Spanish Discussion Thread

User avatar
New Zealand zoom
Gendarme
Posts: 9314
Joined: Apr 26, 2015
ESO: Funnu
Location: New_Sweland

Re: Spanish Discussion Thread

Post by zoom »

umeu wrote:Couprider is right, the meta argument is total bs... But anyway spain colo is not bad at all, just not great either. Its not like chinas colo which just quite bad.

"Balancing civilizations is not what the team is referring to by "changing the meta"; the idea rather is to not alter the way in which a civilization is played, unless necessary.

In other words, it does not relate to the civilization-selection meta, but rather the gameplay or build-order meta."
User avatar
Great Britain britishmusketeer
Howdah
Posts: 1845
Joined: Feb 28, 2015

Re: Spanish Discussion Thread

Post by britishmusketeer »

iNcog wrote:^then the elo page posted by couprider makes no sense to me! :p

Decay.
No Flag deleted_user0
Ninja
Posts: 13004
Joined: Apr 28, 2020

Re: Spanish Discussion Thread

Post by deleted_user0 »

zoom wrote:
umeu wrote:Couprider is right, the meta argument is total bs... But anyway spain colo is not bad at all, just not great either. Its not like chinas colo which just quite bad.

"Balancing civilizations is not what the team is referring to by "changing the meta"; the idea rather is to not alter the way in which a civilization is played, unless necessary.

In other words, it does not relate to the civilization-selection meta, but rather the gameplay or build-order meta."


i know what it means zo... You did change the way iro is being played, since in RE it was mainly an age2 powerhouse, right now it seems its only viable way to play is (semi)FF. if thats not a huge meta change, then i dont know. you also changed the sioux meta, at first it was BR spam, now with BR nerf, it no longer works as well and its not used. in order to compensate, you made their archaic combo slightly more viable, something that never was used really on RE, another meta change. Walling and FI was pretty standard japanese meta, no longer viable. completely influences how japan starts their game, another meta change... so please...

ofcourse you will say all these changes were superduper neccesary... but lets face it, if you nerf something so much it no longer becomes viable or the best option, then you will change the meta. i understand it as an argument to select between changes and to keep a certain line in your balancing acts, but people are just randomly throwing it out there as if its some end-all argument, which it simply is not.
Australia Hazza54321
Pro Player
Winter Champion 2020 x2Donator 01
Posts: 8049
Joined: May 4, 2015
ESO: PrinceofBabu

Re: Spanish Discussion Thread

Post by Hazza54321 »

britishmusketeer wrote:
iNcog wrote:^then the elo page posted by couprider makes no sense to me! :p

Decay.
User avatar
New Zealand zoom
Gendarme
Posts: 9314
Joined: Apr 26, 2015
ESO: Funnu
Location: New_Sweland

Re: Spanish Discussion Thread

Post by zoom »

umeu wrote:
zoom wrote:
umeu wrote:Couprider is right, the meta argument is total bs... But anyway spain colo is not bad at all, just not great either. Its not like chinas colo which just quite bad.

"Balancing civilizations is not what the team is referring to by "changing the meta"; the idea rather is to not alter the way in which a civilization is played, unless necessary.

In other words, it does not relate to the civilization-selection meta, but rather the gameplay or build-order meta."


i know what it means zo... You did change the way iro is being played, since in RE it was mainly an age2 powerhouse, right now it seems its only viable way to play is (semi)FF. if thats not a huge meta change, then i dont know. you also changed the sioux meta, at first it was BR spam, now with BR nerf, it no longer works as well and its not used. in order to compensate, you made their archaic combo slightly more viable, something that never was used really on RE, another meta change. Walling and FI was pretty standard japanese meta, no longer viable. completely influences how japan starts their game, another meta change... so please...

ofcourse you will say all these changes were superduper neccesary... but lets face it, if you nerf something so much it no longer becomes viable or the best option, then you will change the meta. i understand it as an argument to select between changes and to keep a certain line in your balancing acts, but people are just randomly throwing it out there as if its some end-all argument, which it simply is not.

First of all it isn't necessarily the case that Iroquois Colonial Age play is no longer viable. I don't see any direct nerfs to it other than the Aenna cost increase. The same thing goes for Sioux Bow Rider mass – just because it's slightly weaker it is not necessarily unviable. In the case of Sioux however, it was deemed that the relationship between cavalry and infantry was simply broken and had to be altered. The same thing goes for Japanese walling and FI; you're making too many assumptions.

