[Suggestion] Harsher penalties for encumbrance

from Elemental Forums

I think an issue with the unit designer is that the penalties for encumbrance is minor compared to the gains from more armor, at least for melee. A melee unit at 80% encumbrance (more armor) is almost always better than a unit with the same traits at 40% encumbrance and +2 initiative. This leads to armies that are dominated by melee troops with the heaviest possible armor, since they have superior or equal survivability in every scenario.

I think a good penalty for encumbrance would be to give a vulnerability to being knocked prone, since with heavier equipment it will be more difficult to get up if you ever get knocked down. Something like a 20% for medium and a 40% for heavy encumbrance . Mounts should also no longer provide 100% prone resistance, which makes prone attacks completely useless against players, who usually field all mounted units from mid game on. This bonus will not be completely removed from mounts, since the +20 weight limit will usually move the unit to a lighter encumbrance penalty, resulting in less prone vulnerability. A side effect of this will be a buff to the mace line of weaponry, which will become much more useful against heavily armored/weighted units. This should allow maces to be more competitive against swords/spears lines of weaponry, especially in the late game where plate armor renders them obsolete currently.

Another possibility is to have encumbrance penalties for other stats, such as 10% hp penalty for medium and 20% for heavy. This will make lightly weighted units more effective against mage units/tactical spells/armor ignoring attacks/curse than their heavier counterparts. This will at least give some tactical advantage to having light troops other than their recruitment cost.

10,493 views 10 replies
Reply #1 from Elemental Forums Top

Dodge penalty for encumbrance.  Or, looking at at from another angle, Dodge bonus if you're lightly equipped.

Reply #2 from Elemental Forums Top

i agree with a dodge penalty, that would help. I also think there should be slightly more resolution to it. Like 3-4 tiers of penalties instead of two.

Perhaps as well, we could have -1 movement at the highest level of encumbrance.

 

Regarding mounts, yes they are silly and overpowered. There's basically no reason NOT to have a mount. that's an issue which needs addressed.

Elemental: Reforged
Reply #3 from Stardock Forums Top

either way, some other adjustment is likely needed.

 

You can stay heavily encumbered and ignore the weight reduction buffs if you just add initiative buffs instead.  The only thing you need to worry about is whether or not you can actually carry the armour/weapon (only matters for 'over' encumbered units - beyond the weight limit).

 

A lack of dodge bonuses (a % penalty to dodge) would help.  You're armoured, not a dancer.  Ofc, that only makes sense if the armour gives a balanced damage reduction vs. the dodge damage reduction.

 

Or

- Dodge > bash, spear

- Armour > sword, ranged

 

Reply #4 from Elemental Forums Top

I think that the Fast trait cost should be based on the unit's encumbrance.  If you're heavily armoured, it costs more to train you to act quickly with all that weight on you.

And yes, this should add to the cost/wages when you're upgrading the unit to heavier armour, sneaky pants.

Reply #5 from Stardock Forums Top

BONUSES would be better

+ init when unarmed (cause you get +3 with a dagger, you should have +5 without!)

+ init and dodge when lightly encumbered (<40%)

- init and dodge when heavily encumbered (80%+)

 

Reply #6 from Elemental Forums Top

Well you can't be unarmed so far as I know, pioneers aside.

Daggers are hopeless unless you add the Finesse trait, damage is marginally better than clubs and is absorbed easily by very little armour.

Reply #7 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting pdifolco, reply 6
BONUSES would be better 
End of pdifolco's quote

No they wouldn't. That kind of retarded attitude is what causes power creep in MMORPGS. Everyone wants "balance" but nobody wants to see their favourite thing nerfed. It makes no sense. If a problem needs solved, you solve it. you don't readjust everything else to create an environment suitable for the problem to live in.

Quoting pdifolco, reply 6

+ init when unarmed (cause you get +3 with a dagger, you should have +5 without!)

 

End of pdifolco's quote

It doesn't make logical sense to have a bonus for doing nothing. A human, in their natural unarmed, unenchanted, unarmoured state, should have no bonuses to anything. It doesn't make sense to have an initiative bonus while unarmed, where is this iniitative bonus coming from? This is what base values are for. I suppose you COULD increase the base initiative value, but give all weapons a penalty to match (even daggers would have to be negative to satisfy your logic). However i don't think this would be correct to do.

The logical explanation why a dagger or sword would give you initiative (thus making you faster by using them) is reach. With a sword, your arm is effectively twice as long, meaning that you can strike at enemies without stepping forward and putting yourself in more danger, and thusly also having less recovery afterwards.

Using a dagger is essentially identical to being unarmed, but with a pointy hand. The sharpness of a dagger means that you don't need to use as much force as you would when punching, and you can focus on moving more quickly. 

 

 


Quoting pdifolco, reply 6

+ init and dodge when lightly encumbered (<40%)

- init and dodge when heavily encumbered (80%+)
 
End of pdifolco's quote

given the aforementioned logic, pure penalties are the only thing that makes sense. It's illogical that wearing armor would speed you up, yet wearing a little too much would slow you down again. 

Yes penalties to dodge make sense even when people have zero dodge already. IT just goes negative and ADDs to the enemy's accuracy rather than reducing it. This makes reasonable sense, as it's a lot easier to hit a statue than a person, it doesn't move. The slower someone is, the easier they are to hit. Even a cowardly newbie who doesn't know his sword very well, can hit a statue.

 

As to strengthening the penalties, I think it would make sense to adapt some abilities. For example, the Dodge I-III traits, could be changed to only apply their effects when the champion is <50% encumbrance, so the penalty would be losing some of your existing abilities, rather than stacking on a flat amount which may or may not fully counteract them.

Reply #8 from Stardock Forums Top

Nanako

I fail to understand your logic

Why would wearing or wielding anything make you faster ? I take a dagger and pweh I'm faster ??

Same for dodging, you won't get a bonus for wearing somethnig, but for not wearing much.

Regarding bonuses vs penalties, the only difference is whether you consider that base values are "best ones, naked" or "average ones, given normal equipment". It doesn"t make the game more or less balanced,  it's just a reference point, and "average" are better reference points for most people.

 

Reply #9 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting pdifolco, reply 9
Nanako
Why would wearing or wielding anything make you faster ? I take a dagger and pweh I'm faster ?? 
End of pdifolco's quote

wearing wouldn't. Unless it's a magic pair of boots or something, anything you wear is going to slow you down.

What you have to remember here is that we're not talking about speed. we're talking about speed IN COMBAT. it's a lot easier to swing a sword than it is to punch someone, because to punch them you have to get closer, and use more of your body.

 

 

Reply #10 from Elemental Forums Top

Essentially you can have a go at someone with a dagger and be ready to do another attack in a far shorter time than it takes them to get ready to swing their much heavier (but potentially much deadlier) weapon.