Official Balance Issues Thread

[Draco]

Well I have been playing this awesome mod all this day with friends and we have noticed some things that may look in some way unbalance.( even thought this battle expirience have been amazing and very well balanced in most of its parts).

I didnt see any place to post feedback so I will do it here:

1.-Pike Phalanx balance: well this is always a kind of units which historically was enormously powerfull and that in Rome 2 was extremely powerfull. I understand that they have to maintain the line prety well but I have noticed that a few Tier 2 and tier 3 phalanxes lasts too much even completely exhausted and flanked by more than 6 units that are all winded or at most tired, which is a bit insane, since I have almost lost against a Agema pikemen units using 3 tier 3 gallic warriors.
maybe reducing their moral more when they are flanked?

2.-Spearmen tier 2 and 3: same problem as before, I can understand that if you are not flanked you will maintain the position a long time with, for example Triarii, but when you stay like 10 min non stop fighting with 5 troops flanking that battallion and make them all rout while 3 of this troops started with full stamina.... well Its quite tricky also.



Nice you made a lot of factions strong according to how good they were historically, Im loving all your work, this is just early apreciations and I need to play more.

I have to say this mod is a true masterpice in the current stage, cannot imagine how good it will be in the future, thx you so much for this.

PD: Loving the Celtic and Spanish factions ( Im Spanish) they feel very strong and with very good lucking units, Im just surprised you kept in mind the strenght of the Cantabri and Celtic cavalry, just wonderfull.

[hlidskjalf]

i'm also loving the gallic rosters most of all. spear wall infantry is too fun

[popovic]

Ok, I have played 1 battle and here is some feedback.

First of all, I will attach a screenshot:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

As you can see there, I have won a decisive victory, with a cheaper army.
That wouldn`t be anything special, but the thing is... Throughout the battle, I felt the AI isn`t giving me ANY challenge.
True, I didn`t really give the AI any units that are likely to pull of anything more then a frontal charge.
But still...

I flanked the AI units constantly, and effortlessly. I got both my slingers, then my Scutarii, and finally my cavalry behind their back.
Once I would charge in, or started pounding them with slingers, they would almost immediately break and flee.

In itself, this isn`t a bad mechanic, as it is fairly realistic. However, I have got the feeling the AI is at a problem here.
In all likeliness, the AI is too stupid to predict my flanking moves, and to counter them.
And when you combine that with your mechanics of breaking more easily when flanked, it allows the human player to beat the AI EXTREMELY easily.

I mean look at some of those numbers in the screenshot. The AI Triarii routed with 75% men left, and after killing only 20 something of my men. The AI Principes routed while killing less than 20 of my men on average...

Now, this is just 1 battle, and a custom one at that, so you might say we shouldn`t draw conclusions from that. And you are perhaps right, but this looks like bad omen...

Overall, I think further testing is needed, and possible recalibration of units, and especially their moral stats.
IMO, it is better to have somewhat less realistic, but still challenging battles, then have realistic behaviour (from a RL point of view), that the player can exploit to no end. (This is all assuming that the AI in Attilla, just like in all previous TW games, cannot be modded).

[ABH2]

I'm going to purpose this thread for providing balance feedback as I'm sure we are going to get a lot of it. Thanks.

[Willhelm123]

I recommend you guys arrange some online multiplayer battles. The AI as always is completely retarded and an easy win, not much we can do about that. I would recommend you play as the defender and the AI the attacker though, they perform marginally better that way.

Try out some sieges as well, if you can bear the Attila era fortifications.

[Fanest]

Played a couple of mp battles with my buddies and what i noticed is that roman armoured archers (armour rating 11) are very very strong - probably too strong when u compare them to others. Roman roster is in general is too strong, they are almost unbeatable in the right hands.
Secondly the gap between medium and elite/high tier infantry is too big, for example u can surround+hammer and anvil praetorians with 3 decent melee units and they wont brake, most likely they will tank and kill all in the end.
A friend of mine complained about indian armoured elephants - that they are almost unkillable.
Chariots are useless/bugged
Lack of shield wall for medium barbarian infantry.

Can someone tell he how long change bonus lasts and how it affects these modified attack/defence ratings.

Cheers!

