Mitoe wrote:I don't see how it'd be less awkward. Changes the civ's design in a big way.
Reducing unit shipments to like 7/6 skirm and 7/8 uhlan would be better than that.
it hardly changes the civ design in a big way. You take away 1 uhlan. Saying that just seems like a desperate attempt to hide that you don't really have a solid argument against it. Turning 8+7 skirms into 7/6 is way more awkward, and way less consistent considering that fre and dutch both get 8+7 and ports get 8+7 cassa, and that basically all unit shipments are about the same res. Germany's bonus is free uhlans. Nowhere does it say HOW MANY. -1 Uhlan doesn't affect their civ design, atleast not in a BIG WAY. If that's the case then I can also claim that tinkering with uhlan cost or hp is affecting their civ design in a big way. In any case, changing the civ design in big ways is no longer something ESOC really seems to care about, which I'm fine with btw. I never cared much for that argument. It's not like the RE developers had any clue about what they were doing. It's just nostalgia.
8 and 7 uhlan might do it, it seems like -2 uhlans is irrelevant to me. But perhaps not.
yes, you keep saying that but you don't really say why. I mean, no offense to you. But it feels like saying civ design is just kinda like a godwin. Then you can basically make no changes cuz everything is against civ design or otherwise against unit design. Also agreeing to disagree is meh. But whatever. Afaik the problem is too many uhlans (for the timing) in age3. -1 uhlan is basically a fix to that while not affecting any other part of the game. I don't recall uhlans being a problem in age2, either quality or quantity wise. So why are we even meddling with cost and hp...
-1 ulhan on all fortress shipments is a bit too much and it feels akward that age3 has same exact bonus as age2. I also think nerfing the big 4 unit cards would make more sense. But everything considered current hp nerf is just fine. The unit is not weak at all.
Garja wrote:-1 ulhan on all fortress shipments is a bit too much and it feels akward that age3 has same exact bonus as age2. I also think nerfing the big 4 unit cards would make more sense. But everything considered current hp nerf is just fine. The unit is not weak at all.
india has the exact same bonus for all ages, and that doesn't feel awkward. It's just what you are used to. If the RE developers had given germany 2 uhlans for all ages and someone would now propose to give germany +1 uhlan in age3 to buff them, you and mitoe would be on the barricades to claim exactly the opposite of what you are claiming now.
That said, it's possible that -1 uhlan on all shipments is too much. That's a better argument. But it's not necessarily true. We'd have to find out.
Alright then, since everyone talks about the potential ger changes, I'll drop my turd here:
- You could try to remove 1 uhlan from some key shipments only. For example, you could have to choose between the regular 7 skirms + 3 uhlans and a nerfed 8 skirms + 2 uhlans. This nerfs the card which is arguably the strongest fortress unit shipment of germany, while forcing you to choose between the extra skirm and the extra uhlan, which adds a bit of strategical depth. You can also nerf 9 uhlans to 8 uhlans, resulting in two 8 uhlans shipments, and get 3 WWs + 2 uhlans, as well as 1000w + 2 uhlans (maybe?). This works in colonial too, where you can remove 1 uhlan off 3 SW, 700g and 700w, for example, since they are the most classic shipments for germany in colo. I wouldn't nerf colonial unit shipments because we don't want to nerf the german colonial too much. Still, imagine having 6 uhlans early on instead of 7 to fight 5 huss: germany would win the fight slightly with 190 hp uhlans, but not as hard as on RE; and at least they wouldn't lose to huss anymore, which is not logical since uhlans are supposed to be better at melee fights, to make up for their low hp making them paper against ranged units. And it also just slightly reduces their overall uhlan mass later on, and might even snowball if some early colonial fights don't go as well for germany as it usually does, because of the missing uhlans.
- You could apply a small penalty on the settler wagons gathering rate. Goodspeed talked to me about that idea. I think it's not the greatest design to have the unique ger villager gathering a bit slower than 2 vils, but it would probably work at the end of the day. A SW would then be worth around 1.85-1.90 vils, probably (would require testing to tweak the numbers). It would slow germany down a little bit early on, equivalent to around -1 vil when the 2 then 3 SWs cards come in (total of 8 SWs), without slowing down their eco progression later on because you anyway most likely won't train/ship more SWs in 1v1 anyway.
