Indians Discussion Thread

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

Re: Indian Discussion Thread

Post by deleted_user0 »

Goodspeed wrote:
umeu wrote:Nah they don't have an extra crate. There is really no reason but bias to say that... China has 5 crates. But Japan or india have same or more... a few euro civs have 5 too, Russia and twc civs have 5+ too (but 1v less) Its bullshit to say China has an extra crate... when there is no clear baseline
They would have an extra crate relative to what the other civ would've had if they got the extra random crate. You see it depends on the perspective you're looking at it from. Either the fact that China starts with fixed crates helped them, or it helped the other civ, based on the other civ's crate start. If they get wood and an extra food crate, China is unhappy. If they get just coin, China is happy. It's about the difference between just a coin crate and a wood+food crate considering China's start is the same in both cases.

Remember how much stronger a civ gets when you give them +100w? Often it's the difference between an early TP and no early TP, which is game-changing.


There is also just wood no extra crate, and there is also coin with extra food. You can't just say that China has an extra crate, it makes no sense. All you can say is that they always have wood, which again, depends on what you determine their base crates to be. For example, brits can start 200f 200w 100c, or they can start 300f 300w. In the latter case they have an extra crate, in the former, they don't, but you can't just say China has an extra crate because they get wood regardless, they don't get the coin. Your argument is just really weak. You say China Base is 200f 200w and their random crate is fixed to 100w. I can say equally that their base is 300w 100f and their random crate is fixed to 100f. Crates are based on civ needs, not on some arbitrary code.
Germany lordraphael
Pro Player
EWTNWC LAN SilverAdvanced Division WinnerDonator 01
Posts: 2549
Joined: Jun 28, 2015

Re: Indian Discussion Thread

Post by lordraphael »

umeu wrote:
Goodspeed wrote:
umeu wrote:Nah they don't have an extra crate. There is really no reason but bias to say that... China has 5 crates. But Japan or india have same or more... a few euro civs have 5 too, Russia and twc civs have 5+ too (but 1v less) Its bullshit to say China has an extra crate... when there is no clear baseline
They would have an extra crate relative to what the other civ would've had if they got the extra random crate. You see it depends on the perspective you're looking at it from. Either the fact that China starts with fixed crates helped them, or it helped the other civ, based on the other civ's crate start. If they get wood and an extra food crate, China is unhappy. If they get just coin, China is happy. It's about the difference between just a coin crate and a wood+food crate considering China's start is the same in both cases.

Remember how much stronger a civ gets when you give them +100w? Often it's the difference between an early TP and no early TP, which is game-changing.


There is also just wood no extra crate, and there is also coin with extra food. You can't just say that China has an extra crate, it makes no sense. All you can say is that they always have wood, which again, depends on what you determine their base crates to be. For example, brits can start 200f 200w 100c, or they can start 300f 300w. In the latter case they have an extra crate, in the former, they don't, but you can't just say China has an extra crate because they get wood regardless, they don't get the coin. Your argument is just really weak. You say China Base is 200f 200w and their random crate is fixed to 100w. I can say equally that their base is 300w 100f and their random crate is fixed to 100f. Crates are based on civ needs, not on some arbitrary code.

but tps are not to strong, nono ! :O
breeze wrote: they cant even guess how much f***ing piece of stupid retarded they look they are trying to give lesson to people who are over pr35 and know the best mu. im pretty sure that we need a page that only pr30+ post and then we could have a nice discussins.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: Indian Discussion Thread

Post by Goodspeed »

umeu wrote:
Goodspeed wrote:
umeu wrote:Nah they don't have an extra crate. There is really no reason but bias to say that... China has 5 crates. But Japan or india have same or more... a few euro civs have 5 too, Russia and twc civs have 5+ too (but 1v less) Its bullshit to say China has an extra crate... when there is no clear baseline
They would have an extra crate relative to what the other civ would've had if they got the extra random crate. You see it depends on the perspective you're looking at it from. Either the fact that China starts with fixed crates helped them, or it helped the other civ, based on the other civ's crate start. If they get wood and an extra food crate, China is unhappy. If they get just coin, China is happy. It's about the difference between just a coin crate and a wood+food crate considering China's start is the same in both cases.