Your last paragraph are my thoughts exactly. It is simply the policy of the EP team to avoid changing the meta-gameplay, where practically possible.
No Flag deleted_user0
Ninja
Posts: 13004
Joined: Apr 28, 2020

Re: Spanish Discussion Thread

Post by deleted_user0 »

well, you dont see the direct nerfs because you dont know the civ. you hardly even play this game...

i can list them for you, the indirect nerfs would be the maps, which strengthen other civs and thus indirectly weakens iro because they benefit less from their mapcontrol.

the direct nerfs are

1) no tp, meaning that if they fast age, they often dont even have a shipment, while on re, they often had 2 consecutive shipments. the -200 wood also means that on no tp maps they no longer can do the optimal build, which was build a house with the wood, and drop a farm. often they could even get the first farm upgrade. this nerf has even further implications as it completely takes of the table my favorite iro build, which was to send 600w 5vils and take the tp route and stagecoach. not only are your shipments too slow, you also need to make 1 more tp with the wood, which means you simply need to gather too much wood to make the build work. not having the shipment when you are aged up immediately, is not the biggest deal, you will get it not long after, but that the next shipment takes a long time to arrive, thats a dealbreaker, so also the 4 kanya first builds are now super all in, they have to do massive damage or you will be just too all in. and on high level play, the 4 kanya were never the nail in the coffin, they were just a minor annoyance to keep your opponent busy while you boomed up or massed up.

2) the aenna nerf as you already mentioned.

3) the explorer aura nerf. its not the biggest nerf, but it matters. iro units are relatively beefy, having high hp but lower attack, so the aura helps them alot because it gives the bonus on the total hp and not on the base, so this nerf gets bigger the further game goes and the more upgrades are stacked on their units.


i have tried wise women builds often in re, and i found that it just gives most civs too much time, you can bicker about what viable means. but iro colonial build simply arent anymore in high lvl play because they lost to pretty much every civ now with the exception of china. speed and mapcontrol were the main weapons of the iro colonial which they were supposed to milk for all its worth in order to get their final weapon out which is mass stacked upgrades. you took away their speed with direct nerfs, you indirectly nerfed their mapcontrol and you also nerfed their upgradeability a bit. so please dont deny you changed the meta... even the semi ff iro does now is never how iro semi ff'd on RE, its actually closer to the FF, but on re the standard bo for FF was 600c, 5v and u were up 1 whole minute earlier with the same amount of shipments... so please


you can talk about the viability of sioux all you want. but these are the facts, on RE everyone did BR spam. on EP most people are doing archaic rushes or axe rider wakina. its debatable wether its all due to the changes EP made, i dont think so. in part its the people playing sioux, in part its people still trying to figure out the changes, but its undeniable that the changes helped a meta change which there definitely is for sioux. thats simply a fact.

im not making assumptions, unlike you, i am talking from experience in the game. i know these civs way better than you do, i have tested these strats unlike you who is just talking about theory. you are the one making assumptions, im just concluding from my experience or otherwise repeating what expert players of a civ have said after testing and experiencing their civ on this patch. kynesie himself said FI is no longer really viable on the EP. ofcourse going IV is still good, but the FI isnt. it heavily relied on walling, and it also heavily relied on being able to get 8 arrows out (or 30 yumi etc) really quickly.

anyway were derailing this thread, so im just gonna leave it here.
User avatar
New Zealand zoom
Gendarme
Posts: 9314
Joined: Apr 26, 2015
ESO: Funnu
Location: New_Sweland

Re: Spanish Discussion Thread

Post by zoom »

It's not that I am unable to see the direct nerfs. I think you just misunderstand: I was talking about direct nerfs to their Colonial Age gameplay over the Fortress Age gameplay. What I am trying to say is that the only direct nerf to their Colonial Age gameplay is the Aenna nerf.

It's certainly true that the meta has changed, but that doesn't necessarily mean the change is merited; in general, the things from which the meta have temporarly shifted away from may still very well be viable. In saying that this and that is not viable, you most certainly are making assumptions, regardless of whether they are accurate or not. Here, please note that I am not at all saying that you are incorrect – only that there is uncertainty. On that matter, what assumptions of mine ITT are you talking about? I fail to see any made...

When did I ever deny that the EP changed the meta? I'm not denying anything, I just prefer a less confident approach to balancing than you.
No Flag farran34
Dragoon
Donator 01
Posts: 367
Joined: Mar 6, 2015

Re: Spanish Discussion Thread

Post by farran34 »

zoom wrote:It's not that I am unable to see the direct nerfs. I think you just misunderstand: I was talking about direct nerfs to their Colonial Age gameplay over the Fortress Age gameplay. What I am trying to say is that the only direct nerf to their Colonial Age gameplay is the Aenna nerf.

