Everything is Broken again, AGAIN.

Games Halo Wars Series
19

> 2533274792014876;8:
> > 2535409307352389;4:
> > They listen too much to the community. Play the game yourselves and balance it with some input from the community but don’t just take any idiot opinion as gospel. You have to balance the game in 1v1 matches so play a lot of 1v1 matches with all leaders and see what works and what doesn’t. Balancing the game based on any more than 1v1 is crazy…
>
> I will admit very quickly that I am not the best at 1v1 games. I always have favored team games over 1v1 on every game I play because I prefer co-operative play and working together within teams. I would say I should play many more 1v1s, but instead of trying to pretend I am amazing when I’m not at it I and my colleagues watch various 1v1 streams or videos, competitive tournament videos, view lots of interactions from the game data, talk with hundreds of various players surrounding balance from all levels of skill, and work directly with many highly competitive players within the community including previous balance designers who helped build the game.
>
> I would say we have a system in place that is working for the vast majority at this time. By no means am I saying it can’t be improved as it is ever evolving, but I would say we take a lot of information into account before making core changes to the game and how it plays than, “any idiot['s] opinion as gospel.”
>
> This includes publicly posting patch notes weeks before the changes go out to allow the community to offer feedback on it regardless of whether it is good or bad.
>
> The players will always know the game better than any dev in terms of what works and what doesn’t. Unless you do nothing but work on the game and then go home and play it in all of your spare time, there is not way you will be as knowledgeable as the people who actively play it. Working all day leaves little to no room to play it to the point of those who play as much as a developer works on it. The opinions and knowledge that players have can point in a direction that we may not think of as devs as well which is another key point that many forget. I wholeheartedly disagree fundamentally that listening to the community is a bad thing and most definitely won’t stop.
>
> Do I personally disagree with people from the community on various ideas? Definitely. Do I personally push back on things that I don’t agree with? More definitely. Do I make everyone happy with the changes that happen? Lol. That will never happen and I don’t even entertain the thought that one could do that. If a sole individual could do that - they would get paid hundreds of millions of dollars and there would only be 1 game anyone ever played ever again.
>
> TLDR; The communities input if proven by data and in practice helps shape the game’s future with each balance update. If a dial is shifted too far one way or the other it gets corrected, but not listening enough is a problem and can put one out of touch with the fan base you have. At least that is my personal opinion and it’s not going to change until someone shows me a better way. One must entertain the thought that they don’t know everything and always strive to learn. Working with the community is my personal way of constantly learning more about the game I love very much and have poured my life into for nearly 2 years now.
>
> Cheers,
> Postums

I also strongly agree with the rhetoric that all game modes should be balanced and like some have said 3v3’s are in my belief the most enjoyable and come together moments in a strategy game as nothing beats teaming up with friends and winning games by engaging in cooperation and overcoming unpredictable situations, as a team, as a unit.In my personal opinion the majority of the game is incredibly well balanced and the amount of time effort and hardwork by the developers is evident even with the multitude of leaders they have still managed to make them all viable and there is no 1 alpha leader they all have their perks and play styles.

The only thing I believe to be not balanced in this game is the Anti Air and as such gives air a overpowered state I have done some research into this and although the community is split on this subject I believe a compromise can be met with adjustments to AA power costs and damage output because as it stands AA is not even a threat to a full population of air due to manuevrability and damage output.

There is far to much single unit air army’s buzzing around and this is without a doubt a huge exploit that can be abused and is abused by many players which are the people on the otherside of this argument/debate so in closing please take the time to check out my own findings and possible solutions to this issue over here at. Air is still viable as a single unit balance issue forum.

https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/forums/38bd6e2ebbb14e5b9b359bb029588800/topics/air-is-still-viable-as-a-single-unit-balance-issue/b7be7c7a-e1d5-4028-ac30-703a97c7583e/posts?page=2#post26

And maybe in the future we will see more balanced army compositions and strategy take form in this truly amazing RTS series.

20

<mark>This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not flame or attack other members.</mark>
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.

> 2533274947029744;17:
> I invite you to watch this video from team respawn which is evidence of my factual statements of metrics in game such as the cost of units which doesn’t need evidence its there in game at the vehicle and air production buildings respectively.
>
> Some things to bare in mind the reaver army barely scrapes a win against the banshees and there is little to no micro management on both sides they let the AI do the targeting this is the thing with the statements from many about testing its not testing its in a controlled environment.
>
> When a full pop of air attacks a force with anti air a skilled player will allways focus down the AA units first if the AA opposition does this they will likely overkill a single target and lose overall damage output on the Air so there’s that to take into consideration.
>
> Furthermore the cost of the AA vs the air is one of the biggest imbalances let’s do the math as evidence has been requested so many times to detract from the truth of the argument and that is the economy hit and utility of Air units not the fact that some people believe this post to be a complaints post regarding if you build air you win everytime which is NOT what I have said at any point so anyway the maths.
>
> Reavers:
> Supply’s: 175 x 14 = 2450 Supplys
> Power: 225 × 14 = 3150 Power
> Tech 2: 1000 PowerBanshees:
> Supplys: 275 × 30 = 8250
> Tech 2: 1000 PowerLet’s break down some hard truths here.
>
> Yes the banshees cost 3 times as much supply’s as the reavers but supply’s are easy to amass power is most certainly not comparable in economy terms to supply’s.It will cost you around 2000 supply’s and 1000 power to build 3 generators and upgrade them to be any where near close enough to being able to afford that much anti air in the first place and that’s before the costs to reach tech 2 in the first place.
>
> The banshees on the other hand require much less investment to get up and running and thier return on investment is much much higher so so far 1-0 to the Air spammer This is without taking into consideration the additional cost to the reaver army for the shroud, locusts, marauders and grunts ect which I estimate to be another 500-1000 Power and around 2000-3000 supply’s based on the footage in the video.
>
> This brings the total investment to bring down a full pop of banshees to a whopping.
> 7450 Supply’s
> AND
> 6150 Power
>
> So with that being said from this calculation we can deduce that Air has beaten its counter not only in economy but in performance as well whilst also knowing that from the testing in the video little to no micro management was used to counter the AA from the opposistion.
>
> And we are only looking at banshees a pack of hornets would be even more of an overkill on the AA at only a slight increase in supply cost vs the bansheesAnd then there’s the wolverines which are considered weaker than the reavers what happens there is guaranteed to be even more of a win for the Air.
>
> So in closing the people who wanted evidence to what I’ve said you have it there in front of you.Some like minded people have attempted to warp the intent and messege of mine and others posts regarding this topic and belittle alot of people about thier need to learn to be better at the game to stop complaining when they know nothing about the person they are insulting let alone never even played a match with or against them which is a cop out for avoiding the facts of the issues raised in the Air vs AA debates.
>
> But here is the evidence to back up my proposed balance changes and to further enforce what alot of people, postums and the devs are saying and working to fix for the betterment of balance and elimination of the concept of a single unit army in a truly amazing RTS game and that is that air is over performing against its counter.
>
> Can a complex army of reavers take on banshees
> Halo Wars 2 Mythbusters
> - YouTube
>
> To clarify my position on this matter as some people like to warp the posts in a different direction putting peoples argument on this topic down to lack of skill or ability to play at a competitive level.
>
> This post is for the community to come together and voice concerns over the single unit spam of air and its dominance and utility in the game as it stands, and as postums has stated air is over performing right now and has been for a while as most people with common sense and the devs have confirmed this.
>
> On the other side there is a so called self proclaimed elite few forum warriors that attempt to shut down any constructive argument under the guise of your a noob or your service record gives you no experience or right to question game balance.
>
> You have to be blind, in denial or an advocate of spamming only air to see how overpowered it is else you wouldn’t defend it so religiously. But I digress.So here’s the thing. Air units are totally over powered. Period. And this is since the most recent patch in march and I hope for a correction by the devs by further buffing AA in the next update.
>
> One of the main reasons behind this is the sheer cost to counter air is unbalanced as it costs power to build anti air something that is not easily acsessable or in abundance in the early game and even the mid game.
>
> On the otherside air costs only supply’s which we all know and can agree on is much to easy to spam early and mid game.
>
> Furthermore air is incredibly easy to manoeuvre and requires litterly no skill to melt opposition as AA can be focused down in mere seconds and can reposistion in a heartbeat and out range AA using bases as LOS blockers allowing for air units to focus down bases and structures.
>
> Ways this can be fixed.
> For AA balance:
> Half power cost on AA
> Speed up build time of AA
> And buff AA damage
>
> For Air balance:
> Add 75-125 supply’s to cost of air
> Reduce core Air damage against AA, structures and turrets.
> Increase build time
>
> This will mean that players have to build anti vehicle to counter AA and anti building to destroy bases not just laser everything down with overwhelming air and manoeuvrability.
>
> Realistically 1-2 AA should be able to take down at least 2-3 Air units quickly and efficiently but its quite often the case that the air will move away from AA and find someone without AA which implies that every game you need to build majority AA.
>
> I myself have pulled off many full air rushes and its kinda of sad the place air is right now as nothing is equivalent to thier power and utility in game and as such the direction of the game is heading to a full air pop meta in essence destroying the need to build other great units in the game and strategize mixed build army’s for more depth of combat.
>
> Dench.

