Background Image

Eldar should have 15% less EHP than LSM equivalents not 25%. Discuss.

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Nosfantor, Jun 4, 2017.

  1. Nosfantor Recruit

    Toughness of 10 gives approximately 5% mitigation so pre-nerf Eldar had 80 toughness to LSMs 100, effectively making them 10% less durable.

    I'm just wondering why the Devs felt the need to knee-jerk nerf Eldar durability to 25% less than LSM rather than address the real issues such as Eldar roadkill.

    I don't think most veteran players of were complaining that Eldar infantry extremely durable for their mobility/hitbox in the first place so whilst I agree that perhaps a nerf was needed, surely it makes sense to nerf slowly such as to 15% less EHP and then assess performance. If it's warranted then a nerf to 20% less EHP.
  2. Don't waste your time the devs don't care or will not listen to our suggestions.

    There are hundreds of threads with great ideas, yet all of them are ignored. Even in the streams suggestions just get brushed over or get a plain no.
    Konok0, Alb, Daemonkz and 6 others like this.
  3. It was easier?
    Krayt likes this.
  4. ANGRY MARINE ANGRY-MARINE Well-Known Member

    Discuss?

    Sounds like you're saying we should relentlessly attack each other for no reason at all other than because of the factions we prefer. LET'S FUCKING DO IT.
  5. Valentine Iyan Firebrand

    I don't think we need more health just a more capable capping class. Catapults run out of ammo too quick and tend to suffer against orks who take less headshot damage, have even higher health and can throw toughness on to make it even worse.

    If Dire Avengers were a bit more deadly or just had a lot more ammo to fire inbetween reloading it would solve so much of the Eldar's problems right now. We still have to use fire dragons shenanigans or other zany stuff to win in guild vs guild though. =c

    Right now I think the devs should focus on making each faction and class fun to play then balance stuff.
    Drakonite and DrDooManiC like this.
  6. Belphegor LordSloth Preacher

    The Goldennumber you are locking for is pretty much 40 HP or Armor. Which would mean in our current meta that you need 1 additional hit with a regular bolter or a CqCbolter or the shoota ork weapons.

    However this scratches the problem only on the surface. The DA has also issues with his weaponchoice. The ASC's mag is far too small and it could need a slight buff in Dmg output to bring the TTK vs Orks, or tanked up Chaos / LSM closer together.

    Against 140-160 Toughness targets you can only ask for them to be gentle with your corpse if they turn around to focus their attention after you hit them 3-5 times in the back.
  7. I dont mind HP pool anymore. 150 or 50. Just give more base armor if our bodies are weak. Isnt it wise? We cant really go 1v1 if not shenanigans against someone. More armor, less HP means we have to go hit and run, but having less armor and HP both means we have to hit and die, or run and run, or die and die.

    add 25 armor or little more even. Then i will go with base stats not with 75 armor JOKE. Its less than a headshot hit with cqb bolter and if you go without anything - just a plain one-hit-kill of stalker gaybolter.
    Drakonite and Firskon like this.
  8. Catnium Catnium Well-Known Member

    aret thou asking for auto win vs ppl who actually run a survival build ?
    you can't balance games like this .
    160T is not baseline.
    your baseline should not be comparable to this.
    Not every ork of chaos marine runs around with these stats you know.
    plus you have Twin Linked SC. takes care of this problem easily because it always kills me in an eye blink regardless of the 160T
    Tior likes this.
  9. DongSlayer DongSlayer Steam Early Access

    [​IMG]
    Tior and Dreadspectre like this.
  10. Asyran Eldritch Arkhona Vanguard

    But then it doesn't matter what you think either... Than does it matter that you said that it doesn't matter?

    [​IMG]
    Tior and Drakonite like this.

Share This Page