[Draco]

Played a couple of mp battles with my buddies and what i noticed is that roman armoured archers (armour rating 11) are very very strong - probably too strong when u compare them to others. Roman roster is in general is too strong, they are almost unbeatable in the right hands.
Secondly the gap between medium and elite/high tier infantry is too big, for example u can surround+hammer and anvil praetorians with 3 decent melee units and they wont brake, most likely they will tank and kill all in the end.
A friend of mine complained about indian armoured elephants - that they are almost unkillable.
Chariots are useless/bugged
Lack of shield wall for medium barbarian infantry.

Can someone tell he how long change bonus lasts and how it affects these modified attack/defence ratings.

Cheers!

Elephants are very weak vs phalanx, archers and shock cav, just keep some ammo for them, I have killed a lot, it is not easy, But I think an armored Elephant should be powerfull.

The only really op unit in roman roster I see is the Triarii/Cohors Extraordinarii, which are insanely resistant to everything, only could rout them with Elephants, using Poison, fire and a good charge combined with high tier swords, and thats like 10 times their cost, I think they should get less armor and morale ( At least the cohorts). Principes are weak vs cav, really weak, 1 or 2 charges and they rout easily.

The archers have good armor that makes them resist enemie archer fire, but hey they are crap in melee, 1 charge of cav or infantry and they should be all dead.

Also the key vs rome is maintaint your units healthy and fresh, doing rotations you can decimate the testudo and shieldformations pretty easily, combined with a warchant or a flank charge, its won battle.


I wanted also to point something, in the current state Warchant is fairly the best General ability, and all others feels quite weak in comparison, i like the way it works, but you could double some of the bonuses the other abilities give in order to balance them with the war chant.

[Tenerife_Boy]

Ok, I have played 1 battle and here is some feedback.

First of all, I will attach a screenshot:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

As you can see there, I have won a decisive victory, with a cheaper army.
That wouldn`t be anything special, but the thing is... Throughout the battle, I felt the AI isn`t giving me ANY challenge.
True, I didn`t really give the AI any units that are likely to pull of anything more then a frontal charge.
But still...

I flanked the AI units constantly, and effortlessly. I got both my slingers, then my Scutarii, and finally my cavalry behind their back.
Once I would charge in, or started pounding them with slingers, they would almost immediately break and flee.

In itself, this isn`t a bad mechanic, as it is fairly realistic. However, I have got the feeling the AI is at a problem here.
In all likeliness, the AI is too stupid to predict my flanking moves, and to counter them.
And when you combine that with your mechanics of breaking more easily when flanked, it allows the human player to beat the AI EXTREMELY easily.

I mean look at some of those numbers in the screenshot. The AI Triarii routed with 75% men left, and after killing only 20 something of my men. The AI Principes routed while killing less than 20 of my men on average...

Now, this is just 1 battle, and a custom one at that, so you might say we shouldn`t draw conclusions from that. And you are perhaps right, but this looks like bad omen...

Overall, I think further testing is needed, and possible recalibration of units, and especially their moral stats.
IMO, it is better to have somewhat less realistic, but still challenging battles, then have realistic behaviour (from a RL point of view), that the player can exploit to no end. (This is all assuming that the AI in Attilla, just like in all previous TW games, cannot be modded).

You played a battle with more variety on units:
1) Winning in the distance cause you have slingers and they just have javs.
2) Winning on the flanks cause of your cav superiority and even not just one but 2 elephant units.
3) Probably but not 100% sure enlarging your center formation (those hoplites probably) "until the end of the map" wich is unrealistic for the timeperiod (this is not empire/napo) and tricky-arcadeish (it's just an expression don't get mad for that)

And you pretend BAI to hold you for...how long? x'D
C'mon!! This feedback can NOT be taken seriously bro...Play fairly or in a disadvantage against AI and come back again with a new report.

Finally, remember, no matter how deeply we improve TW BAI, humans will always be smarter.

[Willhelm123]

Played a couple of mp battles with my buddies and what i noticed is that roman armoured archers (armour rating 11) are very very strong - probably too strong when u compare them to others. Roman roster is in general is too strong, they are almost unbeatable in the right hands.
Secondly the gap between medium and elite/high tier infantry is too big, for example u can surround+hammer and anvil praetorians with 3 decent melee units and they wont brake, most likely they will tank and kill all in the end.
A friend of mine complained about indian armoured elephants - that they are almost unkillable.
Chariots are useless/bugged
Lack of shield wall for medium barbarian infantry.

