Jump to content

Necroblaster - Upcoming Changes


Recommended Posts

As part of our upcoming tower rebalance, Necroblaster will be receiving the following proposed changes. Please note that all changes proposed here are provisional and as such as subject to change:

Iteration 1
1. Necrotic Gun
   A. Corpse Cost: 500 life points per shot -> 825 life points per shot.
   B. Splash radius: 10m --> 12m
2. Corpse Gathering Storage: 4500 --> 6600 storable life points 

 

Iteration 1 Goals
Necroblaster is the best building in the game without any real competition. It is intended to have a major downside in costing corpses but it does much more damage than it costs in corpses allowing it to be self-sufficient. We are fine with Necroblaster remaining very powerful but it should have an appropriate downside. With a cost of 825 corpses per shot, Necroblaster can store up to 8 attacks in total which translates to 40 seconds worth of attacking. Additionally, it still remains possible for Necroblaster to be self-sufficient in ideal scenarios but in general this should require the player to pay attention to their Necroblaster defenses and maintain them with more corpses.

Xamos and poisonapple95 like this
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, WindHunter said:

best building in the game without any real competition

blue vortex has effectively the same dps just worse splash radius and that weird initial attack delay. and while vortex is also less dense than blaster, the lack of corpse requirement and availability at t2 allows vortex to easily compete with blaster. with both getting nerfed it will be interesting to see how things pan out but really in cases where towers work behind walls, vortex will likely come out ahead if these blaster changes actually provide a meaningful downside so blaster cant just constantly run on autopilot like they do now which afaik was the reason theyre being nerfed in this way

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the changes here and think its moving in the right direction. Shadow should be high risk / high reward and this better emphasizes it. Though i would make the suggestion of maybe moving towards a direction where it has a larger soul storage but uses lots of souls per shot so it isnt so self sufficient but can be set up in a way to make it last a while. I would have to test it but i suspect these changes wont necessarily change a whole lot in most situations. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/24/2022 at 5:08 AM, WindHunter said:

 With a cost of 825 corpses per shot, Necroblaster can store up to 8 attacks in total which translates to 40 seconds worth of attacking.

Are you planning to increase the stored amount to at least 6600? Right now it can store only 4500, which means only 5 shots.

Edited by Tristanb18
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Tristanb18 said:

Are you planning to increase the stored amount to at least 6600? Right now it can store only 4500, which means only 5 shots.

Thank you for pointing this out. We will be increasing the corpse storage amount, yes. Some of these changes have been written over a long period of time and we can forget a detail or two when returning to it after awhile. I have edited the opening post with the updated information. 

Metagross31 likes this
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 months later...
Posted (edited)

I like Necroblaster being able to self sustain, and at is one of my favorite shadow cards.

I might be a noob, but the build, set up, and then forget nature of Necroblaster is core to how I use the tower in pvE.

With the requirement of corpse setup / using enemy corpses, it already feels shadow themed. Not every shadow mechanic needs to come with a major cost. A lot of the core ones (furnace of flesh, chaos altar, time vortex) instead involve cheating cost, which is a very shadowy thing to do. (e.g. making a pact with the devil, and then weaseling out of it), and I don't think making them unable to self sustain adds anything. It feels it just makes the card less fun.

Maybe if one could somehow set up a corpse network, I would like it not being able to self sustain. You could enable soul-splicers to link together, and then have one massive sacrificial area, that fuels all corpse using stuff.

 

For any given map, you can also easily tweak the enemy units being sent against a Necroblaster to make self sustain impossible. E.g. units with a high innate damage reduction, or high regeneration rate, or units that also use corpses. Necroblasters are going to have huge difficulty self sustaining against an onslaught of overlords for example.

Edited by Reloasd
Link to post
Share on other sites

The proposal to adjust every map around Necroblaster is completely unfeasible.

It is the single best tower and a nerf won't make it unusable. Currently it has a condition tied into its power that does pretty much nothing because once fueled it won't run out again in the vast majority of cases. It's true that most defensive building set-ups currently require way too much attention and don't do a good job at actually locking down areas. And in a way the goal of building a defensive set-up is to just not having to care for that area any longer. But Necroblaster is way too good at it for what its requirements are.

The proposal doesn't even touch its obscene damage. Just makes it so accessing it requires a bit more thought.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With the exception of Hatecaster, which has more of its stats in life points, Necroblaster is the most stat efficient card in the entire game and it is only T3 and completely splashable. In terms of damage per power, it is the most damage efficient card in the game. To pay for this incredible level of efficiency, the card is supposed to have the downside that it costs corpses. Except it only does at the beginning, and then never again. As it currently stands, Necroblaster would functionally be no different if we just removed the corpses entirely and gave it slow construction to simulate waiting for initial corpses. We are making Necroblaster's interaction with corpses a real mechanic, and not just the facade it is currently.  If we did not move in this direction, we would have to substantially nerf some other aspect of the card to bring it down to a reasonable level. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

i liked the card the way it is. 😞

 

played it only in the starter deck. starter deck is the perfect difficulty for beginners, and good cards to play with a limted pool.

i am not a fan of weakening too many pve cards. i don´t want to learn every card new with every patch. would be more intresting to find out other good cards and ways.

i don´t want to find a new way so often in a constantly world that goes more difficult every patch. benefit only for a small group of experts?

of course i may be wrong. 🙂

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Raxaaa said:

would be more intresting to find out other good cards and ways.

Exactly. Which is why the vast majority of changes that have happened up to this point and will continue to happen, including these planned tower changes, are buffs.

Some nerfs are unavoidable if the overall powerlevel is supposed to become more stable.

You can't take the strongest cards in the game as a baseline or otherwise you would end up with insane powercreep. And if you just leave them they will maintain their position as the gold standard that nothing else can touch, so the conversation would always be "Yeah, well Y is alright now, I guess. But it ain't X." A certain power discrepancy will always be there but it mustn't be too big. Otherwise the OP will just keep warping perceived power and crowd out anything else.

In the end, there will be more attractive options, not less.

WindHunter likes this
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Terms of Use