Goodspeed is not part of the administrators board anymore. However he is still the leader of the patch team. I don't think some things are going to be change after the end of the tourney
Jerom wrote:Yes I know that. Whats the point you're making?
If you're nerfing something that is too strong for a civ that is balanced around having that thing that is too strong then shouldn't you compensate for that nerf? Japan is too weak in the early game but it's sorta fine because they're too strong in the lategame.
the thing is that japan late-game is so insanely broken, that if they not only nerfed way of the bow but also nerfed yumi att card e nagi hp card, the civ would be ranked exactly the same as now: weak and fragile start, auto-win if you survive 10 mins.
BrookG wrote:@pecelot Tbh it was rather offensive. However, the game isn't only for PR35+, it affects all the players in the community. All would like to have an equal stand at winning an opponent with the same PR.
But I also think these balance changes dont matter almost at all for below PR25, and matter very very little for PR25-35
As A proud pr 20-25, I can assure you that if anything, the balance changes made by the patch are actually way more amplified at lower-level play than for higher level players.
somppukunkku wrote:This is not a fucking discogame.
BrookG wrote:@pecelot Tbh it was rather offensive. However, the game isn't only for PR35+, it affects all the players in the community. All would like to have an equal stand at winning an opponent with the same PR.
But I also think these balance changes dont matter almost at all for below PR25, and matter very very little for PR25-35
As A proud pr 20-25, I can assure you that if anything, the balance changes made by the patch are actually way more amplified at lower-level play than for higher level players.
Could you further elaborate on this this thought? Most glaring issues with Iro, Otto, 5 mams, etc are fixed. Everything else only greatly affects high end players.
BrookG wrote:@pecelot Tbh it was rather offensive. However, the game isn't only for PR35+, it affects all the players in the community. All would like to have an equal stand at winning an opponent with the same PR.
But I also think these balance changes dont matter almost at all for below PR25, and matter very very little for PR25-35
As A proud pr 20-25, I can assure you that if anything, the balance changes made by the patch are actually way more amplified at lower-level play than for higher level players.
Could you further elaborate on this this thought? Most glaring issues with Iro, Otto, 5 mams, etc are fixed. Everything else only greatly affects high end players.
Well the -100f change for france has a bigger effect on players with lower apm and worse macro. Portuguese macro is now way easier with the cheaper vills. Jan/abus no longer rapes everything because you have to be a lot more conscious with your micro. Also russia change is huge, because russia was already decent at lower levels, but with the cheaper vills they are markedly easier. Maybe not stronger, but the macro is easier and everything is a lot more smooth. Same goes for dutch. They are stronger for sure, but the macro is much easier on EP and the whole semi-ff build is much smoother. I think the bow rider nerf speaks for itself.
For some of these changes, like the france, ports and german ones, if you are a very skilled player it is very easy to adapt your macro and micro to the changes, but it is less easy if you are lower-skill. I think that all the changes effect everyone, but probably lower-skill players moreso.
somppukunkku wrote:This is not a fucking discogame.
lemmings121 wrote:2- natives from treasures having 0,5x vs vills. (and possibly removing the bonus vs cav, atm india cant play arkansas because there is always a toma treasure, so you always lose the game in age one)
That's not a bug. If anything you can just change the multiplier on the native tomahawk to not have a bonus vs cavalry, and a negative bonus against villagers in age one.
As for the Shogunate bug that was fixed: Just keep in mind that almost every bug fix effects balance in some way. That one was fixed due to it not scaling properly with the other ages. It's one of those gray area bugs when it comes to where you place it in the notes.
fightinfrenchman wrote:For a more in-depth answer ask the patch team, who actually made the change.
Furthermore, I think it's a bit sad to see the community being so negative about something ESOC provides for free!
Yeah, there is substantial discussion that goes into each these changes really in that I haven't seen a point raised in this thread which was not discussed internally. It would be neat if someone put in the effort to catalog the discussions from discord/forums and released them so people can see the methodology behind these changes! Or don't! It might also make more people more upset than they already are!
fightinfrenchman wrote:For a more in-depth answer ask the patch team, who actually made the change.
Furthermore, I think it's a bit sad to see the community being so negative about something ESOC provides for free!
Yeah, there is substantial discussion that goes into each these changes really in that I haven't seen a point raised in this thread which was not discussed internally. It would be neat if someone put in the effort to catalog the discussions from discord/forums and released them so people can see the methodology behind these changes! Or don't! It might also make more people more upset than they already are!
fightinfrenchman wrote:For a more in-depth answer ask the patch team, who actually made the change.
Furthermore, I think it's a bit sad to see the community being so negative about something ESOC provides for free!
Yeah, there is substantial discussion that goes into each these changes really in that I haven't seen a point raised in this thread which was not discussed internally. It would be neat if someone put in the effort to catalog the discussions from discord/forums and released them so people can see the methodology behind these changes! Or don't! It might also make more people more upset than they already are!
Could you pls explain reason for Russia's vill price buff reversal? Most glaring example is MU vs France and Germany. With small buff Russia had chance against Ger and France, but now we are back to square one where its almost auto-lose for Russia because France -100f is reversed and Uhlans are back to full hp. Least you could have done is to keep small vill batch buff for Russia.
So funny to see that back in the days, professionals of balancing games in Microsoft Studios drew conclusion about the game after 6 months of playtesting and how you guys draw conclusion about the game after 10 minuts after reading patch notes.
Rikikipu wrote:So funny to see that back in the days, professionals of balancing games in Microsoft Studios drew conclusion about the game after 6 months of playtesting and how you guys draw conclusion about the game after 10 minuts after reading patch notes.
