Garja wrote:Ye the Sioux eco argument is parly overstated. Sioux eco is close to the one of Iros for practical purposes. This means that for the average lenght of a 1v1 game (up to 20 mins at least) they are able to produce as many units as other civs. Sure half of civs outgather them by a fair amount but when considering stuff like: free pop space, better unit shipments, cost efficient units (or rather favorable cost/stats ratio if you prefer) and last but not least almost granted vill raids then the gap is smaller than one generally thinks.
This is why civs like Brits or Japan outscales them badly but they can still win games. Then of course there is a no retunr point where the outscale is just too much but that's another story.
The problem with teepees is that now Sioux get a respectable eco on top of other pre-existent advantages. Also there is clear design issue in the fact that the civ was originally one with the weakest eco (hence requiring damage to stay in the game) while now the eco is basically on par and they don't have to constantly seek for a play anymore.
Yup, sioux like otto and to a certain extent spain and china is an eco is in the army type civ. This means you have to engage carefully and apply pressure constantly and you can't waste units in a way that eco cibs can because you have a harder time replacing them. Eco civs though generally have a harder time winning fights vs these kinda
civs. Winning vs these civs was done in a war of attrition. You lose fights until you win one, and then you replenish faster. Or had atleast, before esoc tried to give 3/4 of these civs some sort of eco option, while nerfing core units for 3/4 as well.
On re sioux needed to raid, and because of the bad maps this was easier, perhaps to easy. On ep i rarely see sioux players raid anymore. Ofc the maps make it harder but theres also no real need to take that risk.
Ressentiment is the single greatest source of destruction in human history.