Just shut up

21

<mark>This post has been edited by a moderator. Please refrain from making posts that do not contribute to the topic at hand.</mark>
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.

> 2533274916206345;20:
> > 2533274947029744;17:
> > I invite you to watch this video from team respawn which is evidence of my factual statements of metrics in game such as the cost of units which doesn’t need evidence its there in game at the vehicle and air production buildings respectively.
> >
> > Some things to bare in mind the reaver army barely scrapes a win against the banshees and there is little to no micro management on both sides they let the AI do the targeting this is the thing with the statements from many about testing its not testing its in a controlled environment.
> >
> > When a full pop of air attacks a force with anti air a skilled player will allways focus down the AA units first if the AA opposition does this they will likely overkill a single target and lose overall damage output on the Air so there’s that to take into consideration.
> >
> > Furthermore the cost of the AA vs the air is one of the biggest imbalances let’s do the math as evidence has been requested so many times to detract from the truth of the argument and that is the economy hit and utility of Air units not the fact that some people believe this post to be a complaints post regarding if you build air you win everytime which is NOT what I have said at any point so anyway the maths.
> >
> > Reavers:
> > Supply’s: 175 x 14 = 2450 Supplys
> > Power: 225 × 14 = 3150 Power
> > Tech 2: 1000 PowerBanshees:
> > Supplys: 275 × 30 = 8250
> > Tech 2: 1000 PowerLet’s break down some hard truths here.
> >
> > Yes the banshees cost 3 times as much supply’s as the reavers but supply’s are easy to amass power is most certainly not comparable in economy terms to supply’s.It will cost you around 2000 supply’s and 1000 power to build 3 generators and upgrade them to be any where near close enough to being able to afford that much anti air in the first place and that’s before the costs to reach tech 2 in the first place.
> >
> > The banshees on the other hand require much less investment to get up and running and thier return on investment is much much higher so so far 1-0 to the Air spammer This is without taking into consideration the additional cost to the reaver army for the shroud, locusts, marauders and grunts ect which I estimate to be another 500-1000 Power and around 2000-3000 supply’s based on the footage in the video.
> >
> > This brings the total investment to bring down a full pop of banshees to a whopping.
> > 7450 Supply’s
> > AND
> > 6150 Power
> >
> > So with that being said from this calculation we can deduce that Air has beaten its counter not only in economy but in performance as well whilst also knowing that from the testing in the video little to no micro management was used to counter the AA from the opposistion.
> >
> > And we are only looking at banshees a pack of hornets would be even more of an overkill on the AA at only a slight increase in supply cost vs the bansheesAnd then there’s the wolverines which are considered weaker than the reavers what happens there is guaranteed to be even more of a win for the Air.
> >
> > So in closing the people who wanted evidence to what I’ve said you have it there in front of you.Some like minded people have attempted to warp the intent and messege of mine and others posts regarding this topic and belittle alot of people about thier need to learn to be better at the game to stop complaining when they know nothing about the person they are insulting let alone never even played a match with or against them which is a cop out for avoiding the facts of the issues raised in the Air vs AA debates.
> >
> > But here is the evidence to back up my proposed balance changes and to further enforce what alot of people, postums and the devs are saying and working to fix for the betterment of balance and elimination of the concept of a single unit army in a truly amazing RTS game and that is that air is over performing against its counter.
> >
> > Can a complex army of reavers take on banshees
> > Halo Wars 2 Mythbusters
> > - YouTube
> >
> > To clarify my position on this matter as some people like to warp the posts in a different direction putting peoples argument on this topic down to lack of skill or ability to play at a competitive level.
> >
> > This post is for the community to come together and voice concerns over the single unit spam of air and its dominance and utility in the game as it stands, and as postums has stated air is over performing right now and has been for a while as most people with common sense and the devs have confirmed this.
> >
> > On the other side there is a so called self proclaimed elite few forum warriors that attempt to shut down any constructive argument under the guise of your a noob or your service record gives you no experience or right to question game balance.
> >
> > You have to be blind, in denial or an advocate of spamming only air to see how overpowered it is else you wouldn’t defend it so religiously. But I digress.So here’s the thing. Air units are totally over powered. Period. And this is since the most recent patch in march and I hope for a correction by the devs by further buffing AA in the next update.
> >
> > One of the main reasons behind this is the sheer cost to counter air is unbalanced as it costs power to build anti air something that is not easily acsessable or in abundance in the early game and even the mid game.
> >
> > On the otherside air costs only supply’s which we all know and can agree on is much to easy to spam early and mid game.
> >
> > Furthermore air is incredibly easy to manoeuvre and requires litterly no skill to melt opposition as AA can be focused down in mere seconds and can reposistion in a heartbeat and out range AA using bases as LOS blockers allowing for air units to focus down bases and structures.
> >
> > Ways this can be fixed.
> > For AA balance:
> > Half power cost on AA
> > Speed up build time of AA
> > And buff AA damage
> >
> > For Air balance:
> > Add 75-125 supply’s to cost of air
> > Reduce core Air damage against AA, structures and turrets.
> > Increase build time
> >
> > This will mean that players have to build anti vehicle to counter AA and anti building to destroy bases not just laser everything down with overwhelming air and manoeuvrability.
> >
> > Realistically 1-2 AA should be able to take down at least 2-3 Air units quickly and efficiently but its quite often the case that the air will move away from AA and find someone without AA which implies that every game you need to build majority AA.
> >
> > I myself have pulled off many full air rushes and its kinda of sad the place air is right now as nothing is equivalent to thier power and utility in game and as such the direction of the game is heading to a full air pop meta in essence destroying the need to build other great units in the game and strategize mixed build army’s for more depth of combat.
> >
> > Dench.

Lol rude. I’m sure this will get some likes from all the die hard air spammers out there.

22

<mark>This post has been edited by a moderator. Please refrain from making posts that do not contribute to the topic at hand.</mark>
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.

> 2533274947029744;21:
> > 2533274916206345;20:
> > > 2533274947029744;17:
> > > I invite you to watch this video from team respawn which is evidence of my factual statements of metrics in game such as the cost of units which doesn’t need evidence its there in game at the vehicle and air production buildings respectively.
> > >
> > > Some things to bare in mind the reaver army barely scrapes a win against the banshees and there is little to no micro management on both sides they let the AI do the targeting this is the thing with the statements from many about testing its not testing its in a controlled environment.
> > >
> > > When a full pop of air attacks a force with anti air a skilled player will allways focus down the AA units first if the AA opposition does this they will likely overkill a single target and lose overall damage output on the Air so there’s that to take into consideration.
> > >
> > > Furthermore the cost of the AA vs the air is one of the biggest imbalances let’s do the math as evidence has been requested so many times to detract from the truth of the argument and that is the economy hit and utility of Air units not the fact that some people believe this post to be a complaints post regarding if you build air you win everytime which is NOT what I have said at any point so anyway the maths.
> > >
> > > Reavers:
> > > Supply’s: 175 x 14 = 2450 Supplys
> > > Power: 225 × 14 = 3150 Power
> > > Tech 2: 1000 PowerBanshees:
> > > Supplys: 275 × 30 = 8250
> > > Tech 2: 1000 PowerLet’s break down some hard truths here.
> > >
> > > Yes the banshees cost 3 times as much supply’s as the reavers but supply’s are easy to amass power is most certainly not comparable in economy terms to supply’s.It will cost you around 2000 supply’s and 1000 power to build 3 generators and upgrade them to be any where near close enough to being able to afford that much anti air in the first place and that’s before the costs to reach tech 2 in the first place.
> > >
> > > The banshees on the other hand require much less investment to get up and running and thier return on investment is much much higher so so far 1-0 to the Air spammer This is without taking into consideration the additional cost to the reaver army for the shroud, locusts, marauders and grunts ect which I estimate to be another 500-1000 Power and around 2000-3000 supply’s based on the footage in the video.
> > >
> > > This brings the total investment to bring down a full pop of banshees to a whopping.
> > > 7450 Supply’s
> > > AND
> > > 6150 Power
> > >
> > > So with that being said from this calculation we can deduce that Air has beaten its counter not only in economy but in performance as well whilst also knowing that from the testing in the video little to no micro management was used to counter the AA from the opposistion.
> > >
> > > And we are only looking at banshees a pack of hornets would be even more of an overkill on the AA at only a slight increase in supply cost vs the bansheesAnd then there’s the wolverines which are considered weaker than the reavers what happens there is guaranteed to be even more of a win for the Air.
> > >
> > > So in closing the people who wanted evidence to what I’ve said you have it there in front of you.Some like minded people have attempted to warp the intent and messege of mine and others posts regarding this topic and belittle alot of people about thier need to learn to be better at the game to stop complaining when they know nothing about the person they are insulting let alone never even played a match with or against them which is a cop out for avoiding the facts of the issues raised in the Air vs AA debates.
> > >
> > > But here is the evidence to back up my proposed balance changes and to further enforce what alot of people, postums and the devs are saying and working to fix for the betterment of balance and elimination of the concept of a single unit army in a truly amazing RTS game and that is that air is over performing against its counter.
> > >
> > > Can a complex army of reavers take on banshees
> > > Halo Wars 2 Mythbusters
> > > - YouTube
> > >
> > > To clarify my position on this matter as some people like to warp the posts in a different direction putting peoples argument on this topic down to lack of skill or ability to play at a competitive level.
> > >
> > > This post is for the community to come together and voice concerns over the single unit spam of air and its dominance and utility in the game as it stands, and as postums has stated air is over performing right now and has been for a while as most people with common sense and the devs have confirmed this.
> > >
> > > On the other side there is a so called self proclaimed elite few forum warriors that attempt to shut down any constructive argument under the guise of your a noob or your service record gives you no experience or right to question game balance.
> > >
> > > You have to be blind, in denial or an advocate of spamming only air to see how overpowered it is else you wouldn’t defend it so religiously. But I digress.So here’s the thing. Air units are totally over powered. Period. And this is since the most recent patch in march and I hope for a correction by the devs by further buffing AA in the next update.
> > >
> > > One of the main reasons behind this is the sheer cost to counter air is unbalanced as it costs power to build anti air something that is not easily acsessable or in abundance in the early game and even the mid game.
> > >
> > > On the otherside air costs only supply’s which we all know and can agree on is much to easy to spam early and mid game.
> > >
> > > Furthermore air is incredibly easy to manoeuvre and requires litterly no skill to melt opposition as AA can be focused down in mere seconds and can reposistion in a heartbeat and out range AA using bases as LOS blockers allowing for air units to focus down bases and structures.
> > >
> > > Ways this can be fixed.
> > > For AA balance:
> > > Half power cost on AA
> > > Speed up build time of AA
> > > And buff AA damage
> > >
> > > For Air balance:
> > > Add 75-125 supply’s to cost of air
> > > Reduce core Air damage against AA, structures and turrets.
> > > Increase build time
> > >
> > > This will mean that players have to build anti vehicle to counter AA and anti building to destroy bases not just laser everything down with overwhelming air and manoeuvrability.
> > >
> > > Realistically 1-2 AA should be able to take down at least 2-3 Air units quickly and efficiently but its quite often the case that the air will move away from AA and find someone without AA which implies that every game you need to build majority AA.
> > >
> > > I myself have pulled off many full air rushes and its kinda of sad the place air is right now as nothing is equivalent to thier power and utility in game and as such the direction of the game is heading to a full air pop meta in essence destroying the need to build other great units in the game and strategize mixed build army’s for more depth of combat.
> > >
> > > Dench.
> >
> > Just shut up
>
> Lol rude. I’m sure this will get some likes from all the die hard air spammers out there.

You just liked your own comment bud

23

<mark>This post has been edited by a moderator. Please refrain from making posts that do not contribute to the topic at hand.</mark>
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.

> 2533274916206345;22:
> > 2533274947029744;21:
> > > 2533274916206345;20:
> > > > 2533274947029744;17:
> > > > I invite you to watch this video from team respawn which is evidence of my factual statements of metrics in game such as the cost of units which doesn’t need evidence its there in game at the vehicle and air production buildings respectively.
> > > >
> > > > Some things to bare in mind the reaver army barely scrapes a win against the banshees and there is little to no micro management on both sides they let the AI do the targeting this is the thing with the statements from many about testing its not testing its in a controlled environment.
> > > >
> > > > When a full pop of air attacks a force with anti air a skilled player will allways focus down the AA units first if the AA opposition does this they will likely overkill a single target and lose overall damage output on the Air so there’s that to take into consideration.
> > > >
> > > > Furthermore the cost of the AA vs the air is one of the biggest imbalances let’s do the math as evidence has been requested so many times to detract from the truth of the argument and that is the economy hit and utility of Air units not the fact that some people believe this post to be a complaints post regarding if you build air you win everytime which is NOT what I have said at any point so anyway the maths.
> > > >
> > > > Reavers:
> > > > Supply’s: 175 x 14 = 2450 Supplys
> > > > Power: 225 × 14 = 3150 Power
> > > > Tech 2: 1000 PowerBanshees:
> > > > Supplys: 275 × 30 = 8250
> > > > Tech 2: 1000 PowerLet’s break down some hard truths here.
> > > >
> > > > Yes the banshees cost 3 times as much supply’s as the reavers but supply’s are easy to amass power is most certainly not comparable in economy terms to supply’s.It will cost you around 2000 supply’s and 1000 power to build 3 generators and upgrade them to be any where near close enough to being able to afford that much anti air in the first place and that’s before the costs to reach tech 2 in the first place.
> > > >
> > > > The banshees on the other hand require much less investment to get up and running and thier return on investment is much much higher so so far 1-0 to the Air spammer This is without taking into consideration the additional cost to the reaver army for the shroud, locusts, marauders and grunts ect which I estimate to be another 500-1000 Power and around 2000-3000 supply’s based on the footage in the video.
> > > >
> > > > This brings the total investment to bring down a full pop of banshees to a whopping.
> > > > 7450 Supply’s
> > > > AND
> > > > 6150 Power
> > > >
> > > > So with that being said from this calculation we can deduce that Air has beaten its counter not only in economy but in performance as well whilst also knowing that from the testing in the video little to no micro management was used to counter the AA from the opposistion.
> > > >
> > > > And we are only looking at banshees a pack of hornets would be even more of an overkill on the AA at only a slight increase in supply cost vs the bansheesAnd then there’s the wolverines which are considered weaker than the reavers what happens there is guaranteed to be even more of a win for the Air.
> > > >
> > > > So in closing the people who wanted evidence to what I’ve said you have it there in front of you.Some like minded people have attempted to warp the intent and messege of mine and others posts regarding this topic and belittle alot of people about thier need to learn to be better at the game to stop complaining when they know nothing about the person they are insulting let alone never even played a match with or against them which is a cop out for avoiding the facts of the issues raised in the Air vs AA debates.
> > > >
> > > > But here is the evidence to back up my proposed balance changes and to further enforce what alot of people, postums and the devs are saying and working to fix for the betterment of balance and elimination of the concept of a single unit army in a truly amazing RTS game and that is that air is over performing against its counter.
> > > >
> > > > Can a complex army of reavers take on banshees
> > > > Halo Wars 2 Mythbusters
> > > > - YouTube
> > > >
> > > > To clarify my position on this matter as some people like to warp the posts in a different direction putting peoples argument on this topic down to lack of skill or ability to play at a competitive level.
> > > >
> > > > This post is for the community to come together and voice concerns over the single unit spam of air and its dominance and utility in the game as it stands, and as postums has stated air is over performing right now and has been for a while as most people with common sense and the devs have confirmed this.
> > > >
> > > > On the other side there is a so called self proclaimed elite few forum warriors that attempt to shut down any constructive argument under the guise of your a noob or your service record gives you no experience or right to question game balance.
> > > >
> > > > You have to be blind, in denial or an advocate of spamming only air to see how overpowered it is else you wouldn’t defend it so religiously. But I digress.So here’s the thing. Air units are totally over powered. Period. And this is since the most recent patch in march and I hope for a correction by the devs by further buffing AA in the next update.
> > > >
> > > > One of the main reasons behind this is the sheer cost to counter air is unbalanced as it costs power to build anti air something that is not easily acsessable or in abundance in the early game and even the mid game.
> > > >
> > > > On the otherside air costs only supply’s which we all know and can agree on is much to easy to spam early and mid game.
> > > >
> > > > Furthermore air is incredibly easy to manoeuvre and requires litterly no skill to melt opposition as AA can be focused down in mere seconds and can reposistion in a heartbeat and out range AA using bases as LOS blockers allowing for air units to focus down bases and structures.
> > > >
> > > > Ways this can be fixed.
> > > > For AA balance:
> > > > Half power cost on AA
> > > > Speed up build time of AA
> > > > And buff AA damage
> > > >
> > > > For Air balance:
> > > > Add 75-125 supply’s to cost of air
> > > > Reduce core Air damage against AA, structures and turrets.
> > > > Increase build time
> > > >
> > > > This will mean that players have to build anti vehicle to counter AA and anti building to destroy bases not just laser everything down with overwhelming air and manoeuvrability.
> > > >
> > > > Realistically 1-2 AA should be able to take down at least 2-3 Air units quickly and efficiently but its quite often the case that the air will move away from AA and find someone without AA which implies that every game you need to build majority AA.
> > > >
> > > > I myself have pulled off many full air rushes and its kinda of sad the place air is right now as nothing is equivalent to thier power and utility in game and as such the direction of the game is heading to a full air pop meta in essence destroying the need to build other great units in the game and strategize mixed build army’s for more depth of combat.
> > > >
> > > > Dench.
>
> You just liked your own comment bud

I liked your comment. Thought I’d jump on the band wagon.

24

<mark>This post has been edited by a moderator. Please refrain from making posts that do not contribute to the topic at hand.</mark>
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.

> 2533274947029744;23:
> > 2533274916206345;22:
> > > 2533274947029744;21:
> > > > 2533274916206345;20:
> > > > > 2533274947029744;17:
> > > > > I invite you to watch this video from team respawn which is evidence of my factual statements of metrics in game such as the cost of units which doesn’t need evidence its there in game at the vehicle and air production buildings respectively.
> > > > >
> > > > > Some things to bare in mind the reaver army barely scrapes a win against the banshees and there is little to no micro management on both sides they let the AI do the targeting this is the thing with the statements from many about testing its not testing its in a controlled environment.
> > > > >
> > > > > When a full pop of air attacks a force with anti air a skilled player will allways focus down the AA units first if the AA opposition does this they will likely overkill a single target and lose overall damage output on the Air so there’s that to take into consideration.
> > > > >
> > > > > Furthermore the cost of the AA vs the air is one of the biggest imbalances let’s do the math as evidence has been requested so many times to detract from the truth of the argument and that is the economy hit and utility of Air units not the fact that some people believe this post to be a complaints post regarding if you build air you win everytime which is NOT what I have said at any point so anyway the maths.
> > > > >
> > > > > Reavers:
> > > > > Supply’s: 175 x 14 = 2450 Supplys
> > > > > Power: 225 × 14 = 3150 Power
> > > > > Tech 2: 1000 PowerBanshees:
> > > > > Supplys: 275 × 30 = 8250
> > > > > Tech 2: 1000 PowerLet’s break down some hard truths here.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes the banshees cost 3 times as much supply’s as the reavers but supply’s are easy to amass power is most certainly not comparable in economy terms to supply’s.It will cost you around 2000 supply’s and 1000 power to build 3 generators and upgrade them to be any where near close enough to being able to afford that much anti air in the first place and that’s before the costs to reach tech 2 in the first place.
> > > > >
> > > > > The banshees on the other hand require much less investment to get up and running and thier return on investment is much much higher so so far 1-0 to the Air spammer This is without taking into consideration the additional cost to the reaver army for the shroud, locusts, marauders and grunts ect which I estimate to be another 500-1000 Power and around 2000-3000 supply’s based on the footage in the video.
> > > > >
> > > > > This brings the total investment to bring down a full pop of banshees to a whopping.
> > > > > 7450 Supply’s
> > > > > AND
> > > > > 6150 Power
> > > > >
> > > > > So with that being said from this calculation we can deduce that Air has beaten its counter not only in economy but in performance as well whilst also knowing that from the testing in the video little to no micro management was used to counter the AA from the opposistion.
> > > > >
> > > > > And we are only looking at banshees a pack of hornets would be even more of an overkill on the AA at only a slight increase in supply cost vs the bansheesAnd then there’s the wolverines which are considered weaker than the reavers what happens there is guaranteed to be even more of a win for the Air.
> > > > >
> > > > > So in closing the people who wanted evidence to what I’ve said you have it there in front of you.Some like minded people have attempted to warp the intent and messege of mine and others posts regarding this topic and belittle alot of people about thier need to learn to be better at the game to stop complaining when they know nothing about the person they are insulting let alone never even played a match with or against them which is a cop out for avoiding the facts of the issues raised in the Air vs AA debates.
> > > > >
> > > > > But here is the evidence to back up my proposed balance changes and to further enforce what alot of people, postums and the devs are saying and working to fix for the betterment of balance and elimination of the concept of a single unit army in a truly amazing RTS game and that is that air is over performing against its counter.
> > > > >
> > > > > Can a complex army of reavers take on banshees
> > > > > Halo Wars 2 Mythbusters
> > > > > - YouTube
> > > > >
> > > > > To clarify my position on this matter as some people like to warp the posts in a different direction putting peoples argument on this topic down to lack of skill or ability to play at a competitive level.
> > > > >
> > > > > This post is for the community to come together and voice concerns over the single unit spam of air and its dominance and utility in the game as it stands, and as postums has stated air is over performing right now and has been for a while as most people with common sense and the devs have confirmed this.
> > > > >
> > > > > On the other side there is a so called self proclaimed elite few forum warriors that attempt to shut down any constructive argument under the guise of your a noob or your service record gives you no experience or right to question game balance.
> > > > >
> > > > > You have to be blind, in denial or an advocate of spamming only air to see how overpowered it is else you wouldn’t defend it so religiously. But I digress.So here’s the thing. Air units are totally over powered. Period. And this is since the most recent patch in march and I hope for a correction by the devs by further buffing AA in the next update.
> > > > >
> > > > > One of the main reasons behind this is the sheer cost to counter air is unbalanced as it costs power to build anti air something that is not easily acsessable or in abundance in the early game and even the mid game.
> > > > >
> > > > > On the otherside air costs only supply’s which we all know and can agree on is much to easy to spam early and mid game.
> > > > >
> > > > > Furthermore air is incredibly easy to manoeuvre and requires litterly no skill to melt opposition as AA can be focused down in mere seconds and can reposistion in a heartbeat and out range AA using bases as LOS blockers allowing for air units to focus down bases and structures.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ways this can be fixed.
> > > > > For AA balance:
> > > > > Half power cost on AA
> > > > > Speed up build time of AA
> > > > > And buff AA damage
> > > > >
> > > > > For Air balance:
> > > > > Add 75-125 supply’s to cost of air
> > > > > Reduce core Air damage against AA, structures and turrets.
> > > > > Increase build time
> > > > >
> > > > > This will mean that players have to build anti vehicle to counter AA and anti building to destroy bases not just laser everything down with overwhelming air and manoeuvrability.
> > > > >
> > > > > Realistically 1-2 AA should be able to take down at least 2-3 Air units quickly and efficiently but its quite often the case that the air will move away from AA and find someone without AA which implies that every game you need to build majority AA.
> > > > >
> > > > > I myself have pulled off many full air rushes and its kinda of sad the place air is right now as nothing is equivalent to thier power and utility in game and as such the direction of the game is heading to a full air pop meta in essence destroying the need to build other great units in the game and strategize mixed build army’s for more depth of combat.
> > > > >
> > > > > Dench.
> > > >
> > > > Just shut up
> > >
> > > Lol rude. I’m sure this will get some likes from all the die hard air spammers out there.
> >
> > You just liked your own comment bud
>
> I liked your comment

Lol no you didn’t but whatever, just stop -Yoinking!- about air and ruining every thread

25

> 2533274792014876;8:
> > 2535409307352389;4:
> > They listen too much to the community. Play the game yourselves and balance it with some input from the community but don’t just take any idiot opinion as gospel. You have to balance the game in 1v1 matches so play a lot of 1v1 matches with all leaders and see what works and what doesn’t. Balancing the game based on any more than 1v1 is crazy…
>
> I will admit very quickly that I am not the best at 1v1 games. I always have favored team games over 1v1 on every game I play because I prefer co-operative play and working together within teams. I would say I should play many more 1v1s, but instead of trying to pretend I am amazing when I’m not at it I and my colleagues watch various 1v1 streams or videos, competitive tournament videos, view lots of interactions from the game data, talk with hundreds of various players surrounding balance from all levels of skill, and work directly with many highly competitive players within the community including previous balance designers who helped build the game.
>
> I would say we have a system in place that is working for the vast majority at this time. By no means am I saying it can’t be improved as it is ever evolving, but I would say we take a lot of information into account before making core changes to the game and how it plays than, “any idiot['s] opinion as gospel.”
>
> This includes publicly posting patch notes weeks before the changes go out to allow the community to offer feedback on it regardless of whether it is good or bad.
>
> The players will always know the game better than any dev in terms of what works and what doesn’t. Unless you do nothing but work on the game and then go home and play it in all of your spare time, there is not way you will be as knowledgeable as the people who actively play it. Working all day leaves little to no room to play it to the point of those who play as much as a developer works on it. The opinions and knowledge that players have can point in a direction that we may not think of as devs as well which is another key point that many forget. I wholeheartedly disagree fundamentally that listening to the community is a bad thing and most definitely won’t stop.
>
> Do I personally disagree with people from the community on various ideas? Definitely. Do I personally push back on things that I don’t agree with? More definitely. Do I make everyone happy with the changes that happen? Lol. That will never happen and I don’t even entertain the thought that one could do that. If a sole individual could do that - they would get paid hundreds of millions of dollars and there would only be 1 game anyone ever played ever again.
>
> TLDR; The communities input if proven by data and in practice helps shape the game’s future with each balance update. If a dial is shifted too far one way or the other it gets corrected, but not listening enough is a problem and can put one out of touch with the fan base you have. At least that is my personal opinion and it’s not going to change until someone shows me a better way. One must entertain the thought that they don’t know everything and always strive to learn. Working with the community is my personal way of constantly learning more about the game I love very much and have poured my life into for nearly 2 years now.
>
> Cheers,
> Postums

Yeah you should definitely listen to the community. Just not pander to them. Test the theories etc. You can’t balance a game in 2v2 or 3v3, those games will never be balanced as you are having various leaders working together. If 1v1 is balanced that is enough. Playing more than 1v1 can be fun but the true test of ability and skill is in 1v1 just like a game of chess.