Remember how much stronger a civ gets when you give them +100w? Often it's the difference between an early TP and no early TP, which is game-changing.


There is also just wood no extra crate, and there is also coin with extra food. You can't just say that China has an extra crate, it makes no sense. All you can say is that they always have wood, which again, depends on what you determine their base crates to be. For example, brits can start 200f 200w 100c, or they can start 300f 300w. In the latter case they have an extra crate, in the former, they don't, but you can't just say China has an extra crate because they get wood regardless, they don't get the coin. Your argument is just really weak. You say China Base is 200f 200w and their random crate is fixed to 100w. I can say equally that their base is 300w 100f and their random crate is fixed to 100f. Crates are based on civ needs, not on some arbitrary code.
- I didn't say China has an extra crate. My point is that their crate start is always the same, while the other civ's crate start can be wildly different (differences as large as 100c vs 100w 100f) and this creates imbalances.

- I didn't say China's base is 200f 200w and their random crate is fixed to 100w. How is this even relevant?

You are putting words in my mouth and then responding to them instead of responding to my actual point.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: Indian Discussion Thread

Post by Goodspeed »

lordraphael wrote:but tps are not to strong, nono ! :O
As long as both civs have the option to make one, no. It's like saying market is too strong.
No Flag deleted_user0
Ninja
Posts: 13004
Joined: Apr 28, 2020

Re: Indian Discussion Thread

Post by deleted_user0 »

Garja wrote:
umeu wrote:Nah they don't have an extra crate. There is really no reason but bias to say that... China has 5 crates. But Japan or india have same or more... a few euro civs have 5 too, Russia and twc civs have 5+ too (but 1v less) Its bullshit to say China has an extra crate... when there is no clear baseline

You can Only say that the fixer crate Isa wood crate. So base is 200f200w. But you can argue just the Same that the base is 300w 100f and the fixed crate is food. Crates are based on civ necessity, not on some universal code..


Yes crates are based on civ necessity. India gets 4 base crates (5-6 with the extra one) and they have wood vills. Japan has 6 crates plus a random one which is actually quite a lot but they gather from berries only. China gets 5 crates everytime + a goat (worth like 50f by the time you age) and they have no unique restrictions on gathering or vill costing wood. So yes, one of those 5 crates is actually an extra fixed crate.


That's not an extra crate, with random crates they would have 5 crates too, just one of the food or wood crate would be random. Saying that's an extra crate is unnecessarily confusing
Netherlands momuuu
Ninja
Posts: 14237
Joined: Jun 7, 2015
ESO: Jerom_

Re: Indian Discussion Thread

Post by momuuu »

umeu wrote:That's not how it works...

The random crate is always given, the extra wood crate is given only in conjunction with a coin or wood crate. It's true if the other civ gets it they have an extra crate which China doesn't get, but if they don't get it, it doesn't mean that China suddenly has an extra crate... I'm not really sure how you even got to that conclusion. Godspeeds reasoning to give China random crates wasn't only very biased, it was also flawed.

Its just where you set the frame of reference umea. The bottom line is that fixed crates for just one civ creates a very inconsistent civ.
No Flag deleted_user0
Ninja
Posts: 13004
Joined: Apr 28, 2020

Re: Indian Discussion Thread

Post by deleted_user0 »

Goodspeed wrote:
umeu wrote:
Show hidden quotes


There is also just wood no extra crate, and there is also coin with extra food. You can't just say that China has an extra crate, it makes no sense. All you can say is that they always have wood, which again, depends on what you determine their base crates to be. For example, brits can start 200f 200w 100c, or they can start 300f 300w. In the latter case they have an extra crate, in the former, they don't, but you can't just say China has an extra crate because they get wood regardless, they don't get the coin. Your argument is just really weak. You say China Base is 200f 200w and their random crate is fixed to 100w. I can say equally that their base is 300w 100f and their random crate is fixed to 100f. Crates are based on civ needs, not on some arbitrary code.
- I didn't say China has an extra crate. My point is that their crate start is always the same, while the other civ's crate start can be wildly different (differences as large as 100c vs 100w 100f) and this creates imbalances.

