![]() Perhaps AI will have a hard time dealing with the improved gameplay quality though, ironically. If those anti-T4 units are crap vs everything else, balance should be adequate and lead to a more dynamic and interesting game where having a larger amount of T4s doesn't guarantee a win (even if making it more likely). almost everything except a few anti-T4 units available already in T1 or T2. But it'll not stop spam.", under a transitive system that is true as long as T4 cost efficiency remains highest of everything, but that is not what we're suggesting. Now on the "Reduce effectivness of T4 (make them not so powerful). As to why: If "T4 MUST BE more powerful" the game would be dull because it would always be best to build as many T4 units as you can, i.e. It's just a question of accentuating that even more so that certain T1 or T2 units can be cost effective against mass T4 spam (while preferably suck vs everything else). What we already have is a non-transitive system where some counters can be more cost effective despite being lower tier. the cost efficiency) is better for T4 than everything else unconditionally. If unit strength between tiers is transitive (pretty flawed assumption I know), T1 < T2 < T3 < T4 and it will always be good to spam T4 if the strength / cost ratio (i.e. ![]() Reduce effectivness of T4 (make them not so powerful). ![]() Originally posted by aclyte:Any kind of mechanic to T1, countering T4 are too unlogical - T4 MUST BE more powerful, than t1-t3ฤก.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |