cRPG

cRPG => Suggestions Corner => Game Balance Discussion => Topic started by: ArchonAlarion on January 08, 2012, 07:50:05 am

Title: Rouncey vs. Palfrey
Post by: ArchonAlarion on January 08, 2012, 07:50:05 am
Rouncey

hit points: 95
body armor: 16
difficulty: 3
speed: 41
maneuver: 41
charge: 20
Price: 9,010

Palfrey

hit points: 85
body armor: 12
difficulty: 3
speed: 42
maneuver: 41
charge: 18
Price: 13,214


For exactly 1 more speed you get a horse that is 4000 more gold, 10 less hp, 4 less armor, and 2 less charge. I never see palfreys being used and it is obvious why.

Even if you can argue that the 1 point difference in speed is balanced by the reductions in the other stats, can you argue that the pricing makes sense? I suggest at the very least to cut the price of the palfrey in half or make it equal to the rouncey's. Playing cavalry can be expensive, so I would assume players will gladly take 1 less speed for less upkeep (along with the additional stat benefits). Just stare at the progression of the horse equipment page for a bit and you'll understand the absurdity. I don't think one can argue that the palfrey is a manouver role horse either (in the progression): the sudden drop in difficulty doesn't make sense for that and 41 manouver is standard for non-HA mounts.

*edit: Another suggestion might be to nerf the rouncey, or increase its price instead.
Title: Re: Rouncey vs. Palfrey
Post by: Tears of Destiny on January 08, 2012, 08:00:34 am
Buff Palfrey for diversity!
Title: Re: Rouncey vs. Palfrey
Post by: illogical on January 08, 2012, 08:03:55 am
Buff Palfrey for diversity!
if buff palfey suffer Destrier. Maybe logic nerf Rouncey.
Title: Re: Rouncey vs. Palfrey
Post by: ArchonAlarion on January 08, 2012, 08:10:46 am
It might be best to make significant changes to both horses stat-wise. If they are both kept as 3 difficulty (which they should be imo), then the the "balanced" possibilities are: redundancy (same role, same utility), economy (same role, different utility - one horse is better and priced higher), or different roles. Palfrey could be a novice HA mount, which would call for greater manouverability than it has currently.
Title: Re: Rouncey vs. Palfrey
Post by: B3RS3RK on January 08, 2012, 03:37:26 pm
Give Palfrey speed 43 and everything is fine.
Title: Re: Rouncey vs. Palfrey
Post by: Casimir on January 08, 2012, 08:12:23 pm
Buff palfrey
Title: Re: Rouncey vs. Palfrey
Post by: Herkkutatti on January 08, 2012, 08:16:12 pm
give some love to palfrey <3
Title: Re: Rouncey vs. Palfrey
Post by: zagibu on January 09, 2012, 12:26:27 am
It seems a little unbalanced, yes.
Title: Re: Rouncey vs. Palfrey
Post by: Smoothrich on January 09, 2012, 11:40:26 am
Give the Palfrey 1 more maneuver, make the riding requirement 8.

~~cRPG balance~~
Title: Re: Rouncey vs. Palfrey
Post by: RiPLeY_II on January 09, 2012, 04:14:55 pm
Give Palfrey speed 43 and everything is fine.

This. Make it a "mini-courser", the rouncey is actually a "mini-destrier". No more manouver cause it would go in terrain of the actual "mini-arabian" for HA which is  is the Steppe Horse.
Title: Re: Rouncey vs. Palfrey
Post by: ArchonAlarion on January 09, 2012, 06:40:46 pm
I would suggest 44 speed because 43 is still not enough. If 43 speed, then raise hp to 90 and/or body armor to 14.
Title: Re: Rouncey vs. Palfrey
Post by: Okkam on January 09, 2012, 06:40:59 pm
if buff palfey suffer Destrier. Maybe logic nerf Rouncey.

Nah, let's nerf Destrier
Title: Re: Rouncey vs. Palfrey
Post by: B3RS3RK on January 09, 2012, 06:57:19 pm
I would suggest 44 speed because 43 is still not enough. If 43 speed, then raise hp to 90 and/or body armor to 14.