Can someone tell he how long change bonus lasts and how it affects these modified attack/defence ratings.

Cheers!

The Romans are very strong, even their archers, but they cost so much, so much more than other factions. This will be especially noticeable in campaign, you'll get 3-4 armies on a lot of factions to a single roman army. Some of the most elite units in the game do not break easily at all, they're the sort of fight to the death types, but they should still break if you rout the rest of the army, the Army losses penalty (which kicks in when i believe 80% of the force has routed) is -15 morale which will rout almost all troops unless they're being buffed by something like winning combat, charge buff, etc. As always, hold your mouse over the morale stat to see what morale effects are in play.

We've always had trouble balancing elephants, but i'm quite happy with how they are now, they are very hard to kill, but they do cost 2400, on some factions you'd get 20 units for that.

Chariots aren't useless, but you can't just simply charge them into the enemy, at least not the light chariots. The way to use them is to move them through light infantry, they will cut them down like a scyth. Don't send the light chariots against heavy or formed up infantry, you must remember they are only a wicker chariot that a man could easily lift up. The Ptolemaic heavy chariots on the other hand are murder death weapons capable of running down most infantry, just don't leave them in the fight, they're all about the charge.

Shield wall doesn't fit for barbarians who's main tactic is to charge, some later barbarians do develop such tactics though.

Also in AE different factions need to use vastly different tactics. If you try to play every faction as if it were Rome you will simply lose.

[Fanest]

Elephants are very weak vs phalanx, archers and shock cav, just keep some ammo for them, I have killed a lot, it is not easy, But I think an armored Elephant should be powerfull.

The only really op unit in roman roster I see is the Triarii/Cohors Extraordinarii, which are insanely resistant to everything, only could rout them with Elephants, using Poison, fire and a good charge combined with high tier swords, and thats like 10 times their cost, I think they should get less armor and morale ( At least the cohorts). Principes are weak vs cav, really weak, 1 or 2 charges and they rout easily.

The archers have good armor that makes them resist enemie archer fire, but hey they are crap in melee, 1 charge of cav or infantry and they should be all dead.

Also the key vs rome is maintaint your units healthy and fresh, doing rotations you can decimate the testudo and shieldformations pretty easily, combined with a warchant or a flank charge, its won battle.


I wanted also to point something, in the current state Warchant is fairly the best General ability, and all others feels quite weak in comparison, i like the way it works, but you could double some of the bonuses the other abilities give in order to balance them with the war chant.

The Romans are very strong, even their archers, but they cost so much, so much more than other factions. This will be especially noticeable in campaign, you'll get 3-4 armies on a lot of factions to a single roman army. Some of the most elite units in the game do not break easily at all, they're the sort of fight to the death types, but they should still break if you rout the rest of the army, the Army losses penalty (which kicks in when i believe 80% of the force has routed) is -15 morale which will rout almost all troops unless they're being buffed by something like winning combat, charge buff, etc. As always, hold your mouse over the morale stat to see what morale effects are in play.

We've always had trouble balancing elephants, but i'm quite happy with how they are now, they are very hard to kill, but they do cost 2400, on some factions you'd get 20 units for that.

Chariots aren't useless, but you can't just simply charge them into the enemy, at least not the light chariots. The way to use them is to move them through light infantry, they will cut them down like a scyth. Don't send the light chariots against heavy or formed up infantry, you must remember they are only a wicker chariot that a man could easily lift up. The Ptolemaic heavy chariots on the other hand are murder death weapons capable of running down most infantry, just don't leave them in the fight, they're all about the charge.

Shield wall doesn't fit for barbarians who's main tactic is to charge, some later barbarians do develop such tactics though.

Also in AE different factions need to use vastly different tactics. If you try to play every faction as if it were Rome you will simply lose.

Roman archers price doesnt reflect their fighting capabilities compared to other archers - like allied cretan archers for example - the price difference between the two is only 50gp or somewhere there. Whats more tier 2 averni cav (celtic free horsemen) cant route them in singe charge. They even routed some of my elite cav units which was at around 1/2 strength.

