Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   

Ravager and Halberd

24 posts, 515 views
Post comment
Filter:    Player:  
Page of 2 (24 records)
sort
I think the Ravager vs halberd comparison deserves some attention - the Halberd seems strictly better than the Ravager.

- halberd faster
- halberd can travel over water
- halberd cheaper
- halberd higher dps
- halberd effective HP dependant on whether it takes hits to armoured mode or not, but in many cases higher.
- halberd has utility vs shields as a felon absorber, vs Ravager being gutted by felon ball.
- halberd strong vs high alpha skirmishers (moderator, scalpel), and skirm resistant in general.
- halberd has higher skill ceiling (use of hold fire to retreat, move past enemies or use AoE weapons to cause friendly fire).

Against this, the Ravager has
- higher range.
- higher HP, if the halberd takes majority of hits when unarmored.

Not sure that really tallies, especially when Ravager is the ultimate weapon' of the Rover factory (while Halberd shares roster with Penetrator).

In summary, please buffs Ravager because I loves it
+3 / -0
Thanks for starting this thread and breaking down those points. I do want to deviate your intent somewhat from just "buff ravager" though with information to expand one's view of the unit.

I have noticed, through countless battles with randy on Otago / banana republic, ravager is actually a highly viable lategame invader - because if you can get them in high numbers, they have enough speed to distribute themselves nicely into the damage zone and start cooking whilst on the move (range, speed). Second only to minotaur in this regard. They're best in this role and I think you'll see CCR / FFA players mirror that opinion. That said, they don't fare well in combat vs a surprisingly large handfull of opposing factory armies and that's where the problem lies for rover.

In 1v1 a lot of shieldbots make them useless, glaives give them massive trouble and combining with rippers causes more AoE damage to the ravagers, fleas, buoys/ducks (maybe archer now?) all give them trouble and so on. They just don't offer much in the way of combat. So I'd suggest more of a statistical re-alignment than a straight up buff if anything were to happen to ravager.

Alternatively, nerf Thug first of all and Halberd secondly. Thug is combat grade AF. Halberd, though, is a complex problem. The armor state baiting an entire array of cooldowns before the charge, for example, is ridiculously powerful. As is yesterday's example of 2 halberds having enough armour to get my 2 ogres to kill themselves and leave my commander in retreat. Being armored is definitely a cool feature but maybe the % modifier on that defense is just a bit too much impunity. You're essentially getting Edit: 2.7 ravagers worth of damage absorption. The kicker is that it's cheaper than ravager. I'd say nerf it, tune up mace/claymore who are falling out of meta-appropriate purpose.

SErankGodde's tendency towards hovers because of dagger's extreme mobility and instant-kill increased potential due to pre-targetting, scalpels AoE multikills, plus halberds ability to AoE kill Rippers/Ogres is getting to be a justifiably repetitive logical conclusion for someone looking to win win win. On the receiving end, it just looks like OP mechanic abuse, with the Halberd part of the deal being the most bullshit participant.
+0 / -0
14 days ago
Pls don't kill Thug :(
+0 / -0


14 days ago
quote:
You're essentially getting what, 8 ravagers worth of damage absorption? More?

Please try to be more accurate. This is easy math. A closed Halberd has 2.7 times the HP of a Ravager. (1250 / 0.25) / 1850.

Also, disregarding other things, the break even point for Halberds and Ravagers are 800 HP.
Like if you are a attacking a target, if the Ravager loses less than 800 HP on approach, Ravager is the better choice.

I think both Ravager and Thug is fine.
Ravager is about overrunning and outmaneuver the enemy positions, however, since the meta of the game has moved towards a more static defensive game where you aren't so focused on outmaneuvering the opponent, Ravagers don't have that big of a role in the current meta.
+0 / -0
quote:
Being armored is definitely a cool feature but maybe the % modifier on that defense is just a bit too much impunity

I find fighting against halberds unfun. Like watching the paint dry. The other side has all the initiative, you're there just as a background source of damage. You can't zone them (without things like Newton or Placeholder), and the totality of the tactics you can apply to them is just to keep shooting.