Some changes don't need testing because values are almost the same as before. I gave good example, Russia vs France and Ger. Everything is the same except goon nerf and +5f for CDB which amounts to nothing. Result is, Russia bottom tier again.
fightinfrenchman wrote:For a more in-depth answer ask the patch team, who actually made the change.
Furthermore, I think it's a bit sad to see the community being so negative about something ESOC provides for free!
Yeah, there is substantial discussion that goes into each these changes really in that I haven't seen a point raised in this thread which was not discussed internally. It would be neat if someone put in the effort to catalog the discussions from discord/forums and released them so people can see the methodology behind these changes! Or don't! It might also make more people more upset than they already are!
Teach me the logic behind dutch change.
Well discussion doesn't mean the correct change was chosen. It's impossible to appease everyone on eso, and similarly on esoc, and even on the ep team itself. I don't know the exact logic that went into the change, I went AWOL, but know that there was some sense of logic, there had to be, and some sense of thought process was had.
I'm not really speaking directly to you but to a lot of people in this thread: it's easy to see the final changes and react to them, and naturally so, but each of these changes was collectively argued and debated and pondered more than any one person has pondered any of them in this thread now. It's possible even a member of the team which argued for some of those very changes might have disagreed with them had you shown them before the balance process began. Again, this does not make the change in itself good but perhaps deserves the benefit of the doubt.
Rikikipu wrote:So funny to see that back in the days, professionals of balancing games in Microsoft Studios drew conclusion about the game after 6 months of playtesting and how you guys draw conclusion about the game after 10 minuts after reading patch notes.
Some changes don't need testing because values are almost the same as before. I gave good example, Russia vs France and Ger. Everything is the same except goon nerf and +5f for CDB which amounts to nothing. Result is, Russia bottom tier again.
-5f per vills for russia was something really important according to some players. So +5f per vills for France can be important too, we don't know. Goon change is something than benefit for russia a lot and uhlan are nerfed too. Also iirc, the patch team said that actually they figured out that Russia had never been such a bad civ back in the days, their meta hadn't just evolved the other civs, which is the case right now.
Rikikipu wrote:So funny to see that back in the days, professionals of balancing games in Microsoft Studios drew conclusion about the game after 6 months of playtesting and how you guys draw conclusion about the game after 10 minuts after reading patch notes.
and then they drew the conlcusion that otto is the hardest civ to play and that hussars are indeed ottomans strongest unit ? THose proffessionals must have been great
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.
Rikikipu wrote:So funny to see that back in the days, professionals of balancing games in Microsoft Studios drew conclusion about the game after 6 months of playtesting and how you guys draw conclusion about the game after 10 minuts after reading patch notes.
Some changes don't need testing because values are almost the same as before. I gave good example, Russia vs France and Ger. Everything is the same except goon nerf and +5f for CDB which amounts to nothing. Result is, Russia bottom tier again.
-5f per vills for russia was something really important according to some players. So +5f per vills for France can be important too, we don't know. Goon change is something than benefit for russia a lot and uhlan are nerfed too. Also iirc, the patch team said that actually they figured out that Russia had never been such a bad civ back in the days, their meta hadn't just evolved the other civs, which is the case right now.
I forgot Uhlans got 5 hp back. So its 2,5% from 5% hp reduction now. Its meaningless, while Russia lost only useful buff it got. Maybe it should have been 260 for a batch, it would certainly be better than reversing buff completely.
fightinfrenchman wrote:For a more in-depth answer ask the patch team, who actually made the change.
Furthermore, I think it's a bit sad to see the community being so negative about something ESOC provides for free!
Yeah, there is substantial discussion that goes into each these changes really in that I haven't seen a point raised in this thread which was not discussed internally. It would be neat if someone put in the effort to catalog the discussions from discord/forums and released them so people can see the methodology behind these changes! Or don't! It might also make more people more upset than they already are!
Teach me the logic behind dutch change.
Well discussion doesn't mean the correct change was chosen. It's impossible to appease everyone on eso, and similarly on esoc, and even on the ep team itself. I don't know the exact logic that went into the change, I went AWOL, but know that there was some sense of logic, there had to be, and some sense of thought process was had.
I'm not really speaking directly to you but to a lot of people in this thread: it's easy to see the final changes and react to them, and naturally so, but each of these changes was collectively argued and debated and pondered more than any one person has pondered any of them in this thread now. It's possible even a member of the team which argued for some of those very changes might have disagreed with them had you shown them before the balance process began. Again, this does not make the change in itself good but perhaps deserves the benefit of the doubt.
It's also strange how people react so angrily as if the change is permanent. If it turns out that a change is unhelpful it's quite likely it will be reversed in the future.
Rikikipu wrote:So funny to see that back in the days, professionals of balancing games in Microsoft Studios drew conclusion about the game after 6 months of playtesting and how you guys draw conclusion about the game after 10 minuts after reading patch notes.
Some changes don't need testing because values are almost the same as before. I gave good example, Russia vs France and Ger. Everything is the same except goon nerf and +5f for CDB which amounts to nothing. Result is, Russia bottom tier again.
-5f per vills for russia was something really important according to some players. So +5f per vills for France can be important too, we don't know. Goon change is something than benefit for russia a lot and uhlan are nerfed too. Also iirc, the patch team said that actually they figured out that Russia had never been such a bad civ back in the days, their meta hadn't just evolved the other civs, which is the case right now.
Russia vills and CDB food costs are a false equivalency because of the training speeds of both of them, not to mention how having a little extra resource bank helps Russia more than other civs because of the batches.