With one exception, the whole Eldar Army has these two defining skills that help set them apart from SMs in TT. It's important to note that these two skills go together. But how do you implement it without breaking the game in our favor? For example, I hate the spam ADA keys players familiar with COD do. I feel as though this movement should wreck your aim somehow. However, fleet should be some sort of improved sprint, and Eldar shouldn't lose accuracy while moving (the exception being the ADADADADADADA). Thoughts?
Yeah, I have never played eldar with battle focus but they feel incomplete without fleet. I honestly think they should just run faster and only lose a small portion of their total movement speed while ADS. Also I hate wiggle spam almost as much as min maxing. It kills any sense of imersion and always looks doofy.
TT rules, Eldar toughness 3, SM toughness 4. Just make their durability 75% that of the SMs. Make them faster and allow them to shoot and run (that is batle focus). That is their thing. We need to test it before it becomes OP. I think lowering their durability would hinder them more than given them battle focus. But that is Eldar lore.
The TT is balanced around the effectiveness of dozens of models and doesn't rely on the experience of individual players. You can't just take rules from an entirely different system, plop them in live and 3d environments and expect them to work.
But aye, I'm not sure FoF should be an active skill, so I feel we should just be faster and have a lower movement-related aiming penalty. We can then be a little bit (Scorpions, Dragons, Reapers, maybe Warlocks) or a lot (Avengers, Banshees, Hawks) flimsier and it would be fine.
I think you can if you do the math. To me it's all logical. BS and WS, can't use because it's player based. Toughness and Wounds are your Health, Armor is armor, Strength is damage potential. Initiative could equate to acceleration or ability to turn. Its not a direct relation, its the power base--the relationship among the units. Eldar are 75% weaker than orks and space marines. A very simple linear model can be created: toughness * 25 * wounds = Health. (7 - armor) * 25 = Armor (Stength * X) = Damage That X is the only variable which depends upon how quick you want to kill the enemy. The bolt gun now kills a SM in 9 shots, that means X would be 5.5. Using the same X for all weapons, plasma would kill in about 5.2 shots, lascannon about 4 shots. That X could also be adjusted by the AP rating of the weapon making plasma and lascannon more deadly--I probably would but on a AP factor. Granted its a different system--a system where you have more durability. You would also not see the melee rape you see now. But you would see more factional variance play out. There is tons of thought and play testing in GW games, it may not appear so but it is there. That is what WH40K fans are use to seeing, that is the feel that I want want. Otherwise I'll play a CoD or Planetside. And as for the unit versus person. That's inconsequential. Coming from a RPG background I had problems with the units of WH40K and not having the buffed characters. But when you get into tactical play its not about characters or units, its a thing with X health that can deliver Y damage. That is all that it is, whether you are playing a skirmish game or battle game. The amount of units/characters controlled is quite comparable.
This is never how game development, or any human interface, works. You are attempting to map logarithmic, exponential, and other much more complex nonlinear functions on to simple linear systems. And, not only are the TT stats vague, they don't account for player ability, weapon characteristics that aren't modeled in the table top (velocity, drop, projectile size, ammunition limitations, reload time, etc) it also fails to account for variations in player ability. A terminator played by a terrible enough player can easily lose to a 'boy with a brilliant player and that difference needs to be accounted for. Playing every character needs to be fun, or else no one will play them and that will destroy faction balance. There is nothing "simple" about game design and the architecture laid out by GW is hardly complete enough to just drop into an entirely different environment and expect it to work. As far as balancing per unit, I completely disagree with you based on my experience. There isn't much to resolve this because your experience is different and thus not comparable.
you mean ada spam like this ? : https://www.epicgames.com/unrealtou...y-unreal-tournament-movement-basics-part-one/ - till 1:00 look how fluent movement have not only ada or - 0:45 till 3:10 Shooter game tend to have unfortunately movement dance in chaotic neuron war-zone : . ( For eldar ADA spam is inaccurate so they need to move like a tank only forward/bakward to not loose accuracy when shoot ? If you see the posted links you will see the movement is more complex then just simply ADA spam is more like intuitive dance but have in build ADA too and circle and infinite trajectory etc. If i need to guess the dev simply just will play with accuracy % numbers when moving and shooting for different race and faction because cant do it in a shooter (genre) game to make half faction(player base) sitting duck when the others not -or they can movement freak glass cannon vs sitting duck ? : )- -