In mp it doesnt help much that romans field much smaller armies compared to their opponents because they will still win all melee engagements. Barbarians for example cant do squat against them. First they can bring limited elite number of units and secondly doing rotations is a fairytale nobody can afford in mp. Charge bonuses even when doing hammer and anvil doesnt hurt legions. I had two Thracian Millitary Settlers (charge 11) perform hammer and anvil on some legion (13th i think) and that legion just kept on fighting while barely taking any damage from the charge.

I used Ptolemaic heavy chariots and they got bogged down in seconds, before i notice them again they all routed.

Another thing i dont like is the lack in information about units - where is melee damage - surly two handed weapons dont deal the same amount of damage as roman gladius/spatha. Axes - do they have AP capabilities or not, many units that have missiles lack ammo and range, where are units HP, what is ranged offence etc. There is lots of space in UI why not fill it with useful info.

All in all mp is very unbalanced, maybe in campaign these things become less important, still it would be nice to see it a bit more balanced.

[KAM 2150]

Units have only 1 HP so all weapons have only 1 HP, no reason to include that in UI.

[Willhelm123]

All units in AE have 1 hp, all weapons do 1 damage, they do have different AP, reach, penetration etc.

I'm not discounting your experience but i think you need to play the mod more, AE has a lot of depth which isn't so apparent on the surface. The Romans are very strong, they are meant to be strong, but they aren't unbeatable at all, you just need a different approach. We have a stamina mechanic, every unit has its own stamina stat, the Romans don't have great stamina, they will tire easily, let them chase you, annoy them, don't do frontal charges on them, try targeting their morale as well, if you simply try to outkill them you will have a very tough job on your hands.

Roman Aux archers have a lot more armour than Cretans, and AE places a lot of emphasis on armour in its unit costs, but their other stats are not as good, Cretan Archers are probably the best all around archers in the game, capable of range and melee. They also have shields, something else AE places a large emphasis on, shields increase defensive ability a lot. But Roman auxiliary archers have 11 morale, that is very good morale, and is probably the main reason they don't rout so easily.

But another thing about AE is that it doesn't conform to the same preconceived notions as vanilla TW and other mods, for example just because a unit is archers doesn't mean they will be in melee and wiped out immediately by charges, some archer units are quite good at melee.

Our stats aren't invented by us, we have a stat calculator, every unit has its training level, background and equipment inputted, and the output gives us the stats and price, every unit goes through this so its consistent across the board more or less.

[Fanest]

Our stats aren't invented by us, we have a stat calculator, every unit has its training level, background and equipment inputted, and the output gives us the stats and price, every unit goes through this so its consistent across the board more or less.

Ok since u have 1hp system then imo u should consider putting more weight on armour stat, because 6 more defence stat most definitely doesn't outweigh 3 points of armour, 1 point of ranged offence and 3 points of moral for merely 40gp.

[Willhelm123]

Allied Cretans cost less than Roman Aux Archers, they're on different factions, they have less armour but better melee, they are about equal in ranged, i feel they are balanced. Not everything even has to be balanced though, take the Numidians for example, they have spearmen which are very good and very cheap, better than some other factions spearmen which cost more. This is unbalanced, and yet its not because the faction suffers a lack of heavy infantry and melee infantry, Numidia has its advantage in cheap decent spears, but a disadvantage in infantry with staying power. So sometimes individual units are not balanced against each other due to the nature of the differing factions.

I am far more concerned with how battle balance works rather than balance between different units, as it varies widely through training levels and faction specifics like the Numidia example. Occasionally you will find a unit that is just simply superior to another unit of the same cost, and this is probably just that factions specific advantage. The only time its a big problem is if those two units are on the same faction in which case they should be balanced against each other with pros and cons for either choice.

I hope this makes sense.

[GatoVolador]

Hi guys, thank you for uploading the custom battles section
A few observations before going into battle:
- Armenia, Parthia, Bosphorean Kingdom and Baktria all have pretty solid cav units (cataphracts), none of which have the ability to form a wedge, while seleukidai, saka and even most celic cav units for example, can. Is this intended?
- Armenian nahakar swordsman lack the stamina symbol on their UI. It´s the only unit I spotted so far without it.
- Baktrian native horse archers (baktria) say things like "in service to rome!". weird.
- Just nitpicking here, but since the UI for the units is pretty clean, maybe you can include the speed on it? I don´t know if it´s just me, but I consider it a pretty useful information.


