lets make more deck options viable.

[howlingwolfpaw]

So my thoughts are this.... in Supremacy games there are many deck variations that can be viable, for 1v1 or team games and even variety among those. But in TR each civ pretty much has a standard deck. It would be cool to see either some new or modified card options that could give more variety to each civ.

This could be done with trade offs like how soligen steel for germany increases attack and HP but decreases speed. could be increase port mortars, decrease skirms by 2 range... etc... (to be worked out)

or could be done by buffing under used cards like villager build rate switched to 75% faster.

or could be done by adding new cards like 20% factory improvements.
adding more armor to HI etc...

Creating more variety would be good and players would have to create more of a balance between economy and military.

So this also comes down to what are some of the most under used cards that could be effective that we can make more viable?

[forgrin]

For India, Gorashka needs to be fixed in the treaty patch so it actually affects exp gather rates on sacred fields (iirc it only affects non-tasked animals).

[howlingwolfpaw]

I am pretty sure it does.... I tested it all out once. 10 cows take 10 secs to gather 25 XP no uprades, took 7-8 secs with the upgrade at the sacred field and with the card they gather at about 25 xp every 5 secs.

animals off field take 30 secs to gather 5 XP

[Lukas_L99]

You can still have different decks based on your play style, mainly with russia, india, china.
Adding new cards would just make the balance even harder

[howlingwolfpaw]

india is a great example of what I would like to see with other civs. They have tons of great millitary cards they could use and players do have some varied india decks. Russia and china usually all look the same to me. and even more so with all the other civs. Aztec can have a little variety in which units to buff but I would like to see a lot more variety in buffing cards that are good but deemed non essential making that choice more of personal preference

[Gichtenlord]

You can still have different decks based on your play style, mainly with russia, india, china.
Adding new cards would just make the balance even harder

Lukas so smart. Teach me

[Lukas_L99]

You can still have different decks based on your play style, mainly with russia, india, china.
Adding new cards would just make the balance even harder

Lukas so smart. Teach me

If you like jumping around with Russia (I don't) people like using those faster building cards, some might use the fort, for india urumi can sometimes be useful, others use chakrams (I don't) and with china you have many cards to choose from, not all fit in your deck

[howlingwolfpaw]

i like using urumi and extra forts for india as well. chakrams just eat through coin too fast. only would be good on maps you can get all native upgrades for. I would find place for a card like china has that allows shipments to come faster so that urumi would not under pop india so bad using 18 pop of urumi.

i just feel like with Euro arsenal upgrades they pretty much get to be at their full power while other civs have to make those preferential decisions. I like the variety that adds. where as every port player pretty much uses the same deck etc...

[Gichtenlord]

You can still have different decks based on your play style, mainly with russia, india, china.
Adding new cards would just make the balance even harder

Lukas so smart. Teach me

If you like jumping around with Russia (I don't) people like using those faster building cards, some might use the fort, for india urumi can sometimes be useful, others use chakrams (I don't) and with china you have many cards to choose from, not all fit in your deck

Lul trggered by alcoholic

[Kaiserklein]

Tbh in sup there aren't many variations viable at all, on most maps with most civs. I use the same decks like 95% of the time, regardless of the civ. And it's fine this way, because we already don't manage to create a balanced patch with only those few variations, so it would be even worse (or rather, impossible) with even more options.
Idk much about treaty, but I think the difference is in treaty you know you're gonna ship all your cards, while in sup you usually only ship some key cards and others rarely come on the field. That means that in treaty, you have a longer build order (sth like 15-20 cards instead of sup's 5-10 cards) so there is not much place for fantasy. Even if you try to create more options I think people will quickly see which one of them is the best (because it will never be 100% balanced so one will be better) and will only do that one.

[forgrin]

Tbh in sup there aren't many variations viable at all, on most maps with most civs. I use the same decks like 95% of the time, regardless of the civ. And it's fine this way, because we already don't manage to create a balanced patch with only those few variations, so it would be even worse (or rather, impossible) with even more options.
Idk much about treaty, but I think the difference is in treaty you know you're gonna ship all your cards, while in sup you usually only ship some key cards and others rarely come on the field. That means that in treaty, you have a longer build order (sth like 15-20 cards instead of sup's 5-10 cards) so there is not much place for fantasy. Even if you try to create more options I think people will quickly see which one of them is the best (because it will never be 100% balanced so one will be better) and will only do that one.