I love the game so much and many thanks for making it. Just a few more maps…Please?

26

> 2533274809541272;14:
> These threads are always so interesting. People who think the only way to balance a game is to focus on one mode are wrong.
> Contrary to what some say. 1v1 is not the most important mode in a RTS… nor are the multiplayer modes. They are all important.
>
> And no disrespect intended to all of the people who keep saying there are too many characters, but that is not the issue either. Do more characters make it more difficult? Yes.
> Is is impossible? No. Besides, there is no need to cry over spilled milk. The characters are here and I am not trying to give them back. I love the variety.
>
> The main problems have nothing to do with special units or powers. Yes the glassing beam is too powerful, but the developers knew that when they did it. I’m sure it will be changed shortly. The main problem is the core units as a whole aren’t balanced. Infantry just got to the point where they are formidable against air. Wraiths and Scorpions still need work against infantry. W
>
> And IMO, the issue with air isn’t air, it’s Anti- Air. Anti Air and is too easy to destroy with air. People complain about Anti Air being too strong, but the offensive strength is fine now. The issue is that a good player is going to focus his/her units onto the biggest threat and air can Destroy AA too easily.
>
> The truth of the matter is once the core of the game is balanced, it will be balanced for all game modes. It doesn’t matter if it is 1v1 or 3v3, a single player attacking with full pop air shouldn’t be as dominant as they are. That said, if we are talking multi player matches, 1 person should not be able to stop two people with full pop air. That is what teammates are for.
>
> But once the core of the game is truly balanced, it should be fine in every mode.

I would agree that focusing on a single mode is not the only way to balance a game. But there’s a stark difference between just “a game” and an RTS. Many games have separate balancing for different gamemodes. In RTS, they remain static throughout, which forces the need for a main gamemode to be the focus of balancing. The reason 1s are the main focus is because balancing the game around 2s and 3s just wouldn’t make sense. What would 1s look like if the game was balanced around 3s? It would probably be unrecognizable. Base killing units on T1 would most likely be useless due to nerfs to make unbeatable cheeses beatable in 3s. Air, in it’s entirety, would be suicide (which it already pretty much is). Decimus would be terrible. There are just a few examples. However, the changes would be felt in 2s as well.

I’m going to go ahead and copy-paste a post I made a few months ago to explain why 1s are the standard model for balance:

"While this is an ‘unwritten rule’, there has been speculation as to why RTS is balanced this way.

‘If you’re talking strictly competitively, they’ve experimented with team modes there as well, but, in the past, they mostly haven’t worked. It’s much more difficult to design interesting maps for teams, and it’s significantly easier to design both balanced and interesting matchups for 1v1. Since competitive RTS mostly came from Brood War and is very competitive by nature, that 1v1s are taxing hasn’t been a major factor in design. That 1v1s are also much easier (and better, imo) to watch for spectators and as esports was also a factor in that.’

Another theory: ‘It is theoretically impossible to work backwards from a balance standpoint. The reason for this is simple: for a developer to test if something is balanced, he needs to be able to test it in an extremely controlled environment first to make sure that it is not too effective on its own, and the only thing that could make it ‘overpowered’ or ‘underpowered’ would be directly how you use it, and not how team-play manages into it.’

Another tidbit to keep in mind is that RTS does not lend itself to team games in the first place. Most normal RTS games focus on 1v1 with team games there for ‘teh lulz’ so to speak. Halo Wars is an exception as it draws from an audience that is full of FPS fans who will no doubt value team play higher than a veteran RTS player. Team games are inherently casual, and the Halo Wars playerbase is disproportionately casual because of the franchise it’s attached to. This means that while team games are not the main gamemode, they are much more played than the main gamemode itself, 1v1.

To sum it up in a remark not my own, 'If you want to play RTS team games competitively, you’re doing it wrong." (End quote)

As for your statements about the amount of leaders not being a problem, well, you kind of self refute that. No one (as far as I know) is saying it’s impossible to balance the game. Simply that the fact that there are more leaders than maps and more leader powers than units is a roadblock to a balanced game. Note that I say “roadblock”, not “impasse.”

If you think that infantry has just now become “formidable against air” since this recent patch, then you’re just dead wrong. It was months ago now and the VOD is gone, but in a tournament I played against a primarily team games player in two 1v1s who went air both games. Both games, he was shut down by infantry. The commentators noted (as they should) that air cannot secure expansions and falls flat against infantry, making it impractical.

As for the AA not being strong enough argument, this has been done to death. If you have evidence of this, show it. Otherwise, I find it very hard to believe that you’ll be swaying anyone to your side. In fact, if you want to gather a team and test just how good air is in a custom match, I’m sure sadder joker would love to oblige.

27

> 2533274830489835;26:
> > 2533274809541272;14:
> >
>
> As for the AA not being strong enough argument, this has been done to death. If you have evidence of this, show it. Otherwise, I find it very hard that you’ll be swaying anyone to your side. In fact, if you want to gather a team and test just how good air is in a custom match, I’m sure Sadder Joker would love to oblige.

Oh, baby, you know I’m happy to oblige.

Still waiting for someone to show me how “OP” air is.

28

> 2533274947029744;17:
>

Not trying to shut you down, but you don’t have to copy and paste the same message 3-4 times in a row. That is spam and is against forum rules.