- Absolutely LOVE the tooltips with historical data on the units! I spent like 30 min just reading up on my units and looking at them before even playing! Kudos to the whole team

Cheers!

[Willhelm123]

Hi guys, thank you for uploading the custom battles section
A few observations before going into battle:
- Armenia, Parthia, Bosphorean Kingdom and Baktria all have pretty solid cav units (cataphracts), none of which have the ability to form a wedge, while seleukidai, saka and even most celic cav units for example, can. Is this intended?
- Armenian nahakar swordsman lack the stamina symbol on their UI. It´s the only unit I spotted so far without it.
- Baktrian native horse archers (baktria) say things like "in service to rome!". weird.
- Just nitpicking here, but since the UI for the units is pretty clean, maybe you can include the speed on it? I don´t know if it´s just me, but I consider it a pretty useful information.


- Absolutely LOVE the tooltips with historical data on the units! I spent like 30 min just reading up on my units and looking at them before even playing! Kudos to the whole team

Cheers!

The Wedge formation is something I need to look into, its one of the last few abilities that hasn't been worked on yet, so there is also inconsistencies regarding which units use it. I believe all shock cav should have it baring perhaps the steppe ones. The Nahakars must be missing their stamina stat, thanks. A lot of units say stuff about Rome, unfortunately we cannot remove it, even though we can give them all the same voice cries from Rome 2, there are underlying default Attila ones that are impossible to remove, very annoying. I'd have to talk with the team about adding speed but i believe we are pretty happy with the stats we have now, originally we planned to display even less of them. The tooltips are good, we really want to explain each unit, but most aren't written and it will take a long time to complete them all, they obviously aren't a big priority for us now. It's something people can volunteer to help with though.

[Causeless]

Not really a balance thing, more of a bug, but the horse hitbox may need to be changed. When toggling mount for a cavalry unit a lot of the soldiers cannot get back onto their horse, and just push it indefinitely.

[Draco]

doing rotations is a fairytale nobody can afford in mp

Emmmm, well you are incredibly wrong, I use to win thx to this because I use to get around 1 or 2 Stamina levels up and completely destroy my enemies.

All in all mp is very unbalanced, maybe in campaign these things become less important, still it would be nice to see it a bit more balanced.

Roman legions are not so OP thought, it is not easy dealing with them( I would say Roman Empire and Epirote League are the 2 easiest factions ATM)

But that doesnt mean you cant win rome, with some factions is easier than others. For example: Elephants help very well routing and destroying the lines of the Legionaries, just be sure you charge from a flank or from behind, and never the first thing you launch to them.

Secondly, you can use Phalanxes, prety easy to contain roman legions make them look like useless dogs.

Lastly you can use flamming arrows and poison arrows combined with cataphract charges and rotations with any Eastern faction, so the legionaries will be hiting you like baby bunnys and you will smash them easily.

The mod is much more balanced than Attila vanilla.

Obviously you need to control an entire army and have more micro than with Rome or any other great empire that field units so well armored that you can forget about them and the wrong decisions dont punish so hard.

So try to understand the current balance rather than talk about changing it.

[Falco]

Ok, I have played 1 battle and here is some feedback.

First of all, I will attach a screenshot:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

As you can see there, I have won a decisive victory, with a cheaper army.
That wouldn`t be anything special, but the thing is... Throughout the battle, I felt the AI isn`t giving me ANY challenge.
True, I didn`t really give the AI any units that are likely to pull of anything more then a frontal charge.
But still...

I flanked the AI units constantly, and effortlessly. I got both my slingers, then my Scutarii, and finally my cavalry behind their back.
Once I would charge in, or started pounding them with slingers, they would almost immediately break and flee.

In itself, this isn`t a bad mechanic, as it is fairly realistic. However, I have got the feeling the AI is at a problem here.
In all likeliness, the AI is too stupid to predict my flanking moves, and to counter them.
And when you combine that with your mechanics of breaking more easily when flanked, it allows the human player to beat the AI EXTREMELY easily.

I mean look at some of those numbers in the screenshot. The AI Triarii routed with 75% men left, and after killing only 20 something of my men. The AI Principes routed while killing less than 20 of my men on average...

Now, this is just 1 battle, and a custom one at that, so you might say we shouldn`t draw conclusions from that. And you are perhaps right, but this looks like bad omen...