I don't think this is necessarily true because of the way MUs work in treaty vs Sup. If you're in an unfavourable MU in treaty there is very little you can do about it if your opponent plays at the same level, since most civs have fairly static unit choices due to the cards avaliable. Cards that could make units more viable in niche MUs without changing the basic way the civ is played can then be used in MU-specific decks. For example, India usually struggles against Ports since cass+20 range goon is very hard to deal with when you're using sepoy-mahout. However, if, say, one of the Gurkha card gave additional bonus vs goons, then the mahout have a better chance of making it to the cass since the gurk can threaten goons more.

[dicktator_]

There are still a few deck variations in treaty:
-If you tend to spam explorers a lot and can use them really well, you can try to fit the improved explorer card in your decks, even for civs that don't traditionally use it (Russia, Germany, France etc).
-If you're not a heavy organ gun user, you can remove the artillery HP card from your deck, and add something like building hp, wall hp, or stonemasons. The artillery card does not change culvs from 2 shot to 3 shot, so it's actually quite useless if you don't make organs.
-As china, you can chose to include both wood cards for a better boom, or you can chose to omit them and add more military cards.
-Whether or not to use overpop shipments as India, and if so only chakrams or both chakrams and war eles.
-etc.

It's not much obviously but deck variation is still there in treaty. IMO if we added more cards or changed/buffed existing cards, after a few weeks of figuring stuff out we would be back to 2-3 viable decks for each civ.

[howlingwolfpaw]

thats why I think more cards with tradeoffs would create better treaty balance. Giving some civs OP cards should have negatives. like port mortars increase range should decrease range of skirms by 2 (or other artillery), or monks increase aura radius but are slower, or decrease build time 75% but increase cost 15%

[stonecold316]

treaty wise this forum is a very good idea as decks from each civ treaty to treaty depending on map of course between the pros cards differ maybe 1 or 2
so people without standard cards get kicked by us higher ranks in treaty
more options might add for some spice in the game regaurding decks and card usage

[momuuu]

I guess in treaty it often really is pretty limited, especially because the order of the cards doesn't make the game the way it does in sup. Its usually just spam the 25 logical cards in the clearly logical order [disclaimer: not disrespecting treaty or the skill level, please dont interpret it as an insult] which could be spiced up a lot.

In sup, the order makes the difference. Maybe with slightly more things viable it'd be slightly more interesting, but I think its fine as is.

[howlingwolfpaw]

For India, Gorashka needs to be fixed in the treaty patch so it actually affects exp gather rates on sacred fields (iirc it only affects non-tasked animals).

i tested this and it makes a difference in how you send the card. upgrade the tech at the sacred field first before sending card.

[forgrin]

For India, Gorashka needs to be fixed in the treaty patch so it actually affects exp gather rates on sacred fields (iirc it only affects non-tasked animals).

i tested this and it makes a difference in how you send the card. upgrade the tech at the sacred field first before sending card.

So wait, it actually does increase gather rate of xp for the cows on the fields, but only if you send it after the tech is completed?

[howlingwolfpaw]

it works in both, but works better if you send after the tech is completed. the Fields spawn the same 25 XP but it just happens at faster rates.

[supernapoleon]

Export trade with japan is a viable option

[_NiceKING_]

Export trade with japan is a viable option

btw Hatamatos are longer instant, so u can't really spam them

[howlingwolfpaw]

Export trade with japan is a viable option

btw Hatamatos are longer instant, so u can't really spam them

i like the export trade. I have seen 10 of them win it for another team at highest rated levels taking out 3 players factories in a raid.

So do they now just train fast like they did before with that one tech from the Spanish consulate?

[_NiceKING_]

Export trade with japan is a viable option

btw Hatamatos are longer instant, so u can't really spam them

i like the export trade. I have seen 10 of them win it for another team at highest rated levels taking out 3 players factories in a raid.

So do they now just train fast like they did before with that one tech from the Spanish consulate?

Hatamotos are longer instant, their train time increased

[howlingwolfpaw]

but they were never instant. were they made instant on the patch then reverted? there was a tech from the spanish consulate that allowed for all consulate armies to train faster. It was not instant but it was pretty fast.

[_NiceKING_]

but they were never instant. were they made instant on the patch then reverted? there was a tech from the spanish consulate that allowed for all consulate armies to train faster. It was not instant but it was pretty fast.

they are instant on RE on maps that have Incas natives (Andes, etc)

[howlingwolfpaw]

ok.... but I do not count having a native tech as part of the calculus as to whether a unit is instant created or not. For me it has to come from the civ. So now it seems like they will be so slow on non andes maps and probably just fast enough on andes....