- You could even play around and give ger an infinite 600w + 1 uhlan shipment, so that they have a better late colonial/late game potential by freeing up a slot in colonial, while making the semi ff and early colonial a bit weaker. And/or the same with infinite 600g + 1 uhlan.
- Meanwhile, 5 uhlans could be changed into 6 uhlans, so that germany has a legit third unit shipment in colonial, improving their colonial without affecting fortress play too much. There could also be an overall small xbow buff (+ 1-2 attack, or + 10 hp maybe?), but that's another story.
- An overall small TP nerf, and/or an overall fast age up nerf, would also hurt germany btw. And these are balance changes that don't sound bad to me.
- A small merc nerf is also something I would consider. Training mercs from the saloon often isn't very good, but shipping 13 jaegers or 9 blackriders is. 13 jaegers could be easily turned into 12 jaegers; but an 8 blackriders shipment sounds a bit underwhelming, so idk how to nerf them. 1100g cost sounds ugly since all other mercs cost 1000g, or then we could try to change them all into 1100g instead, only for germany. Maybe these 9 BR don't need a nerf anyway? They are way less OP than 13 jaegers honestly (jaegers are just a superior merc overall), but they're also the only real goon unit germany can get, so it's probably better not to nerf the BR, in fact.
You can try and apply a certain amount of these changes at the same time, depending on how many nerfs are needed to balance the civ. I doubt only one of these changes would be enough to balance germany if we revert the uhlans to 190 hp, so I'd say a couple of them combined should do it.
I don't know if the changes I stated would be popular, or aesthetic, but I think they would do the job. The design might be ugly, but it would provide a bit more of a refreshing german gameplay. I mean, the uhlan hp did force germany to train less uhlans in fortress; but did it change the fact that germany goes for essentially the same semi-ff in a lot of match ups? Not really :/
LoOk_tOm wrote:I have something in particular against Kaisar (GERMANY NOOB mercenary LAMME FOREVER) And the other people (noobs) like suck kaiser ... just this ..
umeu wrote:india has the exact same bonus for all ages, and that doesn't feel awkward. It's just what you are used to. If the RE developers had given germany 2 uhlans for all ages and someone would now propose to give germany +1 uhlan in age3 to buff them, you and mitoe would be on the barricades to claim exactly the opposite of what you are claiming now.
That said, it's possible that -1 uhlan on all shipments is too much. That's a better argument. But it's not necessarily true. We'd have to find out.
India penalty is 8% and it gives free vills which is arguably an overall better bonus than few cav. Also India was given the livestock thing to partly compensate for the xp penalty. On top of that, India has very different way to be played which relies less on shipments as the game progresses. The combination of these things makes the xp penalty less akward. In any case a 2-2-4 progression is odd. Honestly it's about design details. I'm fine with -10 hp which from balance standpoint works totally fine.
So you like op shipments but dont like unit nerfs? I believe xp penalty was %17 in germany, so increase it to %22 or something. But this makes germany more and more tp civ.
Your arguments don't address what I say. In any case, it's not odd at allrr. We're not looking for some natural logic or fibonacci code. We're simply looking for balance. Which is a practical matter overall.
There's nothing inherently wrong with 2-2-4. The only argument against it would be that it makes germany too weak. Which might be true. It might not be. It hasn't been tried so nobody knows.
The rest is all bullshit. If re had designed it 2-2-4, and I would now propose 2-3-4, you would call that odd. If there hadn't been a royal guard upgrade, and I would now propose a 10% extra on certain units guard upgrade for extra cost, you'd be opposed to it in the name of logic, while in fact it's more in the name of nostalgia and acquaintance.
umeu wrote:Your arguments don't address what I say. In any case, it's not odd at allrr. We're not looking for some natural logic or fibonacci code. We're simply looking for balance. Which is a practical matter overall.
There's nothing inherently wrong with 2-2-4. The only argument against it would be that it makes germany too weak. Which might be true. It might not be. It hasn't been tried so nobody knows.
