charlemagen wrote:Completely reverting teepee would ruin sioux. I have not played in a while but spamming 20 teepees and needing a ton of space to do so makes sioux not fun. I like gichts ideas
Yeah fair point. Less teepees is good for maps like Orinoco or blitztreaty cliff. I thought about it more and now I think of you increase the build time too much you run the risk of making teepees horrible (if you can cancel the foundations with mortars). So I think the best way to balance Sioux is another incremental hit to teepees (another +20%, totaling +40% on teepees) while hitting the bison trickle hard. I don't know why you @Gichtenlord don't think it's problematic for Sioux to have a large stockpile of res pre 40 and a decent (still very low compared to other Civs but much, much better than RE) income later. Sioux by design are not meant to have a strong boom. They're meant to be a low eco strong mili civ with a few special gimmicks (wc fire pit teepee etc) that can win games. They're not meant to have a stockpile of res at 40 that can rival euro civs. I'd also like to add that theorizing and actually putting theories into practice are two very different things, and I have a few games against floko Sioux that we both agree indicate Sioux is too strong right now (there is one on my YouTube channel, that game was played on the most recent patch), and if need be we can play more (this time I'll play some Sioux as well).
I am on board, I would suggest making bison spawn 2:30 from tcs and agreed with nick, double teepee build time.
Right now this is what I'm thinking: -Remove ageup bison -Bison trickle must be teched in the farm tech (the one that atm increases the rate enables it), so no bison trickle in the first 18 mins when there are still hunts on the map -Bison trickle is 2 mins as opposed to 1 min 30. -(And of course the incremental teepee nerf) Sioux will hit a much healthier score (~1700-1800), while the late game bison trickle is not effected too much.
steniothejonjoe wrote:I can micro better than 99% of the player base and that's 100% objective
paddy_jai wrote:india and japan are fast enough i think, they have train speed card
China has its own train card, but it's really an overall characteristic that it's units train slow. Maybe using the banner train card to also train the monk faster? (Not all units tho cause then they would get super-op art)
dicktator_ wrote:My new list (China hasn't had much testing BTW, same with Iro), from strongest to weakest, in nats or out of nats I don't think it matters too much at this point
Sioux Brits China Ports Japan (below Germany and France in nats) Germany France (France can do decent against Brits tho) Russia (Might be above Germany, France, and even Japan, but I'm not sure yet) Dutch Iro (probs above Dutch in nats) Spain India Aztec Otto (moves up above Aztec and around India level in nats)
As China and Iro haven't had much testing and the community (except for @supernapoleon) is realizing a better way to play Russia, this list is not final. Also my opinion changes every time I lose a game.
dicktator_ wrote:My new list (China hasn't had much testing BTW, same with Iro), from strongest to weakest, in nats or out of nats I don't think it matters too much at this point
Sioux Brits China Ports Japan (below Germany and France in nats) Germany France (France can do decent against Brits tho) Russia (Might be above Germany, France, and even Japan, but I'm not sure yet) Dutch Iro (probs above Dutch in nats) Spain India Aztec Otto (moves up above Aztec and around India level in nats)
As China and Iro haven't had much testing and the community (except for @supernapoleon) is realizing a better way to play Russia, this list is not final. Also my opinion changes every time I lose a game.
is this still your most up to date list
Iro above Dutch and Russia and ports below Germany in nats
steniothejonjoe wrote:I can micro better than 99% of the player base and that's 100% objective
My new list based on current meta and recent experience: Japan Sioux France Germany Spain China Ports Iro Russia Dutch Brit Otto Aztec India
Dutch-Brit is debatable Sioux-Japan is debatable Otto-Aztec is debatable Yes I'm serious about brit Sioux is really strong but not stupid op, same with japan
steniothejonjoe wrote:I can micro better than 99% of the player base and that's 100% objective
Yeah. India loses to aztec because with slow inf times they can't stop the Aztec push. India kinda beats otto but it's the same logic as with otto vs aztec, even tho otto can lose those matchups heads up they are a lot more versatile simple because they're a european civ and india/aztec aren't. Otto have the luxury of making mortars and not having to worry about running out of wood (Aztec) or coin (India) so I ranked them above both those civs.
steniothejonjoe wrote:I can micro better than 99% of the player base and that's 100% objective
In nats VS out of nats is not that different. I don't create the lists with in nats or out of nats in mind. Taking a closer look at that list it's probably more accurate for out of nats. China is above Germany and possibly france in nats, and I'd possibly push iro above ports in nats as well. I need more games vs China as most of my China games have been with me playing China. The one time I played against China was as Germany out of nats, after a 6 week break and with me feeding 10k.
steniothejonjoe wrote:I can micro better than 99% of the player base and that's 100% objective
It is a bit different imo... Like Ofc French musk are not the same like ports or Brits musk for example. Spain isn't so good imo you drain pretty fast when you fuck up the first push (out of the experience as a pr 25 Ofc)
A great thing about the TP is that it allows for a flexible meta and the tier lists of civs arent always stagnant; I.e. it fluctuates over the years unlike in RE where it's pretty fixe which civs are broken. Makes for interesting discussions.