- I didn't say China's base is 200f 200w and their random crate is fixed to 100w. How is this even relevant?

You are putting words in my mouth and then responding to them instead of responding to my actual point.


U didn't say it maybe, but Jerom did, which sparked this entire discussion.

Ofcourse it's relevant what the base crates are... giving India 400c as their base crates wouldn't make sense. The base crates need to be tailored to the civ needs. And China is already one of the slowest aging civs. Anyway I made this case already in the ep thread. Can't be bothered to make it again. You can have your opinion, but it's simply one bias against another and u have no good arguments really. Random crates are silly anyway, despite Garja insistence that random crates are the only reason aoe is fun
No Flag deleted_user0
Ninja
Posts: 13004
Joined: Apr 28, 2020

Re: Indian Discussion Thread

Post by deleted_user0 »

Jerom wrote:
umeu wrote:That's not how it works...

The random crate is always given, the extra wood crate is given only in conjunction with a coin or wood crate. It's true if the other civ gets it they have an extra crate which China doesn't get, but if they don't get it, it doesn't mean that China suddenly has an extra crate... I'm not really sure how you even got to that conclusion. Godspeeds reasoning to give China random crates wasn't only very biased, it was also flawed.

Its just where you set the frame of reference umea. The bottom line is that fixed crates for just one civ creates a very inconsistent civ.


Actually China is consistent. You still have carrying openings played by people, so that argument of diversity is also gone. It's better to fix all crates. But having one civ with fixed crates is no balance issue, since chuina isn't even op, or weak, but pretty mediocre. And when ppl think China is op it's not cuz of their crates. Its silly so much energy is wasted on this while important issues are handled so fucking poorly
No Flag deleted_user0
Ninja
Posts: 13004
Joined: Apr 28, 2020

Re: Indian Discussion Thread

Post by deleted_user0 »

Goodspeed wrote:
lordraphael wrote:but tps are not to strong, nono ! :O
As long as both civs have the option to make one, no. It's like saying market is too strong.


Some civs clearly benefit a lot more, and not all civs can use it. And obviously market doesn't grant a huge advantage early in the game, so having it 2-3 min earlier is no big deal. But having a tp 2-3 min earlier is huge, so huge in fact that often there is no point to make it later unless you want the stagecoach income.
User avatar
No Flag Jaeger
Jaeger
Posts: 4492
Joined: Feb 28, 2015

Re: Indian Discussion Thread

Post by Jaeger »

umeu wrote:
Goodspeed wrote:
lordraphael wrote:but tps are not to strong, nono ! :O
As long as both civs have the option to make one, no. It's like saying market is too strong.


Some civs clearly benefit a lot more, and not all civs can use it. And obviously market doesn't grant a huge advantage early in the game, so having it 2-3 min earlier is no big deal. But having a tp 2-3 min earlier is huge, so huge in fact that often there is no point to make it later unless you want the stagecoach income.

That's true, but for the sake of argument market for brit is also much much better than market for otto or sioux.
last time i cryed was because i stood on Legoļ»æ
No Flag deleted_user0
Ninja
Posts: 13004
Joined: Apr 28, 2020

Re: Indian Discussion Thread

Post by deleted_user0 »

Yes, but the impact of that advantage on the game is a lot less prominent.
User avatar
Italy Garja
Retired Contributor
Donator 02
Posts: 9729
Joined: Feb 11, 2015
ESO: Garja

Re: Indian Discussion Thread

Post by Garja »

umeu wrote:
Garja wrote:
umeu wrote:Nah they don't have an extra crate. There is really no reason but bias to say that... China has 5 crates. But Japan or india have same or more... a few euro civs have 5 too, Russia and twc civs have 5+ too (but 1v less) Its bullshit to say China has an extra crate... when there is no clear baseline

You can Only say that the fixer crate Isa wood crate. So base is 200f200w. But you can argue just the Same that the base is 300w 100f and the fixed crate is food. Crates are based on civ necessity, not on some universal code..