The rest is all bullshit. If re had designed it 2-2-4, and I would now propose 2-3-4, you would call that odd. If there hadn't been a royal guard upgrade, and I would now propose a 10% extra on certain units guard upgrade for extra cost, you'd be opposed to it in the name of logic, while in fact it's more in the name of nostalgia and acquaintance.
Balance is easy to achieve. The point is balance with coherent design, which ye in this specific case is basically very much about natural logic or elegant progression. They didn't design 2-2-4 tho. Very much for that reason. And the royal upgrade doesn't have much of an odd logic behind it. The only not obvious thing there would be the premium price being not proportional to the stat buff. Anyway, for balance purposes even just removing the extra ulhans from specific shipments would be fine. Actually for balance -10 hp is totally fine. I think I said that already.
yes I agree that -10 hp could be totally fine. But please tell me why elegant progression is a criterion? What's the elegant progression in 300w, 700w and 1000w and 1600w? And what is it in 20%, 20% and then 50% for veteran, guard and imperial upgades? Why is this ok, but 2, 2, 4 uhlan isnt? And what's inherently unlogical about it? I don't see why 2, 2, and then 4 is unlogical, but this step isn't for the unit upgrades... It just seems totally arbitrary to me.
Kaiserklein wrote:Alright then, since everyone talks about the potential ger changes, I'll drop my turd here:
- You could try to remove 1 uhlan from some key shipments only. This is too incoherent with the general logic of the civ penalty/bonus and it has also balance implications. Certain cards are too good because they get sent early enough in the game. But what if the same card get sent way later, for example after a long colonial battle?
- You could apply a small penalty on the settler wagons gathering rate. This is just adding unecessary and potentially harmful stuff. 1 SW = 2 settlers. This equation works perfectly for balance and for civ design. It is simply not worth it to touch this aspect just to adjust a mild balance problem.
- You could even play around and give ger an infinite 600w + 1 uhlan shipment, so that they have a better late colonial/late game potential by freeing up a slot in colonial, while making the semi ff and early colonial a bit weaker. And/or the same with infinite 600g + 1 uhlan. Aside from probably having very little impact on the actual play it is sort of ugly design. Crates should be stay untouched for all the euro civs because they are a baseline and provide consistency among them.
- Meanwhile, 5 uhlans could be changed into 6 uhlans, so that germany has a legit third unit shipment in colonial, improving their colonial without affecting fortress play too much. There could also be an overall small xbow buff (+ 1-2 attack, or + 10 hp maybe?), but that's another story. 6 ulhans, even with 180 hp, would be a killer card. Sent first would be incredibly good, doesn't matter what the real value of the card is. There is a reason if they kept it to 5 and not 6.
- An overall small TP nerf, and/or an overall fast age up nerf, would also hurt germany btw. And these are balance changes that don't sound bad to me. Those changes affect a number of other civs which don't need them. They are way more undesired than a simple ulhan HP nerf.
- A small merc nerf is also something I would consider. Training mercs from the saloon often isn't very good, but shipping 13 jaegers or 9 blackriders is. 13 jaegers could be easily turned into 12 jaegers; but an 8 blackriders shipment sounds a bit underwhelming, so idk how to nerf them. 1100g cost sounds ugly since all other mercs cost 1000g, or then we could try to change them all into 1100g instead, only for germany. Maybe these 9 BR don't need a nerf anyway? They are way less OP than 13 jaegers honestly (jaegers are just a superior merc overall), but they're also the only real goon unit germany can get, so it's probably better not to nerf the BR, in fact. This should be on top of the ulhan nerf actually, since the merc play is potentially broken too. Not only with the current FF meta the merc shipments are slightly too good but also the merc combat is outrageous at 25%. I mean you boost the strongest units in the game with the strongest % of any combat card. And on top of that there are possibly more upgrades to stack with. It's simply way too much.
You can try and apply a certain amount of these changes at the same time, depending on how many nerfs are needed to balance the civ. I doubt only one of these changes would be enough to balance germany if we revert the uhlans to 190 hp, so I'd say a couple of them combined should do it.
