still in this game where player agency (and thus the un-fun factor) could be improved. Many of the t3 wargears have/or used to have this problem. They're supposed to be powerful, but they're not supposed to ensure domination. Time Field is one of those. Menacing Visage is another. So let's improve Time field. We can always improve things. Perfection is a constantly shifting goalpost.

Change is meant to be taken slowly. Completely reworking an ability to the point where it is entirely unrecognizable is something only to be taken in the most extreme circumstances. To date, only two wargears have ever undergone such a huge change. It isn't something to drop lightly based on whether you feel something is fun to play against or not.

back to specifically my proposal. I'm not declaring that this is the way we should change it. It is a possibility. A possibility that can be tweaked. Or one that can be discarded entirely when a better one comes along. Your getting hung up on the minutia of what I proposed, something that had little to no numbers attached to it, no mention of cost at all, and something that I said would be open to change.

You gave quite a few mentions of things you wanted changed, but made no mention of price. Therefore, it was heavily implied you wanted the price to remain the same. Regardless of what it became however, it still wouldn't be worth the cost given the ability is just a weaker version of a T1 suppression team.

time field is not fine. It sucks to play against. But it could be better. I refuse to believe that you cannot have a powerful piece of T3 wargear that allows reasonable counterplay and does not reduce opposing player agency to much. So why not brainstorm a way for it to be?

Brainstorming a change is one thing. Asking for the entire ability to be scrapped in favor of something else is another. You seem to be exaggerating the raw power of the Time Field, so I'll as, is this coming from a 1v1 perspective, or a 3v3?

[Aguxyz]

Player agency has to do with how much control over actions occurring to and by the player that a player has. It does not mean how skilled with a mouse or hotkeys you are. "A player with agency is one who is able to make meaningful decisions about their actions, with regards to the game world".

Again, if this is your definition of poor game design, there's a lot more wrong with Dawn of War than just Time Field. Take the Space Marine nuke for example. There is no real counterplay. You can't really predict it. You can't retreat out of it. The range is pretty massive. Once that beam lands, all you can do is eat it and hope for the best. But the Space Marine nuke isn't overpowered. I don't think I've heard anyone claim that it is in recent memory. Hard control abilities are an integral part of this game. If they were to follow the definition you have, then all stun abilities would fall under that same category since they remove the ability for the opposing player to counteract them other than just not getting hit in the first place.

You're comparing a nuke to a T3 wargear hardly a good comparison lol

[Kvn]

I was comparing the mechanics he labeled as being poor game design. I'm well aware that the two serve very different functions.

[egewithin]

Tell me; if we remove the cancelling ranged attacks thing from Time Field, will it be fixed?

[Thunderhost]

Tell me; if we remove the cancelling ranged attacks thing from Time Field, will it be fixed?

I think it needs to be decided whether it's broke first..

[BloatedChamp]

Tell me; if we remove the cancelling ranged attacks thing from Time Field, will it be fixed?

I think it needs to be decided whether it's broke first..

I personally see Time-field as filling in too many roles. I understand that it's tier 3 and that it's expensive. But it's a no-brainer wargear. given that it does three things.

1. Slow targets, from a good range.

2. Cancels ability use, for a good 10 seconds( according to the online codex).

3. Cancels ranged and melee attacks.


That's just cheesy. Each of those in their own right is a powerful ability. Yet this wargear combines all three. This essentially takes out a unit from doing anything for 10 seconds, worse if a blob is caught.... How is this justifiable?

[Asmon]

Time-field is not a no brainer wargear. In 1v1 it is inferior to both other armours.

[Flash]

Player agency has to do with how much control over actions occurring to and by the player that a player has. It does not mean how skilled with a mouse or hotkeys you are. "A player with agency is one who is able to make meaningful decisions about their actions, with regards to the game world".

Again, if this is your definition of poor game design, there's a lot more wrong with Dawn of War than just Time Field. Take the Space Marine nuke for example. There is no real counterplay. You can't really predict it. You can't retreat out of it. The range is pretty massive. Once that beam lands, all you can do is eat it and hope for the best. But the Space Marine nuke isn't overpowered. I don't think I've heard anyone claim that it is in recent memory. Hard control abilities are an integral part of this game. If they were to follow the definition you have, then all stun abilities would fall under that same category since they remove the ability for the opposing player to counteract them other than just not getting hit in the first place.

Yes Orbital reduces the opposing player agency as do most nukes. However it does not do so enough to be detrimental to the game experience. You can predict it because you get a big icon on the ground and a few seconds time to move out of the away. Depending on how quickly the player reacts, they can mitigate or avoid most of the damage. Add in to that the the nuke itself doesn't frequently get you squad wipes and you have something that achieves good balance. DoW is in general fine to good when to comes to player agency. Doesn't mean there aren't some issues, or areas of improvement.

I argue that Time Field is an ability that reduces the agency of any player it is used on significantly. It cannot be countered, you cannot fight it, you only have the option to retreat, conceding valuable ground/time/ resoucrces. There is little counterplay to it (other than not being hit in the first place). "There was nothing I could have done". The problem is exacerbated in team games compared to 1v1. Thus I advocate for changing time field to be an ability that lessens the reduction of agency. I think we can improve on what relic gave us.

I'm sorry, but this is a blatant lie. You can play around Time Field. Don't blob up. If your squads get caught in it, walk out. Sometimes that won't be feasible and you'll have to retreat, but that's no different than any hard hitting abilities. 40% slow isn't immobilization, and the radius isn't all that harsh unless you get caught in the center.

See the part below when I talk about 3v3 vs 1v1.

