With the latest updated patch, their have been some minor changes to the exact Health, Armor and Damage values for the units used as examples in this video, but all other information remains the same and accurate, and you can now finally see how much bonus damage a unit does by hoovering your mouse over a units weapon icon in the detail select bar, next to it's armor icon.
This is great stuff! Thanks for posting. I'm not a fan of 'complicated systems' but I usually just base my knowledge off of how many hits from an atlas does it take to kill a lancer and that's good enough for me. This is VERY helpful to understand that 50 armour doesn't block 50 points of damage.
I know, its not very intuitive at all. Maybe one day they could have the % damage reduction stated alone with a units armor value when hoovering your mouse over it during a game, so people wouldn't have to work that out themselves
Thanks! I think the reason stated as to why they went with this Armor system was mainly for co-op as they could never get sc2 Armor to scale well in high level mutations
To my knowledge there isn't currently a way to find that out within the game, which is frustrating. You might be able to look up each unit online, but the damage bonuses for each unit will always be unique and different and usually not double. For example the scout's base attack is 8 damage, but it's bonus attack is another +16 to light.
How I see it: The armor mechanics in the game, while straightforward on paper, fall short when it comes to delivering a satisfying and strategic experience for players. One of the main issues stems from the uneven scaling of the armor values, which feels both unintuitive and poorly balanced. For starters, the incremental reduction in damage is disproportionate to the armor value displayed. For example, while an armor value of 1 barely scratches a 0.99% reduction in damage, an armor value of 100 offers a 50% reduction. This non-linear scaling can make some units feel far too fragile at low armor values and overly "tanky" at high values, creating a significant imbalance. Units with 10 armor, offering a 9.09% damage reduction, don’t feel noticeably more durable than those with 5 armor, which reduces damage by only 4.76%. The jump to 25 armor, suddenly reducing damage by 20%, exacerbates this issue by making units with armor value seem almost inconsequential in comparison. Moreover, this setup discourages nuanced decision-making when it comes to compositions of units. The lack of a steady progression in damage reduction values across different armor thresholds means that there’s little incentive to invest in different units. Players will avoid into investing heavily in a unique composition of different units altogether, leading to a binary approach to of matches either being a mass of one type of unit, or not and will likely lose the match because of this lack of equal values amongst tier 1 units. Ultimately, this armor system undermines the depth of the game’s combat mechanics, turning what should be strategic choices into arbitrary leaps in effectiveness. A more gradual and consistent scaling of armor values would go a long way toward creating a more balanced and engaging experience. I enjoy the game still
I definitely feel like the Sc2 Armor values felt more impactful, at least on a psychological basis. Such as when a Zerg Ultralisk would have 6 Armor, and a Marine in your army only deals 6 damage, you get the feeling that the Ultralist is basically invincible and how that's crazy, when in reality all units will also deal a minimum amount of damage, even when a units armor is greater than actual attack. Having a higher armor value somehow seems less cool and abstract within Stormgate, but that may be my own personal bias from playing Sc2 for 14 years, and someone coming from a game such a League of Legends may have a difference opinion as they are more used to that sort of armor system and it's relative value.
With the latest updated patch, their have been some minor changes to the exact Health, Armor and Damage values for the units used as examples in this video, but all other information remains the same and accurate, and you can now finally see how much bonus damage a unit does by hoovering your mouse over a units weapon icon in the detail select bar, next to it's armor icon.
This is great stuff! Thanks for posting. I'm not a fan of 'complicated systems' but I usually just base my knowledge off of how many hits from an atlas does it take to kill a lancer and that's good enough for me. This is VERY helpful to understand that 50 armour doesn't block 50 points of damage.
I know, its not very intuitive at all. Maybe one day they could have the % damage reduction stated alone with a units armor value when hoovering your mouse over it during a game, so people wouldn't have to work that out themselves
great information! thanks. I wish it wasn't so complicated to calculate though. I would need to memorize values outside the game.
Thanks! I think the reason stated as to why they went with this Armor system was mainly for co-op as they could never get sc2 Armor to scale well in high level mutations
good explanation on armor and effects
Thanks!
with the bonus damage, is there a way to know how much that bonus actually is?
ex, is it always double?
To my knowledge there isn't currently a way to find that out within the game, which is frustrating. You might be able to look up each unit online, but the damage bonuses for each unit will always be unique and different and usually not double. For example the scout's base attack is 8 damage, but it's bonus attack is another +16 to light.
How I see it:
The armor mechanics in the game, while straightforward on paper, fall short when it comes to delivering a satisfying and strategic experience for players. One of the main issues stems from the uneven scaling of the armor values, which feels both unintuitive and poorly balanced. For starters, the incremental reduction in damage is disproportionate to the armor value displayed. For example, while an armor value of 1 barely scratches a 0.99% reduction in damage, an armor value of 100 offers a 50% reduction. This non-linear scaling can make some units feel far too fragile at low armor values and overly "tanky" at high values, creating a significant imbalance. Units with 10 armor, offering a 9.09% damage reduction, don’t feel noticeably more durable than those with 5 armor, which reduces damage by only 4.76%. The jump to 25 armor, suddenly reducing damage by 20%, exacerbates this issue by making units with armor value seem almost inconsequential in comparison. Moreover, this setup discourages nuanced decision-making when it comes to compositions of units. The lack of a steady progression in damage reduction values across different armor thresholds means that there’s little incentive to invest in different units. Players will avoid into investing heavily in a unique composition of different units altogether, leading to a binary approach to of matches either being a mass of one type of unit, or not and will likely lose the match because of this lack of equal values amongst tier 1 units. Ultimately, this armor system undermines the depth of the game’s combat mechanics, turning what should be strategic choices into arbitrary leaps in effectiveness. A more gradual and consistent scaling of armor values would go a long way toward creating a more balanced and engaging experience.
I enjoy the game still
I definitely feel like the Sc2 Armor values felt more impactful, at least on a psychological basis.
Such as when a Zerg Ultralisk would have 6 Armor, and a Marine in your army only deals 6 damage, you get the feeling that the Ultralist is basically invincible and how that's crazy, when in reality all units will also deal a minimum amount of damage, even when a units armor is greater than actual attack.
Having a higher armor value somehow seems less cool and abstract within Stormgate, but that may be my own personal bias from playing Sc2 for 14 years, and someone coming from a game such a League of Legends may have a difference opinion as they are more used to that sort of armor system and it's relative value.
@@Dansible I completely agree a supply cap of 5v5 or 10 does make it a very relative value versus; SG having a supply cap of 300v300 or 600 😄.