This is much worse than similarly tanky Jack, because the Jack can be kited or dived, and without jump it is slow enough for you to maybe try to run with your commander. Halberd, though, has raider-tier speed.

Even if for some absurd reason you manage to chew through the armor, good job, you've done killed what, 240 metal? Mediocre.

Imo, frustration aside, it just does not need all that speed.
+1 / -0
quote:
Also, disregarding other things, the break even point for Halberds and Ravagers are 800 HP.
Like if you are a attacking a target, if the Ravager loses less than 800 HP on approach, Ravager is the better choice.


The armour (and speed) of Halberd also applies to its ability to withdraw from combat. Or bypass enemy units to attack something beyond them. It protects them from slow damage of skirms that can gimp Ravager (moderator, bouy).

+0 / -0
quote:
I'd say nerf it, tune up mace/claymore who are falling out of meta-appropriate purpose.

On that! Hover has this peculiar problem where Mace is a skirm-riot (no aoe, but long range) and the Scalpel is a riot-skirm (long range, perfect accuracy, aoe).

During the years of playing the game my observation was that typically only one of those "exists"; that is, in the pair of Mace and Scalpel, as the meta ebbs and flows, one unit typically eclipses the other.

They are never really used at the same time for different purposes the same way Ronin/Reaver, Rogue/Outlaw, and even Ripper/Fencer would be - because they are so similar to each other that you just need the one that's currently better. And with the continuous DPS now accessible for 2x cheaper with Bolas, Mace is out of vogue and mass Scalpel is where it's at in this relationship.

(This is somewhat more analogous to Ronin/Sling than to Ronin/Reaver.)

TL:DR to make Mace good again, Scalpel should become (more) vulnerable to raiders.
+4 / -0


14 days ago
quote:
Please try to be more accurate. This is easy math. A closed Halberd has 2.7 times the HP of a Ravager. (1250 / 0.25) / 1850.


That's what I said, Halberd has 26 times the effective health of a Minotaur.

(Seriously though, thanks for doing the actual maths. Before I had a chance to look it up and edit it, I got very busy this morning. Shocking to see how far wrong I was)
+0 / -0
14 days ago
quote:
of dagger's extreme mobility and instant-kill increased potential due to pre-targetting


Giving a gauss unit prefire was a large mistake imo. It was already is very powerful due to the massive alpha damage/cost ratio, along with higher speed than most other raiders.

It's sad that this change was implemented almost immediately after SErankGodde lost a game when the daggers got countered by careful kodachi micro. Daggers now pose a huge problem for matches against heavy tanks.
+1 / -0
quote:
higher speed than most other raiders

It is significantly faster than all other ground raiders. The only things that come ahead are Flea and Dart, which are technically scouts and practically not sustainable combat options vs others in this list.

[Spoiler]
+1 / -0


14 days ago
[stage whisper] Ravager comparison to Halberd thread... Ravager comparison to Halberd thread...
+1 / -0

14 days ago
Ravager can fire over Ravager, but Halberd can't fire over Halberd.

Historically Ravager also had great damage tuning, 210 used to results in little overkill for many common targets but this was ruined after superfluid (eg. mex 400 -> 700, Glaive 200 -> 230). Possibly this can be tweaked without necessarily changing DPS all that much.
+3 / -0
I think the complaint can be extended to all mobile armored units (although I think crabe is the only other one?). Crabe and halberd are both too good at slowing down the game just by flaunting their immense durability around.

Crabe is also rather unintuitive to use as you're massively punished for trying to move it during combat.

Maybe the damage reduction of mobile armored units should be cut down to 50%.

In regards to ravager being UP... feels like its more of a symptom of the playstyle of the rover fac not being terribly workable in the current meta, at least in lobsterpots. In small games they have to deal with the fact that tanks now have a decent early game line-up while still packing the big guns as usual.

Although in my experience ravagers have never been the best combatants. They were good for rolling over enemy bases, rather. I feel like the current weakness of scorchers hurts them indirectly, since ravager + scorcher used to be a pretty great combination. The scorchers provided the DPS and point-defense that ravagers lack.
+2 / -0

13 days ago
Make Ravager 10 elmos/s faster.
+1 / -0
quote:
I have noticed, through countless battles with randy on Otago / banana republic, ravager is actually a highly viable lategame invader
(...)
Second only to minotaur in this regard. They're best in this role and I think you'll see CCR / FFA players mirror that opinion.