29

> 2533274947029744;23:
> > 2533274916206345;22:
> > > 2533274947029744;21:
> > > > 2533274916206345;20:
> > > > > 2533274947029744;17:
> > > > > I invite you to watch this video from team respawn which is evidence of my factual statements of metrics in game such as the cost of units which doesn’t need evidence its there in game at the vehicle and air production buildings respectively.
> > > > >
> > > > > Some things to bare in mind the reaver army barely scrapes a win against the banshees and there is little to no micro management on both sides they let the AI do the targeting this is the thing with the statements from many about testing its not testing its in a controlled environment.
> > > > >
> > > > > When a full pop of air attacks a force with anti air a skilled player will allways focus down the AA units first if the AA opposition does this they will likely overkill a single target and lose overall damage output on the Air so there’s that to take into consideration.
> > > > >
> > > > > Furthermore the cost of the AA vs the air is one of the biggest imbalances let’s do the math as evidence has been requested so many times to detract from the truth of the argument and that is the economy hit and utility of Air units not the fact that some people believe this post to be a complaints post regarding if you build air you win everytime which is NOT what I have said at any point so anyway the maths.
> > > > >
> > > > > Reavers:
> > > > > Supply’s: 175 x 14 = 2450 Supplys
> > > > > Power: 225 × 14 = 3150 Power
> > > > > Tech 2: 1000 PowerBanshees:
> > > > > Supplys: 275 × 30 = 8250
> > > > > Tech 2: 1000 PowerLet’s break down some hard truths here.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes the banshees cost 3 times as much supply’s as the reavers but supply’s are easy to amass power is most certainly not comparable in economy terms to supply’s.It will cost you around 2000 supply’s and 1000 power to build 3 generators and upgrade them to be any where near close enough to being able to afford that much anti air in the first place and that’s before the costs to reach tech 2 in the first place.
> > > > >
> > > > > The banshees on the other hand require much less investment to get up and running and thier return on investment is much much higher so so far 1-0 to the Air spammer This is without taking into consideration the additional cost to the reaver army for the shroud, locusts, marauders and grunts ect which I estimate to be another 500-1000 Power and around 2000-3000 supply’s based on the footage in the video.
> > > > >
> > > > > This brings the total investment to bring down a full pop of banshees to a whopping.
> > > > > 7450 Supply’s
> > > > > AND
> > > > > 6150 Power
> > > > >
> > > > > So with that being said from this calculation we can deduce that Air has beaten its counter not only in economy but in performance as well whilst also knowing that from the testing in the video little to no micro management was used to counter the AA from the opposistion.
> > > > >
> > > > > And we are only looking at banshees a pack of hornets would be even more of an overkill on the AA at only a slight increase in supply cost vs the bansheesAnd then there’s the wolverines which are considered weaker than the reavers what happens there is guaranteed to be even more of a win for the Air.
> > > > >
> > > > > So in closing the people who wanted evidence to what I’ve said you have it there in front of you.Some like minded people have attempted to warp the intent and messege of mine and others posts regarding this topic and belittle alot of people about thier need to learn to be better at the game to stop complaining when they know nothing about the person they are insulting let alone never even played a match with or against them which is a cop out for avoiding the facts of the issues raised in the Air vs AA debates.
> > > > >
> > > > > But here is the evidence to back up my proposed balance changes and to further enforce what alot of people, postums and the devs are saying and working to fix for the betterment of balance and elimination of the concept of a single unit army in a truly amazing RTS game and that is that air is over performing against its counter.
> > > > >
> > > > > Can a complex army of reavers take on banshees
> > > > > Halo Wars 2 Mythbusters
> > > > > - YouTube
> > > > >
> > > > > To clarify my position on this matter as some people like to warp the posts in a different direction putting peoples argument on this topic down to lack of skill or ability to play at a competitive level.
> > > > >
> > > > > This post is for the community to come together and voice concerns over the single unit spam of air and its dominance and utility in the game as it stands, and as postums has stated air is over performing right now and has been for a while as most people with common sense and the devs have confirmed this.
> > > > >
> > > > > On the other side there is a so called self proclaimed elite few forum warriors that attempt to shut down any constructive argument under the guise of your a noob or your service record gives you no experience or right to question game balance.
> > > > >
> > > > > You have to be blind, in denial or an advocate of spamming only air to see how overpowered it is else you wouldn’t defend it so religiously. But I digress.So here’s the thing. Air units are totally over powered. Period. And this is since the most recent patch in march and I hope for a correction by the devs by further buffing AA in the next update.
> > > > >
> > > > > One of the main reasons behind this is the sheer cost to counter air is unbalanced as it costs power to build anti air something that is not easily acsessable or in abundance in the early game and even the mid game.
> > > > >
> > > > > On the otherside air costs only supply’s which we all know and can agree on is much to easy to spam early and mid game.
> > > > >
> > > > > Furthermore air is incredibly easy to manoeuvre and requires litterly no skill to melt opposition as AA can be focused down in mere seconds and can reposistion in a heartbeat and out range AA using bases as LOS blockers allowing for air units to focus down bases and structures.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ways this can be fixed.
> > > > > For AA balance:
> > > > > Half power cost on AA
> > > > > Speed up build time of AA
> > > > > And buff AA damage
> > > > >
> > > > > For Air balance:
> > > > > Add 75-125 supply’s to cost of air
> > > > > Reduce core Air damage against AA, structures and turrets.
> > > > > Increase build time
> > > > >
> > > > > This will mean that players have to build anti vehicle to counter AA and anti building to destroy bases not just laser everything down with overwhelming air and manoeuvrability.
> > > > >
> > > > > Realistically 1-2 AA should be able to take down at least 2-3 Air units quickly and efficiently but its quite often the case that the air will move away from AA and find someone without AA which implies that every game you need to build majority AA.
> > > > >
> > > > > I myself have pulled off many full air rushes and its kinda of sad the place air is right now as nothing is equivalent to thier power and utility in game and as such the direction of the game is heading to a full air pop meta in essence destroying the need to build other great units in the game and strategize mixed build army’s for more depth of combat.
> > > > >
> > > > > Dench.
> > > >
> > > > Just shut up
> >
> > You just liked your own comment bud
>
> I liked your comment. Thought I’d jump on the band wagon.

Who cares about likes on Halo Waypoint?

(Can we get a bajillion likes on the comment plzzzzzzzzz)

30

> 2535431243595189;29:
> > 2533274947029744;23:
> > > 2533274916206345;22:
> > > > 2533274947029744;21:
> > > > > 2533274916206345;20:
> > > > > > 2533274947029744;17:
> > > > > > I invite you to watch this video from team respawn which is evidence of my factual statements of metrics in game such as the cost of units which doesn’t need evidence its there in game at the vehicle and air production buildings respectively.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Some things to bare in mind the reaver army barely scrapes a win against the banshees and there is little to no micro management on both sides they let the AI do the targeting this is the thing with the statements from many about testing its not testing its in a controlled environment.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > When a full pop of air attacks a force with anti air a skilled player will allways focus down the AA units first if the AA opposition does this they will likely overkill a single target and lose overall damage output on the Air so there’s that to take into consideration.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Furthermore the cost of the AA vs the air is one of the biggest imbalances let’s do the math as evidence has been requested so many times to detract from the truth of the argument and that is the economy hit and utility of Air units not the fact that some people believe this post to be a complaints post regarding if you build air you win everytime which is NOT what I have said at any point so anyway the maths.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Reavers:
> > > > > > Supply’s: 175 x 14 = 2450 Supplys
> > > > > > Power: 225 × 14 = 3150 Power
> > > > > > Tech 2: 1000 PowerBanshees:
> > > > > > Supplys: 275 × 30 = 8250
> > > > > > Tech 2: 1000 PowerLet’s break down some hard truths here.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yes the banshees cost 3 times as much supply’s as the reavers but supply’s are easy to amass power is most certainly not comparable in economy terms to supply’s.It will cost you around 2000 supply’s and 1000 power to build 3 generators and upgrade them to be any where near close enough to being able to afford that much anti air in the first place and that’s before the costs to reach tech 2 in the first place.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The banshees on the other hand require much less investment to get up and running and thier return on investment is much much higher so so far 1-0 to the Air spammer This is without taking into consideration the additional cost to the reaver army for the shroud, locusts, marauders and grunts ect which I estimate to be another 500-1000 Power and around 2000-3000 supply’s based on the footage in the video.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This brings the total investment to bring down a full pop of banshees to a whopping.
> > > > > > 7450 Supply’s
> > > > > > AND
> > > > > > 6150 Power
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So with that being said from this calculation we can deduce that Air has beaten its counter not only in economy but in performance as well whilst also knowing that from the testing in the video little to no micro management was used to counter the AA from the opposistion.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > And we are only looking at banshees a pack of hornets would be even more of an overkill on the AA at only a slight increase in supply cost vs the bansheesAnd then there’s the wolverines which are considered weaker than the reavers what happens there is guaranteed to be even more of a win for the Air.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So in closing the people who wanted evidence to what I’ve said you have it there in front of you.Some like minded people have attempted to warp the intent and messege of mine and others posts regarding this topic and belittle alot of people about thier need to learn to be better at the game to stop complaining when they know nothing about the person they are insulting let alone never even played a match with or against them which is a cop out for avoiding the facts of the issues raised in the Air vs AA debates.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But here is the evidence to back up my proposed balance changes and to further enforce what alot of people, postums and the devs are saying and working to fix for the betterment of balance and elimination of the concept of a single unit army in a truly amazing RTS game and that is that air is over performing against its counter.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Can a complex army of reavers take on banshees
> > > > > > Halo Wars 2 Mythbusters
> > > > > > - YouTube
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To clarify my position on this matter as some people like to warp the posts in a different direction putting peoples argument on this topic down to lack of skill or ability to play at a competitive level.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This post is for the community to come together and voice concerns over the single unit spam of air and its dominance and utility in the game as it stands, and as postums has stated air is over performing right now and has been for a while as most people with common sense and the devs have confirmed this.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On the other side there is a so called self proclaimed elite few forum warriors that attempt to shut down any constructive argument under the guise of your a noob or your service record gives you no experience or right to question game balance.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You have to be blind, in denial or an advocate of spamming only air to see how overpowered it is else you wouldn’t defend it so religiously. But I digress.So here’s the thing. Air units are totally over powered. Period. And this is since the most recent patch in march and I hope for a correction by the devs by further buffing AA in the next update.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > One of the main reasons behind this is the sheer cost to counter air is unbalanced as it costs power to build anti air something that is not easily acsessable or in abundance in the early game and even the mid game.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On the otherside air costs only supply’s which we all know and can agree on is much to easy to spam early and mid game.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Furthermore air is incredibly easy to manoeuvre and requires litterly no skill to melt opposition as AA can be focused down in mere seconds and can reposistion in a heartbeat and out range AA using bases as LOS blockers allowing for air units to focus down bases and structures.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ways this can be fixed.
> > > > > > For AA balance:
> > > > > > Half power cost on AA
> > > > > > Speed up build time of AA
> > > > > > And buff AA damage
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For Air balance:
> > > > > > Add 75-125 supply’s to cost of air
> > > > > > Reduce core Air damage against AA, structures and turrets.
> > > > > > Increase build time
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This will mean that players have to build anti vehicle to counter AA and anti building to destroy bases not just laser everything down with overwhelming air and manoeuvrability.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Realistically 1-2 AA should be able to take down at least 2-3 Air units quickly and efficiently but its quite often the case that the air will move away from AA and find someone without AA which implies that every game you need to build majority AA.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I myself have pulled off many full air rushes and its kinda of sad the place air is right now as nothing is equivalent to thier power and utility in game and as such the direction of the game is heading to a full air pop meta in essence destroying the need to build other great units in the game and strategize mixed build army’s for more depth of combat.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Dench.
> > > > >
> > > > > Just shut up
> > >
> > > You just liked your own comment bud
> >
> > I liked your comment. Thought I’d jump on the band wagon.
>
> Who cares about likes on Halo Waypoint?
>
> (Can we get a bajillion likes on the comment plzzzzzzzzz)

I got you.