Why was subjucate changed? Because it allowed you to quickly eliminate another unit from your opponents roster (usually terminators) significantly changing the balance of power. There was little counterplay, you could not dodge it, and could exercise little control over the outcome with either macro purchases or micro skills. Yes I'm aware you can shoot the sorcerer down, or not buy expensive infantry units. But again that reduces player agency. Eliminating expensive infantry units (which are important to most race's t3) as a viable option at all is a severe handicap. Now think about the original intent of subjugation. Was it's purpose to allow you to take near instantly destroy any infantry unit on the field? Or was it intended to allow you to take control of an enemy unit, turn it against them and use it to fight them temporarily? What did you see it used for instead? The answer is more often the former. THIS WAS BAD GAME DESIGN!!!! The elite mod changed it and shifted the purpose back to it's original intent thus restoring agency to the player who had a unit subjugated in the process. It was un-fun to play against and now it is better. Another was changing whether the chains from Abyss pulled in retreating units. Again a restoration of player agency. your choice to hit retreat allows you to survive. How quickly you do it determines how well you pull it off. Others, changing FC flamer so it no longer instagibs units and gens, changing chaos t2 so that not every unit could be used against vehicles (a reduction in player agency), changing banshee retreat killing (a reduction in one players agency that went to far perhaps) etc etc.

Everything you have listed was changed because it was literally unable to be avoided once the situation had been set up. If a Sorc caught out your Terminator squad alone and he had a nuke, they were dead. If the FC got to your gens with his flamer, they were dead. If Banshees caught you in retreat, you were in for a world of hurt, and often would be dead. Time Field doesn't instantly remove all options. You can still play around it, or even in it. It's a control ability, not an I-win button.

"everything you have listed was changed because it was literally unable to be avoided once the situation had been set up". That's about as perfect a definition of something that swings player agency too far in the wrong direction as I could have come up with. It absolutely is an I-win button. Sure if you just use it and follow it up with nothing then it's just a delaying tactic. Unless you're desperate that's a poor way to use it. You follow it up with other things. It's usually a death sentence for vehicles when you don't use it in a vacuum. "It was unable to be avoided once the situation had been set up". Can you deny that it's frequently combined with singularity and eldritch with frequently devastating effect?

are several instances still in this game where player agency (and thus the un-fun factor) could be improved. Many of the t3 wargears have/or used to have this problem. They're supposed to be powerful, but they're not supposed to ensure domination. Time Field is one of those. Menacing Visage is another. So let's improve Time field. We can always improve things. Perfection is a constantly shifting goalpost.

Change is meant to be taken slowly. Completely reworking an ability to the point where it is entirely unrecognizable is something only to be taken in the most extreme circumstances. To date, only two wargears have ever undergone such a huge change. It isn't something to drop lightly based on whether you feel something is fun to play against or not.

TF is not bad design because it is unfun to play against. TF is unfun to play against because it is bad design. Hence my reasoning is not based on it being unfun. The unfun nature is a symptom of the problem. As for change taken slowly I agree. If you can think of ways to increment changes to TF I'm all ears. I'm also not demanding change. I'm not demanding it for this patch or the next. In fact I said nothing about executing changes to time field at all. I think it should be changed and I have given my rationale for it. Seeing as how this is all just theory and time I also see no problem with looking at rework of it.

back to specifically my proposal. I'm not declaring that this is the way we should change it. It is a possibility. A possibility that can be tweaked. Or one that can be discarded entirely when a better one comes along. Your getting hung up on the minutia of what I proposed, something that had little to no numbers attached to it, no mention of cost at all, and something that I said would be open to change.

You gave quite a few mentions of things you wanted changed, but made no mention of price. Therefore, it was heavily implied you wanted the price to remain the same. Regardless of what it became however, it still wouldn't be worth the cost given the ability is just a weaker version of a T1 suppression team.

My proposal implied nothing about price. I deliberately did not include numbers at all except for the slow description. It was not a fully realized proposal. I was looking for feedback on whether people thought the idea at its core was viable before adding concrete numbers. I was also hoping it would spur discussion about how we could make TF better.
I do not share your view on how underwhelming it would be. Such an ability would give you extra time to dodge a grenade, time for melee units to close in on a suppression team as no team suppresses in one burst anymore. Melee units would get more attacks in and thus a greater chance for specials. It would allow units to win stand up fights that they otherwise wouldn't. More time to kite AV for vehichles. More time to gain advantageous positioning. Such an ability would be extremely powerful and not in anyway like a lesser suppression.

time field is not fine. It sucks to play against. But it could be better. I refuse to believe that you cannot have a powerful piece of T3 wargear that allows reasonable counterplay and does not reduce opposing player agency to much. So why not brainstorm a way for it to be?

Brainstorming a change is one thing. Asking for the entire ability to be scrapped in favor of something else is another. You seem to be exaggerating the raw power of the Time Field, so I'll as, is this coming from a 1v1 perspective, or a 3v3?

The two are not mutually exclusive. And even if they were, so what? Caeltos will make his decisions as he sees fit. I have no problems with that. He's generally done pretty well so far.

I play mainly 3v3, something that I've made no secret about before. "Oh but your opinion isn't valid/isnt worth as much now". I watch plenty of 1v1s and while my skill is lesser in that mode due to lack of interest, I am familiar with it. And the reasons that TF are bad are independent of mode. Problem is exponentially worse in 3v3 than 1v1 due to the nature of the mode. The elite mod prioritizes 1v1 play. But it does not do so at the cost of, or with no regard to the other modes.


The core of why we are disagreeing seems to be because I think TF could be made better in terms of design and implementation and thus result in better play experience while you do not seem to want to see any possible ideas to make it better.

Man I hope the formatting this comes out well. Doing this on mobile is a pain.

Asmon, you say it is inferior to the other armors in 1v1 (I am not disputing that statement). Would, you mind sharing your thoughts on TF in 1v1? Why it's subpar, what's good and bad about it?