<- CCR-player mirrors that opinion but asks himself why Minotaurs are actually still better for the job. Imo Minotaur shouldn`t be that close in speed to ravager, because it`s pork-breaking abillities are a lot higher.


I think as well that the "Blitzkrieg"-playstyle that rovers seem to encourage is pretty misplaced with that factory. If i want to rush something down to oblivion i go with glaives. Scorchers are too clumsy and expensive in comparison. Fencers don`t have the stopping-power they once had, but Badger and Ripper are quite good now (compared to pre-superfluid). This seems to shift Rovers to be the Factory for stalling fronts in clusterfucks at the moment, where badger-spam is really popular and effective. (In contrast to Impaler-spam, which is ironically almost always ineffective, but even more popular)



About Halbert vs Ravager:

that`s like comparing Hermit and Ronin. I admit they are annoying and unfun. But they also leave Hover with a very low abillity to go into open fights. Mace is too paper and too expensive to attack real pork with it, same for scalpel, so you are forced to stay back and shoot with lances. Lance is another story tho. Anyway, i don`t feel like Halbert is any reason for ravager to be bad.
+1 / -0
Ravager is one of the common victims to Placeholder.

I also would like to see usage of ravagers mix with Blitzs.

Though ravager could shoot over each other to focus fire, the bulleye Halberd do raiding better, as they may split into few smaller groups to potentially deal more damage to statics. They are better raiders more dps better survival chances marching into deep enemy territory.



__Just ignore below__
To break the game balance, I swapped ravager and ripper weapon however kept AoE

a combat vehicle
*Ravager* 290M, AoE 16, reload 2.5, velocity 600; cannot shoot over each other, worse than previous ripper to fight gunships

a lessor emissary riot/skrimisher
*Ripper* 260M, range 320, damage 200, AoE 48, reload 2.5, now shoot over each other

It feels they moving fluid in combat.
+0 / -0
13 days ago
quote:
This seems to shift Rovers to be the Factory for stalling fronts in clusterfucks at the moment, where badger-spam is really popular and effective. (In contrast to Impaler-spam, which is ironically almost always ineffective, but even more popular)


I agree, for a while now the rover factory has felt like the factory of poking, rather than the factory of aggression. Using their speed for kiting and poking is working better than trying direct raids or assaults.
+0 / -0
Prior to the targetting change and whatever other changes happened to rover/hover in the last 6 months, rover and hover matchups were extremely common on flatlands and there was very unclear evidence to suggest which factory was on top. Today, it absolutely feels as though hover is on top.

Although it's a rather small sample size, this data from high elo, flatland games during the most recent patch does support the theory of hover dominance:



To be clear, hover have 20 wins over rovers 11. If you look at losses, Hover shows itself to be a very safe choice; 6 losses. 20-6 ratio is very safe.

If we then remove the flatlands filter...



It's clear to see that the trend of hover being a safe pick continues, with it's loss rate much lower ranked than it's win rate. It's important to look at the size of those chunks. In this example, poor tanks is an incredibly risky pick with 8 wins and 18 losses.

Meanwhile, and a little more off-topic to hovers, we can see that shieldbots has become a far safer choice than cloakbots. But apparently I've kicked the shieldbots is OP dead horse to the point where it's no longer a valid opinion to hold.

EDIT: It appears most of October's data is missing from the sample. I'd be very interested to see if the trend continues.

EDIT #2: Remove ZK version from the filters and you get Octobers data, user error.
+0 / -0


13 days ago
And if you exclude me from the stats, it suddenly doesn't look as bad for Rovers.
+0 / -0


13 days ago
Very true Godde, you are a huge influencer on Hover's data. That said, to exclude you is really unproductive for many reasons - the most prominent being that one of the most successful player's factory picks and habits should ABSOLUTELY be factored into balance assessments. Put it this way; there's a reason you play hovercraft more frequently than other flatland factories.
+1 / -0
Page of 2 (24 records)