Yes crates are based on civ necessity. India gets 4 base crates (5-6 with the extra one) and they have wood vills. Japan has 6 crates plus a random one which is actually quite a lot but they gather from berries only. China gets 5 crates everytime + a goat (worth like 50f by the time you age) and they have no unique restrictions on gathering or vill costing wood. So yes, one of those 5 crates is actually an extra fixed crate.


That's not an extra crate, with random crates they would have 5 crates too, just one of the food or wood crate would be random. Saying that's an extra crate is unnecessarily confusing

Sigh. Extra crate = not base crate. China has 4+1 crates basically, where the extra one is fixed and it is the wood one (they dont need it for the village). As GS said that is good for China when other civs got the gold one and bad when they get 100w+100f. It is indifferent when other civs get only +100w. To be completely fair they should get 2 extra random crates instead an extra fixed one, just like every other civ.
Image Image Image
No Flag deleted_user0
Ninja
Posts: 13004
Joined: Apr 28, 2020

Re: Indian Discussion Thread

Post by deleted_user0 »

You can sigh, but this terminology leads to people like Jerom thinking china has an extra crate in some situations. Which, I say it again, sparked this discussion

It wouldn't be fair, it would be consistent, those two aren't necessarily the same.
Netherlands momuuu
Ninja
Posts: 14237
Joined: Jun 7, 2015
ESO: Jerom_

Re: Indian Discussion Thread

Post by momuuu »

umeu wrote:You can sigh, but this terminology leads to people like Jerom thinking china has an extra crate in some situations. Which, I say it again, sparked this discussion

It wouldn't be fair, it would be consistent, those two aren't necessarily the same.

To be fair, this is not what has me thinking that. Its a rough oversimplification of a concept I explained where I took an arbitrary frame of reference. Whether you read poorly or failed to understand is up to you, but you probably shouldnt try to mock someone for being wrong when he isnt.
Netherlands momuuu
Ninja
Posts: 14237
Joined: Jun 7, 2015
ESO: Jerom_

Re: Indian Discussion Thread

Post by momuuu »

umeu wrote:
Goodspeed wrote:
umeu wrote:Nah they don't have an extra crate. There is really no reason but bias to say that... China has 5 crates. But Japan or india have same or more... a few euro civs have 5 too, Russia and twc civs have 5+ too (but 1v less) Its bullshit to say China has an extra crate... when there is no clear baseline
They would have an extra crate relative to what the other civ would've had if they got the extra random crate. You see it depends on the perspective you're looking at it from. Either the fact that China starts with fixed crates helped them, or it helped the other civ, based on the other civ's crate start. If they get wood and an extra food crate, China is unhappy. If they get just coin, China is happy. It's about the difference between just a coin crate and a wood+food crate considering China's start is the same in both cases.

Remember how much stronger a civ gets when you give them +100w? Often it's the difference between an early TP and no early TP, which is game-changing.


There is also just wood no extra crate, and there is also coin with extra food. You can't just say that China has an extra crate, it makes no sense. All you can say is that they always have wood, which again, depends on what you determine their base crates to be. For example, brits can start 200f 200w 100c, or they can start 300f 300w. In the latter case they have an extra crate, in the former, they don't, but you can't just say China has an extra crate because they get wood regardless, they don't get the coin. Your argument is just really weak. You say China Base is 200f 200w and their random crate is fixed to 100w. I can say equally that their base is 300w 100f and their random crate is fixed to 100f. Crates are based on civ needs, not on some arbitrary code.

A) So 40% of the time other civs get one extra crate while china gets nothing,
or B) 60% of the time china gets 'an extra crate' over the other civ.