It's certainly true that the meta has changed, but that doesn't necessarily mean the change is merited; in general, the things from which the meta have temporarly shifted away from may still very well be viable. In saying that this and that is not viable, you most certainly are making assumptions, regardless of whether they are accurate or not. Here, please note that I am not at all saying that you are incorrect – only that there is uncertainty. On that matter, what assumptions of mine ITT are you talking about? I fail to see any made...

When did I ever deny that the EP changed the meta? I'm not denying anything, I just prefer a less confident approach to balancing than you.


How is no tp not a direct nerf to their age 2 play? This is the main reason they cannot do age 2 near as effectively..
User avatar
New Zealand zoom
Gendarme
Posts: 9314
Joined: Apr 26, 2015
ESO: Funnu
Location: New_Sweland

Re: Spanish Discussion Thread

Post by zoom »

It is. It is also a direct nerf to their Fortress Age play.
User avatar
China fei123456
Jaeger
Posts: 3283
Joined: Apr 23, 2015
ESO: fei123456
Location: Alderaan

Re: Spanish Discussion Thread

Post by fei123456 »

iro age 2 play is not viable at all. you cannot stop your opponent from aging up with your few units. if your opponent choose to play colo with you and iro may have some chance to win. but why should he play colonial?
User avatar
Italy Garja
Retired Contributor
Donator 02
Posts: 9729
Joined: Feb 11, 2015
ESO: Garja

Re: Spanish Discussion Thread

Post by Garja »

It is still possible that you can just play colo vs fortress like you can with some other civs.
This is the Spanish discussion thread anyway.
Image Image Image
No Flag farran34
Dragoon
Donator 01
Posts: 367
Joined: Mar 6, 2015

Re: Spanish Discussion Thread

Post by farran34 »

zoom wrote:It is. It is also a direct nerf to their Fortress Age play.

It is more of a direct nerf to colonial play though, because fast age is no longer viable, and colonial play without fast age and less xp is just not optimal for iro.
User avatar
India _DB_
Howdah
Posts: 1787
Joined: May 20, 2015

Re: Spanish Discussion Thread

Post by _DB_ »

why even play iro :P

Add piroshiki in EP team and he will do everything alright. ;)
Doing what you like is Freedom...
Liking what you do is Happiness...
User avatar
India _DB_
Howdah
Posts: 1787
Joined: May 20, 2015

Re: Spanish Discussion Thread

Post by _DB_ »

btw, what if we make spain return to nilla status (except the broken skirm thing)

By nilla status, I mean the XP income (slightly more than nilla one to make them a bit more playable on no tp maps), 5 lancers, rod attack and better rod shipments?

what will be the the winning chances of all 13 MUs for spain if they have those changes?
Doing what you like is Freedom...
Liking what you do is Happiness...
User avatar
France [Armag] diarouga
Ninja
NWC LAN Gold
Posts: 12710
Joined: Feb 26, 2015
ESO: diarouga
Location: France

Re: Spanish Discussion Thread

Post by [Armag] diarouga »

_DB_ wrote:btw, what if we make spain return to nilla status (except the broken skirm thing)

By nilla status, I mean the XP income (slightly more than nilla one to make them a bit more playable on no tp maps), 5 lancers, rod attack and better rod shipments?

what will be the the winning chances of all 13 MUs for spain if they have those changes?

They'd win every nilla civs again (not sure about ger but since they'll be nerfed maybe), they'd also beat azzy, they already beat sioux/iro, and they'd do very well vs jap, india, china (can't tell if they'd win or still lose. They'd probably still lose to india but I think they'd beat jap and maybe china.).
User avatar
India _DB_
Howdah
Posts: 1787
Joined: May 20, 2015

Re: Spanish Discussion Thread

Post by _DB_ »

Hmm I think they would beat India actually,
5 lancer card is just too good
Doing what you like is Freedom...
Liking what you do is Happiness...
User avatar
Serbia Atomiswave
Lancer
Posts: 794
Joined: Dec 27, 2015

Re: Spanish Discussion Thread

Post by Atomiswave »

_DB_ wrote:Hmm I think they would beat India actually,
5 lancer card is just too good


I hope it will be implemented in 1.2.
Netherlands momuuu
Ninja
Posts: 14237
Joined: Jun 7, 2015
ESO: Jerom_

Re: Spanish Discussion Thread

Post by momuuu »

I think spain is pretty average right now, but seems the EP team wants to buff them some.
User avatar
Serbia Atomiswave
Lancer
Posts: 794
Joined: Dec 27, 2015

Re: Spanish Discussion Thread

Post by Atomiswave »

Jerom wrote:I think spain is pretty average right now, but seems the EP team wants to buff them some.