Overall, I think further testing is needed, and possible recalibration of units, and especially their moral stats.
IMO, it is better to have somewhat less realistic, but still challenging battles, then have realistic behaviour (from a RL point of view), that the player can exploit to no end. (This is all assuming that the AI in Attilla, just like in all previous TW games, cannot be modded).

I dunno man, I just did a 20 v 20 Pontus (me) vs Iberia, fairly even rosters (4 units of cav each), and they started rolling up my right flank pretty quick; they grouped their shock cav on that side and were really quick to get rear charges off that routed almost my whole right (I had pikes in center, any other infantry on flanks), thought I was actually going to be defeated by AI for a sec lol (I managed to hold them off with my skirmishers and reserves from my left, and roll up their right with my left quicker thankfully and won). Your result might just be dependent on which factions used in the battle and army composition.

Also, want to say how awesome this battle was to fight, and a big thanks to the AE team for the release, the battles feel and look really authentic to me, having a ton of fun so far (can't wait for campaign).

[popovic]

You played a battle with more variety on units:
1) Winning in the distance cause you have slingers and they just have javs.
2) Winning on the flanks cause of your cav superiority and even not just one but 2 elephant units.
3) Probably but not 100% sure enlarging your center formation (those hoplites probably) "until the end of the map" wich is unrealistic for the timeperiod (this is not empire/napo) and tricky-arcadeish (it's just an expression don't get mad for that)

And you pretend BAI to hold you for...how long? x'D
C'mon!! This feedback can NOT be taken seriously bro...Play fairly or in a disadvantage against AI and come back again with a new report.

Finally, remember, no matter how deeply we improve TW BAI, humans will always be smarter.

You have GOT to be kidding me...

First of all, you were wrong on ALL of your ASSUMPTIONS (and I don`t even know why you would make such elaborate assumptions in the first place).

1) The Romans didn`t have any archers/slingers because there IS NO archers/slingers for them in the Roman Republic roster

1a) I didn`t "win on distance" because the AI closed the gap as soon as I was within range for the slingers. The thing is, that once they closed the gap, the charged thir Velites straight into my front line. And then allowed my Baleares to go ALL the way around their flank (I held my slingers behind my front lines), and shoot them in the back. Again, and again, and again...
For me, this is shocking. I haven`t seen this kind of AI behaviour since Empire, if not Rome 1.

2) If you actually took the time to study that SS you would have noticed that my elephants did very little killing, and almost got completely killed off themselves.
The thing is, I placed them in the back as well. And when I tried to move them to the front, they kept getting "entangled" in my other units, so they came to the fight late.
And then when they did, 1 got routed super-fast by something (I don`t even know what), and the went amok.
In conclusion, they did practically nothing for me in this battle.

3) I am mad about this, because you are making silly assumptions about other people, in a rather negative way.
I NEVER do ANYTHING tricky in TW games, as I know how stupid the AI is, and I really want a challenge.
I did not expand my formation, and the AI had plenty of room to go around my flanks.
It didn`t, and that`s that. Frankly, I`m not surprised or concerned about the AI not flanking me, I am far more concerned about the AI not trying to stop me from flanking it.

"And you pretend BAI to hold you for...how long? x'D
C'mon!! This feedback can NOT be taken seriously bro...Play fairly or in a disadvantage against AI and come back again with a new report."

That part is offensive, to say the least.
I give extensive feedback, and you say to me that I shouldn`t be taken seriously? For what? Because I didn`t give the AI a 3:1 advantage?

FYI, the AI had more of those starting funds invested then me. Like, considerably more (I was left with close to 2k silver before the battle, AI was at ~150).
Yes, they did have less variety in units, but still, given the quality of their units, they could have AT LEAST given me some sort of a challenge.
As I said before, this was extremely easy, right from the start.

Finally, I`d like to point out that from my limited experience, I would say a battle like this would work out MUCH different in DeI.
The AI there seems a lot more aware of being flanked. And certain units are really hard to kill, especially when you can`t flank them.

And let me get something straight: I`m NOT trying to blame anyone for anything here. The AE modders did a wonderful job, and I am aware that very little can be done about the AI behaviour in this game, in general.
I just think that this mod will need a LOT more polishing before it starts shining.