It depends on where you place 'normal'. If you call 1 random crate the normal case then A is true. If you call 2 random crates the standard then B is true. The statements are identical statements except that the point of reference differs. I could remove statement B to make it easier for you if you want, its still the same statement then.
User avatar
India drsingh
Dragoon
Posts: 273
Joined: Jun 10, 2016
ESO: drsingh

Re: Indian Discussion Thread

Post by drsingh »

It can't be determined which crate china has extra, since every civ has different base crates. It could either be compared with japan and said to have no random crate. Or compared with india and considered getting 100 food / wood crate fixed.

What can be compared is the difference in power lvl of opponent civ. From 100 coin to 100 food + wood, while china remains constant. This is not an ideal scenario. Random crates are "claimed" to be balanced only because they are same for all civ in a game (even though their value and use for each civ is different)(so if fixed, it should Initially be same for all civ instead of giving wood to one but coin to another).

And thus either all civ should get fixed crates. Or no civ, china or india should have fixed crates while others have random. There was a lot of debate on this already. But i guess everyone agreed that fixing crates for only one civ was not an option(if balance is the aim).

If giving china random crates seems like an impossible task from balance perspective. Then maybe the whole random crate thing should be reviewed. While it adds strategic depth and gameplay variety for vanilla civs(and was introduced keeping them in mind). Expansion civs are more or less broken with random crates (china most, probably), because of their different design or mechanics. (debatable, agree to disagree)

I dont buy the less fun argument. Since there are still lots of random factors(maps, treasures), to provide variation. If still something is missing, new maps can be made to include single additional 100 coin crate eg. Or saloon or market or farm pre built. So people can adapt with different builds on different maps..

Btw, who is heading the patch team now?
No Flag deleted_user0
Ninja
Posts: 13004
Joined: Apr 28, 2020

Re: Indian Discussion Thread

Post by deleted_user0 »

Jerom wrote:
umeu wrote:
Show hidden quotes


There is also just wood no extra crate, and there is also coin with extra food. You can't just say that China has an extra crate, it makes no sense. All you can say is that they always have wood, which again, depends on what you determine their base crates to be. For example, brits can start 200f 200w 100c, or they can start 300f 300w. In the latter case they have an extra crate, in the former, they don't, but you can't just say China has an extra crate because they get wood regardless, they don't get the coin. Your argument is just really weak. You say China Base is 200f 200w and their random crate is fixed to 100w. I can say equally that their base is 300w 100f and their random crate is fixed to 100f. Crates are based on civ needs, not on some arbitrary code.

A) So 40% of the time other civs get one extra crate while china gets nothing,
or B) 60% of the time china gets 'an extra crate' over the other civ.

It depends on where you place 'normal'. If you call 1 random crate the normal case then A is true. If you call 2 random crates the standard then B is true. The statements are identical statements except that the point of reference differs. I could remove statement B to make it easier for you if you want, its still the same statement then.


Lol first you say I misread, and then you reproduce the exact same misinformation. China doesn't get an extra crate over another civ... china just always gets wood, so at times when it's just 1 random crate which isn't wood, then china has a different crate then the other civ, but not Ana extra crate. Because if china had random crates, they would still have the exact same amount of crates... in not sure if you understand the definition of extra.. but it would suit you to be less resolute about this while you are just spreading wrong info and calling out other people for being wrong on top of it

Statement a is true, but b simply isn't. You even completely fail to understand that in a single wood crate start china has the exact same start now as it would with random crates assuming the fixed crate is 100w. Otherwise the same would be true but for the food start. So your percentages, which origin are unclear to begin with, are totally wrong. And still, this doesn't really mean an extra crate...
Netherlands momuuu
Ninja
Posts: 14237
Joined: Jun 7, 2015
ESO: Jerom_

Re: Indian Discussion Thread

Post by momuuu »

Lol
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: Indian Discussion Thread

Post by Goodspeed »

umeu wrote:
Goodspeed wrote:
Show hidden quotes
- I didn't say China has an extra crate. My point is that their crate start is always the same, while the other civ's crate start can be wildly different (differences as large as 100c vs 100w 100f) and this creates imbalances.

