| unit costs | |
|
+3RuneSlayer Savvage Claudandus 7 posters |
Author | Message |
---|
Claudandus
Posts : 585 Join date : 2013-10-21
| Subject: unit costs Fri Oct 25, 2013 12:17 am | |
| Dont you think that you went a little bit over the top with the increase of the unit prices? All my ressources are currently spend on Artillery, cause I really feel the need to disband them, when they gain endurance after the first Lvl. up. And why is it that none of my artillery is gaining strength? The basic AP of artillery is less than that of the cavalry, yet i have to pay twice as much for a new artillery unit. Thats really frustrating.
None the less overall a very good job on the latest update. | |
|
| |
Savvage
Posts : 297 Join date : 2013-06-05 Location : Rosario, Philippines
| Subject: Re: unit costs Fri Oct 25, 2013 12:40 am | |
| It's actually pretty cheap, compared to most games. That's your problem if you keep on disbanding them. | |
|
| |
RuneSlayer
Posts : 3124 Join date : 2012-11-13
| Subject: Re: unit costs Fri Oct 25, 2013 1:03 am | |
| Considering the fact that you don't lose units if they are destroyed in battle (as the case was a few months ago), I would say that their cost is logical. | |
|
| |
Claudandus
Posts : 585 Join date : 2013-10-21
| Subject: Re: unit costs Fri Oct 25, 2013 1:05 am | |
| Of course I disband them or whats the use of an artillery with endurance gain? When the units where pretty cheap I had no problem with the random stats distribution after Lvl.-up, but now its just frustrating. Missile on heros (could be usefull in very rare cases) and endurance on artillery (always useless) are so useless, that it is just frustrating. | |
|
| |
Claudandus
Posts : 585 Join date : 2013-10-21
| Subject: Re: unit costs Fri Oct 25, 2013 1:09 am | |
| - RuneSlayer wrote:
- Considering the fact that you don't lose units if they are destroyed in battle (as the case was a few months ago), I would say that their cost is logical.
Compared to the worst case scenario everything seems pretty reasonable, but its none the less frustrating. I can live with heroes gaining useless stuff, but since i cant equip artillery, its just annoying when you see them gaining endurance time after time when they should be gaining missile, strength and morale. | |
|
| |
RuneSlayer
Posts : 3124 Join date : 2012-11-13
| Subject: Re: unit costs Fri Oct 25, 2013 1:14 am | |
| - schriftsetzer wrote:
- RuneSlayer wrote:
- Considering the fact that you don't lose units if they are destroyed in battle (as the case was a few months ago), I would say that their cost is logical.
Compared to the worst case scenario everything seems pretty reasonable, but its none the less frustrating. I can live with heroes gaining useless stuff, but since i cant equip artillery, its just annoying when you see them gaining endurance time after time when they should be gaining missile, strength and morale.
Receiving missile fire from enemy archers is always good to have endurance on your artillery. At least it works for my army. | |
|
| |
Fyrr The Unyielding
Posts : 802 Join date : 2013-05-31
| Subject: Re: unit costs Fri Oct 25, 2013 2:57 am | |
| - RuneSlayer wrote:
Receiving missile fire from enemy archers is always good to have endurance on your artillery. At least it works for my army. Aww and I thought I was the only one who liked my defensive artillery, everyone else seem to kill such units My +18 endurance arty is sometimes able to kill quite a few units in melee too. Poor enemy. Morale on arty seems pretty useless though... Unit costs are better now than used to be, prevents noobs from changing their armies every other day. (provided they buy/disband at least hi). | |
|
| |
Ellthune
Posts : 170 Join date : 2013-08-18 Age : 25 Location : Florida
| Subject: Re: unit costs Fri Oct 25, 2013 8:50 am | |
| - RuneSlayer wrote:
- Considering the fact that you don't lose units if they are destroyed in battle (as the case was a few months ago), I would say that their cost is logical.
This | |
|
| |
jellybiscuit
Posts : 12 Join date : 2013-08-31
| Subject: Re: unit costs Tue Oct 29, 2013 9:11 am | |
| - RuneSlayer wrote:
- Considering the fact that you don't lose units if they are destroyed in battle (as the case was a few months ago), I would say that their cost is logical.
So... you're defending the current setting by calling every other setting you've chosen illogical? Nothing builds player confidence like arbitrary changes. | |
|
| |
RuneSlayer
Posts : 3124 Join date : 2012-11-13
| Subject: Re: unit costs Tue Oct 29, 2013 9:35 am | |
| I am merely saying that every action has a reaction and the actions done in the course of several months (changing healing times, not losing units, not losing XP from defeats) needed their reaction in order to balance the changes.
In a game where there is no permanent death and you don't need to buy again and again new units, it just doesn't make sense to have costs like 150 wood, 150 stone, 200 iron, 350 gold when the user has reached a mid level. | |
|
| |
Bonezz
Posts : 47 Join date : 2013-08-23
| Subject: Re: unit costs Fri Nov 01, 2013 12:42 am | |
| I would like to point out that, yet again
THIS WASN"T PUT IN THE PATCH NOTES!
NEITHER WAS THE NM/COOP FRAGMENT DROP NERF! (going from 0-2 to 0-1!)
| |
|
| |
Sponsored content
| Subject: Re: unit costs | |
| |
|
| |
| unit costs | |
|