Judging by that graph, in current state Spain is the worst civ. Only question remains is what unit shipments will they buff in age 3. I sincerely hope we get 5 Lancers.
Netherlands momuuu
Ninja
Posts: 14237
Joined: Jun 7, 2015
ESO: Jerom_

Re: Spanish Discussion Thread

Post by momuuu »

Atomiswave wrote:
Jerom wrote:I think spain is pretty average right now, but seems the EP team wants to buff them some.


Judging by that graph, in current state Spain is the worst civ. Only question remains is what unit shipments will they buff in age 3. I sincerely hope we get 5 Lancers.

What graph?
User avatar
Serbia Atomiswave
Lancer
Posts: 794
Joined: Dec 27, 2015

Re: Spanish Discussion Thread

Post by Atomiswave »

Jerom wrote:
Atomiswave wrote:
Jerom wrote:I think spain is pretty average right now, but seems the EP team wants to buff them some.


Judging by that graph, in current state Spain is the worst civ. Only question remains is what unit shipments will they buff in age 3. I sincerely hope we get 5 Lancers.

What graph?


https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Z1BLDtMi6zNE-_ZNNybqL7DP3h_S_uN1TWnYXOzRcwE/edit#gid=889958768
Netherlands momuuu
Ninja
Posts: 14237
Joined: Jun 7, 2015
ESO: Jerom_

Re: Spanish Discussion Thread

Post by momuuu »

Atomiswave wrote:
Jerom wrote:
Show hidden quotes

What graph?


https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Z1BLDtMi6zNE-_ZNNybqL7DP3h_S_uN1TWnYXOzRcwE/edit#gid=889958768

That does need seem to correspond any opinion of any pr35+ for as far as I know..
User avatar
Serbia Atomiswave
Lancer
Posts: 794
Joined: Dec 27, 2015

Re: Spanish Discussion Thread

Post by Atomiswave »

@Jerom
Yeah, but i think many of us agree Spain is the lowest tier. Ok, maybe not the worst, but near bottom. Missionary buff is sorely needed for colo, and age 3 shipments.... idk, when I think of it, if they give 5 Lancers, Spain will have op cav shipments. Maybe buff pike shipments to give people incentive to upgrade them via cards in conjunction with rods.
User avatar
No Flag thebritish
Jaeger
Posts: 3787
Joined: Jul 18, 2015

Re: Spanish Discussion Thread

Post by thebritish »

Atomiswave wrote:@Jerom
Yeah, but i think many of us agree Spain is in the lowest tier. Ok, maybe not the worst, but near bottom. Missionary buff is sorely needed for colo, and age 3 shipments.... idk, when I think of it, if they give 5 Lancers, Spain will have op cav shipments. Maybe buff pike shipments to give people incentive to upgrade them via cards in conjunction with rods.

Or give them chance to go more economic, so they wont do naked FF every game and make it even harder to hold as other civs just because they have OP shipments (this is already happening with China)
krichk wrote: For some reason, you want the world to know that you're brave enough to challenge thebritish
User avatar
Serbia Atomiswave
Lancer
Posts: 794
Joined: Dec 27, 2015

Re: Spanish Discussion Thread

Post by Atomiswave »

thebritish wrote:
Atomiswave wrote:@Jerom
Yeah, but i think many of us agree Spain is in the lowest tier. Ok, maybe not the worst, but near bottom. Missionary buff is sorely needed for colo, and age 3 shipments.... idk, when I think of it, if they give 5 Lancers, Spain will have op cav shipments. Maybe buff pike shipments to give people incentive to upgrade them via cards in conjunction with rods.

Or give them chance to go more economic, so they wont do naked FF every game and make it even harder to hold as other civs just because they have OP shipments (this is already happening with China)


1. How do you think it can be done, without making drastic changes?

2. China will be nerfed considerably, so it's non issue.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

Which top 10 players do you wish to see listed?

All-time

Active last two weeks

Active last month

Supremacy

Treaty

Official

ESOC Patch

Treaty Patch

1v1 Elo

2v2 Elo

3v3 Elo

Power Rating

Which streams do you wish to see listed?

Twitch

Age of Empires III

Age of Empires IV