- I didn't say China's base is 200f 200w and their random crate is fixed to 100w. How is this even relevant?

You are putting words in my mouth and then responding to them instead of responding to my actual point.
Ofcourse it's relevant what the base crates are... giving India 400c as their base crates wouldn't make sense. The base crates need to be tailored to the civ needs. And China is already one of the slowest aging civs. Anyway I made this case already in the ep thread. Can't be bothered to make it again. You can have your opinion, but it's simply one bias against another and u have no good arguments really. Random crates are silly anyway, despite Garja insistence that random crates are the only reason aoe is fun
Where am I biased? All I am saying is that it's not balanced for China to start with fixed crates and other civs to start with random crates. This should be consistent, meaning either all civs should have fixed crates or all civs should have random crates. I argued for fixed crates in the EP discussions, as I'm sure you remember, but the idea wasn't popular enough to implement.
And by "not balanced" I don't mean it's a civ balance issue. It doesn't make China too strong or too weak, it just makes their strength depend on random chance (the crate start) to an extent I'm not comfortable with.
Netherlands momuuu
Ninja
Posts: 14237
Joined: Jun 7, 2015
ESO: Jerom_

Re: Indian Discussion Thread

Post by momuuu »

Id argue the 100 starting resource swing is actually huge even.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: Indian Discussion Thread

Post by Goodspeed »

Yeah, especially the difference between 100c and 100f+100w is massive. Just imagine the impact if you would take away 100f and 100w from a civ's base crates and add 100c. Almost every civ would become unplayable with that change.
No Flag deleted_user0
Ninja
Posts: 13004
Joined: Apr 28, 2020

Re: Indian Discussion Thread

Post by deleted_user0 »

Goodspeed wrote:
umeu wrote:
Show hidden quotes
Ofcourse it's relevant what the base crates are... giving India 400c as their base crates wouldn't make sense. The base crates need to be tailored to the civ needs. And China is already one of the slowest aging civs. Anyway I made this case already in the ep thread. Can't be bothered to make it again. You can have your opinion, but it's simply one bias against another and u have no good arguments really. Random crates are silly anyway, despite Garja insistence that random crates are the only reason aoe is fun
Where am I biased? All I am saying is that it's not balanced for China to start with fixed crates and other civs to start with random crates. This should be consistent, meaning either all civs should have fixed crates or all civs should have random crates. I argued for fixed crates in the EP discussions, as I'm sure you remember, but the idea wasn't popular enough to implement.
And by "not balanced" I don't mean it's a civ balance issue. It doesn't make China too strong or too weak, it just makes their strength depend on random chance (the crate start) to an extent I'm not comfortable with.


It equally makes their civ strength depend on chance if they have random crates. The chance may be distributed differently but you will never eliminate this aspect when you stick to random crates. That's why I said consistency isn't the same as fairness in this situation.
No Flag deleted_user0
Ninja
Posts: 13004
Joined: Apr 28, 2020

Re: Indian Discussion Thread

Post by deleted_user0 »

Goodspeed wrote:Yeah, especially the difference between 100c and 100f+100w is massive. Just imagine the impact if you would take away 100f and 100w from a civ's base crates and add 100c. Almost every civ would become unplayable with that change.


But the 100f is extra, the base crates + the random Fwg crates are designed around the civs base necessity. So that switch from 100f 100w will not make a civ unplayable...
No Flag deleted_user0
Ninja
Posts: 13004
Joined: Apr 28, 2020

Re: Indian Discussion Thread

Post by deleted_user0 »

Jerom wrote:Lol

U can lol, but you have simply botched your explanation or you misunderstand how it actually works. I don't really care.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: Indian Discussion Thread

Post by Goodspeed »

It equally makes their civ strength depend on chance if they have random crates.
No. Not equally.

I know random crates are inherently unbalanced, but at least every player in a game gets the same one(s). It's not necessarily a problem. The China case is an issue in that their opponent can either have a shit start or a very good one where China's start will be the same. Where do you disagree? About it being an issue, or about it being true in the first place?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 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