Nah. 43 Speed is already faster than the Destrier, and it´s the fastest horse except for the Courser out there with 43 speed.43 would be pretty perfect.
Title: Re: Rouncey vs. Palfrey
Post by: Stabby_Dave on January 09, 2012, 08:10:15 pm
The way I see it is we have 4 low tier horses, excluding the sumpter. Atm there is no reason to use any of these except the rouncey and maybe the steppe horse.
The
Averaged out the main stats for the 4 horses go like this:

hit points: 87.5
body armor: 13
speed: 39.5
maneuver: 43.75
charge: 17

Why not have it so that 3 of the horses have a specialisation from these stats and 1 be an all-rounder. E.g. Rouncey has more HP/Armour, Steppe horse has higher maneuvre, Desert Horse has the Speed and Palfrey is an all rounder.

The Palfrey for example could have these stats as the all rounder:

Palfrey
hit points: 90
body armor: 13
speed: 40
maneuver: 42
charge: 17

Compared to the Desert Horse Speed Specialist:

Desert Horse
hit points: 85
body armor: 10
speed: 44
maneuver: 40
charge: 15

Rouncey as the tank:

Rouncey
hit points: 95
body armor: 16
speed: 38
maneuver: 40
charge: 18

The maneuverable Steppe Horse:

Steppe Horse
hit points: 85
body armor: 10
speed: 38
maneuver: 46
charge: 15

This way, each of the horses has a specialisation at lower levels and the game would see some more diversity. The prices and difficulties would have to be normalised as well.
Title: Re: Rouncey vs. Palfrey
Post by: Glyph on January 09, 2012, 09:12:57 pm
The way I see it is we have 4 low tier horses, excluding the sumpter. Atm there is no reason to use any of these except the rouncey and maybe the steppe horse.
The
Averaged out the main stats for the 4 horses go like this:

hit points: 87.5
body armor: 13
speed: 39.5
maneuver: 43.75
charge: 17

Why not have it so that 3 of the horses have a specialisation from these stats and 1 be an all-rounder. E.g. Rouncey has more HP/Armour, Steppe horse has higher maneuvre, Desert Horse has the Speed and Palfrey is an all rounder.

The Palfrey for example could have these stats as the all rounder:

Palfrey
hit points: 90
body armor: 13
speed: 40
maneuver: 42
charge: 17

Compared to the Desert Horse Speed Specialist:

Desert Horse
hit points: 85
body armor: 10
speed: 44
maneuver: 40
charge: 15

Rouncey as the tank:

Rouncey
hit points: 95
body armor: 16
speed: 38
maneuver: 40
charge: 18

The maneuverable Steppe Horse:

Steppe Horse
hit points: 85
body armor: 10
speed: 38
maneuver: 46
charge: 15

This way, each of the horses has a specialisation at lower levels and the game would see some more diversity. The prices and difficulties would have to be normalised as well.
the rouncey wont be a tank, because it still can't take decent damage for a tank horse. it needs more armor, more like 20.
Title: Re: Rouncey vs. Palfrey
Post by: Stabby_Dave on January 10, 2012, 01:37:21 am
the rouncey wont be a tank, because it still can't take decent damage for a tank horse. it needs more armor, more like 20.

Well it cant be a proper tank because its still a low tier horse.
Title: Re: Rouncey vs. Palfrey
Post by: dodnet on January 10, 2012, 11:35:39 am
I'm into this but plz dont nerf the Rouncey.
Title: Re: Rouncey vs. Palfrey
Post by: ArchonAlarion on January 10, 2012, 02:50:43 pm
Something as simple as slightly increasing the speed of the palfrey, with a slight reduction in price should do the trick.

43-44 speed
~10,000 gold
Title: Re: Rouncey vs. Palfrey
Post by: CrazyCracka420 on January 12, 2012, 10:29:19 pm
I choose the palfrey for the 1 extra speed, apparently I didn't really compare the stats or I might have taken the rouncey.

I think moving the speed from 42 to 43 would work, or giving it 42 maneuver. 

But honestly to stay consistent with my views, I think they should just leave it alone.  That 1 extra speed makes it the fastest horse besides the courser.   That's significant enough for some people to pick it over the rouncey (as I did). 
Title: Re: Rouncey vs. Palfrey
Post by: Teeth on January 12, 2012, 11:07:27 pm
It's balanced cause the Palfrey looks hawt. Ah well, looks are probably unimportant, buff it.
Title: Re: Rouncey vs. Palfrey
Post by: Gnjus on January 13, 2012, 06:29:46 pm
Being a peasant/villager in real life Fasader should have decent knowledge about horses and balancing mistakes like this shouldn't be possible....but then it's Failsader we're talking about.......