I don't know if the changes I stated would be popular, or aesthetic, but I think they would do the job. The design might be ugly, but it would provide a bit more of a refreshing german gameplay. I mean, the uhlan hp did force germany to train less uhlans in fortress; but did it change the fact that germany goes for essentially the same semi-ff in a lot of match ups? Not really :/
The HP nerf didn't change the way Germans are played yes, but that's a good thing. It only slightly made the civ less competitive against some other civs which was the desired effect in the end.
umeu wrote:yes I agree that -10 hp could be totally fine. But please tell me why elegant progression is a criterion? What's the elegant progression in 300w, 700w and 1000w and 1600w? And what is it in 20%, 20% and then 50% for veteran, guard and imperial upgades? Why is this ok, but 2, 2, 4 uhlan isnt? And what's inherently unlogical about it? I don't see why 2, 2, and then 4 is unlogical, but this step isn't for the unit upgrades... It just seems totally arbitrary to me.
Among crates it is about age up cost and point in time where those ages are reached. I mean, those values (and others too) have been tweaked over time but we should be very careful changing stuff to not initiate a continuous tweaking process. Again, unit upgrades are related to age up costs. Veteran is 20%, guard 30-40. For TWC civs it's 25% 25% to make them stronger up to fortress and weaker later on.
I do agree 2-2-4 is not the ugliest design. If it wasn't for the fact that it completely nerfs all the fortress shipment rack (balance problem) it could be worth testing. Ideally, we want to nerf about half of the fortress cards simply to adjust to the current XP progression post TP play.
Kaiserklein wrote:Alright then, since everyone talks about the potential ger changes, I'll drop my turd here: - You could apply a small penalty on the settler wagons gathering rate. Goodspeed talked to me about that idea. I think it's not the greatest design to have the unique ger villager gathering a bit slower than 2 vils, but it would probably work at the end of the day. A SW would then be worth around 1.85-1.90 vils, probably (would require testing to tweak the numbers). It would slow germany down a little bit early on, equivalent to around -1 vil when the 2 then 3 SWs cards come in (total of 8 SWs), without slowing down their eco progression later on because you anyway most likely won't train/ship more SWs in 1v1 anyway.
Hopefully anything like this doesn't happen - The idea of changing unique civ bonuses seems awkward. Same with increased French CDB and Brit manor cost, they are just changes for the sake of changing.
I agree that some age 3 shipments should be looked at and maybe nerfed but nothing over the top.
Garja wrote:Increasing cost isn't a great solution. It has two downsides: - it can limit the production of the unit, especially early on. This is a downside because more weaker units doesn't equal to less stronger units. Especially when the two things are not perfectly proportional (unit training works in discrete numbers and not percentages like a cost increase); - it doesn't affect ulhans from shipments which in the end is the real problem. If we ever want to test something else it has to be nerfing shipments in a way or another, since Germans balance issues are exclusively related to that.
Given the extreme degree to which Germans players train Uhlans, I'd say it's the other way around. It makes more sense to target nerfs that disincentivize training Uhlans.
Mitoe wrote:I don't see how it'd be less awkward. Changes the civ's design in a big way.
Reducing unit shipments to like 7/6 skirm and 7/8 uhlan would be better than that.
Actually, it doesn't change it at all; it weakens it.
Other than that, it's impractical because it requires tons of changes to mercenary shipments. Just another reason nerfing Uhlan cost is the better option.
Revert hp nerf, and nerf atk from 37 to 35 instead. Uhlans need one more hit to kill a hussar this way. I like buffing 5 uhlans to 6 also.
[Some people aspire to be pr30+, some people aspire to have fun, and some people aspire to play 3v3 Deccan.] - vividlyplain - 2019Who (nationality) rape ?
stupid logic. noob players can say op?
toxic, Insult, Racism ?
Mitoe wrote:I don't see how it'd be less awkward. Changes the civ's design in a big way.
Reducing unit shipments to like 7/6 skirm and 7/8 uhlan would be better than that.
Actually, it doesn't change it at all; it weakens it.
Other than that, it's impractical because it requires tons of changes to mercenary shipments. Just another reason nerfing Uhlan cost is the better option.
Doesnt require that at all, unless the mercs are a balance problem in their own right. Which they very well might be.
, clearly i need to spam more, thanks for your feedback