Also, don’t be afraid to like your own comment. If you don’t support yourself, no one will ;).

31

> 2533274947029744;23:
> > 2533274916206345;22:
> > > 2533274947029744;21:
> > > > 2533274916206345;20:
> > > > > 2533274947029744;17:
> > > > > I invite you to watch this video from team respawn which is evidence of my factual statements of metrics in game such as the cost of units which doesn’t need evidence its there in game at the vehicle and air production buildings respectively.
> > > > >
> > > > > Some things to bare in mind the reaver army barely scrapes a win against the banshees and there is little to no micro management on both sides they let the AI do the targeting this is the thing with the statements from many about testing its not testing its in a controlled environment.
> > > > >
> > > > > When a full pop of air attacks a force with anti air a skilled player will allways focus down the AA units first if the AA opposition does this they will likely overkill a single target and lose overall damage output on the Air so there’s that to take into consideration.
> > > > >
> > > > > Furthermore the cost of the AA vs the air is one of the biggest imbalances let’s do the math as evidence has been requested so many times to detract from the truth of the argument and that is the economy hit and utility of Air units not the fact that some people believe this post to be a complaints post regarding if you build air you win everytime which is NOT what I have said at any point so anyway the maths.
> > > > >
> > > > > Reavers:
> > > > > Supply’s: 175 x 14 = 2450 Supplys
> > > > > Power: 225 × 14 = 3150 Power
> > > > > Tech 2: 1000 PowerBanshees:
> > > > > Supplys: 275 × 30 = 8250
> > > > > Tech 2: 1000 PowerLet’s break down some hard truths here.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes the banshees cost 3 times as much supply’s as the reavers but supply’s are easy to amass power is most certainly not comparable in economy terms to supply’s.It will cost you around 2000 supply’s and 1000 power to build 3 generators and upgrade them to be any where near close enough to being able to afford that much anti air in the first place and that’s before the costs to reach tech 2 in the first place.
> > > > >
> > > > > The banshees on the other hand require much less investment to get up and running and thier return on investment is much much higher so so far 1-0 to the Air spammer This is without taking into consideration the additional cost to the reaver army for the shroud, locusts, marauders and grunts ect which I estimate to be another 500-1000 Power and around 2000-3000 supply’s based on the footage in the video.
> > > > >
> > > > > This brings the total investment to bring down a full pop of banshees to a whopping.
> > > > > 7450 Supply’s
> > > > > AND
> > > > > 6150 Power
> > > > >
> > > > > So with that being said from this calculation we can deduce that Air has beaten its counter not only in economy but in performance as well whilst also knowing that from the testing in the video little to no micro management was used to counter the AA from the opposistion.
> > > > >
> > > > > And we are only looking at banshees a pack of hornets would be even more of an overkill on the AA at only a slight increase in supply cost vs the bansheesAnd then there’s the wolverines which are considered weaker than the reavers what happens there is guaranteed to be even more of a win for the Air.
> > > > >
> > > > > So in closing the people who wanted evidence to what I’ve said you have it there in front of you.Some like minded people have attempted to warp the intent and messege of mine and others posts regarding this topic and belittle alot of people about thier need to learn to be better at the game to stop complaining when they know nothing about the person they are insulting let alone never even played a match with or against them which is a cop out for avoiding the facts of the issues raised in the Air vs AA debates.
> > > > >
> > > > > But here is the evidence to back up my proposed balance changes and to further enforce what alot of people, postums and the devs are saying and working to fix for the betterment of balance and elimination of the concept of a single unit army in a truly amazing RTS game and that is that air is over performing against its counter.
> > > > >
> > > > > Can a complex army of reavers take on banshees
> > > > > Halo Wars 2 Mythbusters
> > > > > - YouTube
> > > > >
> > > > > To clarify my position on this matter as some people like to warp the posts in a different direction putting peoples argument on this topic down to lack of skill or ability to play at a competitive level.
> > > > >
> > > > > This post is for the community to come together and voice concerns over the single unit spam of air and its dominance and utility in the game as it stands, and as postums has stated air is over performing right now and has been for a while as most people with common sense and the devs have confirmed this.
> > > > >
> > > > > On the other side there is a so called self proclaimed elite few forum warriors that attempt to shut down any constructive argument under the guise of your a noob or your service record gives you no experience or right to question game balance.
> > > > >
> > > > > You have to be blind, in denial or an advocate of spamming only air to see how overpowered it is else you wouldn’t defend it so religiously. But I digress.So here’s the thing. Air units are totally over powered. Period. And this is since the most recent patch in march and I hope for a correction by the devs by further buffing AA in the next update.
> > > > >
> > > > > One of the main reasons behind this is the sheer cost to counter air is unbalanced as it costs power to build anti air something that is not easily acsessable or in abundance in the early game and even the mid game.
> > > > >
> > > > > On the otherside air costs only supply’s which we all know and can agree on is much to easy to spam early and mid game.
> > > > >
> > > > > Furthermore air is incredibly easy to manoeuvre and requires litterly no skill to melt opposition as AA can be focused down in mere seconds and can reposistion in a heartbeat and out range AA using bases as LOS blockers allowing for air units to focus down bases and structures.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ways this can be fixed.
> > > > > For AA balance:
> > > > > Half power cost on AA
> > > > > Speed up build time of AA
> > > > > And buff AA damage
> > > > >
> > > > > For Air balance:
> > > > > Add 75-125 supply’s to cost of air
> > > > > Reduce core Air damage against AA, structures and turrets.
> > > > > Increase build time
> > > > >
> > > > > This will mean that players have to build anti vehicle to counter AA and anti building to destroy bases not just laser everything down with overwhelming air and manoeuvrability.
> > > > >
> > > > > Realistically 1-2 AA should be able to take down at least 2-3 Air units quickly and efficiently but its quite often the case that the air will move away from AA and find someone without AA which implies that every game you need to build majority AA.
> > > > >
> > > > > I myself have pulled off many full air rushes and its kinda of sad the place air is right now as nothing is equivalent to thier power and utility in game and as such the direction of the game is heading to a full air pop meta in essence destroying the need to build other great units in the game and strategize mixed build army’s for more depth of combat.
> > > > >
> > > > > Dench.
> > > >
> > > > Just shut up

Send me a PM if you want to personally demonstrate this Air spam to me. I love science and I love having my mind changed. GT: THEWALL766. Air spam is not a thing in competitive 1s games and in 2s and 3s it’s a viable army comp. Don’t balence this game around 3s, because the amount of leader powers in that mode makes it a yoink show from start to finish

32

Lol Air OP, 1 Wolverine > 4 Hornets

33

> 2533274869891714;11:
> > 2533274830166194;9:
> > > 2533274855883119;2:
> > > Okay I will tell the devs how I really feel.
> > >
> > > Unpopular opinion 1: Stop listening to the community so much. Air is barely usable in 1s because Platinum players who don’t know how to play the game come on to waypoint to complain about air instead of looking at what they’re doing wrong. Another nerf or 2 to air and you’ll never see it again in 1s.
> > >
> > > Unpopular opinion 2: stop listening to 3s players about balance changes. That game mode is a cluster -Yoink- and will never be balanced, stop changing things to appease 3 players. It sucks because I have a feeling 3s is the most populated playlist, but RTS games need to be balanced around 1s and 1s only. This game will never be close to balanced if they try to make balance changes across 1s, 2s, and 3s. They need to stick to one playlist, preferably 1s, and make changes solely around that playlist. I’m tired of coming onto waypoint and seeing a Plat 3s player complaining that air is OP
> >
> > Or the game could be balanced for all game modes not just 1s.Kind of selfish to say it should only be balanced for 1s
>
> While I agree with you, this simply isn’t possible, especially in HW2. There are too many Leaders, too many leader abilities, the maps are too large (in teams), and there are too many interactions for the game to be balanced across all the deathmatch playlists. The only way for all three deathmath playlists (1’s, 2’s, 3’s) to be balanced, would be to have seperate balancing for each playlists, which, in my opinion, isn’t feasible. Even in other RTS games, players understand that team modes are meant for more casual play, and there will be great imbalances.
>
> An example of this would be Vord’s Maelstrom. In team games, this ability is, without question, broken. Keeping an entire army locked in one place, and having have teammates bombard said army with actives is just plain unfair. However, in 1’s this ability is just meh, and doesn’t really do a whole lot, especially as units get global upgrades.
>
> Another example of this would be everyone’s favourite; core air units. Air is just viable in 1’s and mostly isn’t seen until super late game, however, in teams, air is “good” and is seen almost every game.
>
> There are countless examples that display this relationship, but I hope these help set the scene a little bit. As amazing at it would he to have all playlists balanced, it’s not possible, this is something we need to accept. Because of this, balancing the game around competive 1’s matches is the best course of action, as they are the most competive gamemode. This is universal across all RTS games.

My sleepy self had a very interesting and impractical idea that probably would never happen due to the sheer amount of work involved, but here we go.

The game could in theory be balanced for all team sizes. However it would require separate data files entirely for the different game mode team sizes. Meaning 1s would have its own balance, 2s would have its own, and 3s again would have its own.

However, this is highly impractical as it would do several negative things.

  1. Players would not have consistency from game to game with each leader for the various modes as they do now.
  2. The sheer amount of overhead needed to balance for each indidivudal team size would be mind boggling.
  3. The additional time to get balance patches out would essentially triple for each game type.

Personally and professionally I don’t believe doing it would be remotely practical, but at a high level of thought it could potentially solve the, “balance for all team sizes while continuing to balance for the most competitive mode which is 1v1 and the staple for RTS balance.”

But to be clear, the likliehood of such a thing happening is extremely low and just a thought at this point in time. This is not a, “this is what we are doing” statement by any means. To be even clearer, I repeat, at this time we are not doing this idea.

34

WOW!

You guys are passionate about this stuff and honestly I love it!

I’m with Sadder Joker on this one (if the post staring this thread was clear enough)

EVIDENCE!

I play a lot of 3’s. Since the update Air and AA have been great. AV needs some work against AA and Glassing beam is obnoxious but all in all things are good.

I agree that the game should be balanced around one’s but you guys gotta think bigger than that. The Dev’s can not simply abandon 3’s for the stake of 1’s. This line of thinking is not logical when you look at this game with a lens wider than the hard core competitive 1’s community. It’s simple, I love 1’s play a bunch, but if you balance the game to 1’s and do not consider 3’s at all you will loose a majority of the community. My brothers and I are not going to continue to play a wildly unbalanced game mode every night and then say to ourselves “It’s ok because 1’s is balanced” Regular people (you know the ones that buy products and keep the lights on at 343) do not care about that kind of stuff. They only care if they had a fun experience. 3’s ranked and team war are very popular game modes (my evidence is lobby wait times, they are pretty low for me). You can not ignore this or you forsake the future of the game.

So my ultimate point is: balance primary (major) focus should be 1’s with a secondary (minor) focus on 3’s (Duh)

or do not do -yoink- to 3’s that -yoinks- up 1’s… (again DUH)

Keep talking guys!

35

> 2533274792014876;33:
> > 2533274869891714;11:
> > > 2533274830166194;9:
> > > > 2533274855883119;2:
> > > > Okay I will tell the devs how I really feel.
> > > >
> > > > Unpopular opinion 1: Stop listening to the community so much. Air is barely usable in 1s because Platinum players who don’t know how to play the game come on to waypoint to complain about air instead of looking at what they’re doing wrong. Another nerf or 2 to air and you’ll never see it again in 1s.
> > > >
> > > > Unpopular opinion 2: stop listening to 3s players about balance changes. That game mode is a cluster -Yoink- and will never be balanced, stop changing things to appease 3 players. It sucks because I have a feeling 3s is the most populated playlist, but RTS games need to be balanced around 1s and 1s only. This game will never be close to balanced if they try to make balance changes across 1s, 2s, and 3s. They need to stick to one playlist, preferably 1s, and make changes solely around that playlist. I’m tired of coming onto waypoint and seeing a Plat 3s player complaining that air is OP
> > >
> > > Or the game could be balanced for all game modes not just 1s.Kind of selfish to say it should only be balanced for 1s

As I stated prior, I don’t believe it to be feasible, for the reasons you mentioned, but it’s the only way I see each playlists being as close to balnced as possible. Until then , I would like to stick to to balancing the game around 1’s. While I believe it’s not right to completely ignore the team playlists, I feel they should not be the primary focus. If something can be altered in teams without making it useless/broken in 1’s, I’m all for it. You feel me?

Thanks for the explanation, Post.

36

> 2533274808003246;34:
> WOW!
>
> You guys are passionate about this stuff and honestly I love it!
>
> I’m with Sadder Joker on this one (if the post staring this thread was clear enough)
>
> EVIDENCE!
>
> I play a lot of 3’s. Since the update Air and AA have been great. AV needs some work against AA and Glassing beam is obnoxious but all in all things are good.
>
> I agree that the game should be balanced around one’s but you guys gotta think bigger than that. The Dev’s can not simply abandon 3’s for the stake of 1’s. This line of thinking is not logical when you look at this game with a lens wider than the hard core competitive 1’s community. It’s simple, I love 1’s play a bunch, but if you balance the game to 1’s and do not consider 3’s at all you will loose a majority of the community. My brothers and I are not going to continue to play a wildly unbalanced game mode every night and then say to ourselves “It’s ok because 1’s is balanced” Regular people (you know the ones that buy products and keep the lights on at 343) do not care about that kind of stuff. They only care if they had a fun experience. 3’s ranked and team war are very popular game modes (my evidence is lobby wait times, they are pretty low for me). You can not ignore this or you forsake the future of the game.
>
> So my ultimate point is: balance primary (major) focus should be 1’s with a secondary (minor) focus on 3’s (Duh)
>
> or do not do -yoink- to 3’s that -yoinks- up 1’s… (again DUH)
>
> Keep talking guys!

There are compromises being made for both. Keeping everyone happy is a fun pendulum swing my friend.

Have to get pretty creative at times, but it is a never ending challenge to do right by team games and 1v1 games.

I am stubborn in the sense that if someone says, “You can’t do it.” I’m still going to try. Probably stubborn to a fault, but none the less I will continue to work within our team to find creative ways to help put team games while minimally impacting 1s so it is not a heavy negative.

I will just sit here and wait for the rage… It is coming… I foresee it.

37

> 2533274869891714;35:
> > 2533274792014876;33:
> > > 2533274869891714;11:
> > > > 2533274830166194;9:
> > > > > 2533274855883119;2:
> > > > > Okay I will tell the devs how I really feel.
> > > > >
> > > > > Unpopular opinion 1: Stop listening to the community so much. Air is barely usable in 1s because Platinum players who don’t know how to play the game come on to waypoint to complain about air instead of looking at what they’re doing wrong. Another nerf or 2 to air and you’ll never see it again in 1s.
> > > > >
> > > > > Unpopular opinion 2: stop listening to 3s players about balance changes. That game mode is a cluster -Yoink- and will never be balanced, stop changing things to appease 3 players. It sucks because I have a feeling 3s is the most populated playlist, but RTS games need to be balanced around 1s and 1s only. This game will never be close to balanced if they try to make balance changes across 1s, 2s, and 3s. They need to stick to one playlist, preferably 1s, and make changes solely around that playlist. I’m tired of coming onto waypoint and seeing a Plat 3s player complaining that air is OP
> > > >
> > > > Or the game could be balanced for all game modes not just 1s.Kind of selfish to say it should only be balanced for 1s
>
> As I stated prior, I don’t believe it to be feasible, for the reasons you mentioned, but it’s the only way I see each playlists being as close to balnced as possible. Until then , I would like to stick to to balancing the game around 1’s. While I believe it’s not right to completely ignore the team playlists, I feel they should not be the primary focus. If something can be altered in teams without making it useless/broken in 1’s, I’m all for it. You feel me?
>
> Thanks for the explanation, Post.

See above post for confirmation.

38

Air in a 1v1 standpoint is not op. It may be strong but that is different. In a pure unit on unit situation anti air will always win. But include specific faction powers into the factor that devastate army’s. As well as unit movement speed and ability to attack quickly and outmaneuver or defend a base with turret anti vehicle support and in those instances I can see them being strong but not op.

Air will always be able to dodge leader powers more effectively in capable micro hands due to its speed