Why is there no new Patch Version before the the Autumn Tournament?

[lordraphael]

you mean you consulted yourself and talked about the changes to sepoys ?

Well did you advise GS?

Also cool to see that sepoy build you mentioned earlier isn't really affected much by this change since it's a slow roll karni play that later switches to brit consulate. Strange that your build isn't actually the one GS is nuking.

And no, no one has told me that the specific problem with sepoys is that they need to get 2 shotted by the TC to balance them as a unit.

im not in the patch team anymore.

[Goodspeed]

@WickedCossack I don't think the changes combined make early pressure builds as much weaker as you seem to think. Nothing is getting "nuked". Let's just see how it turns out.

- Culverin multiplier against warships increased to 12.5 (up from 10)
- Fishing Boat cost decreased to 70w (down from 100w)
- "Schooners" shipment effect changed from "-60% Fishing Boat cost" to "-20w Fishing Boat cost and -40% train time" (decreases train points from 25 to 15)
- Canoe range & line-of-sight decreased from 20 and 24 to 18 and 22 respectively
- War Canoe range & line-of-sight decreased from 30 and 34 to 25 and 29 respectively
- "European Cannons" shipment effect changed from "+20% warship attack and +5 warship range & line-of-sight" to "+30% warship attack"
- "Offshore Support" shipment effect changed from "+20% warship attack and +5 warship range & line-of-sight" to "+20% warship attack and +2 warship range & line-of-sight"
- "Admiralty" shipment effect changed from increased warship build limit to "Dock warship improvements cost & train points halved"

How 'bout them apples

[Darwin_]

Oh god don't reduce fishing boat train time.

[Asateo]

I said older time full musk counter full xbow and thats kinda wierd. But some said (dont want names) xbows are good... lol
But even if you dont want completely change the meta and start with small changes 18 range would be essential. Then you could at least shoot back to gurkhas in age 2. And ofx kite vs all heavy inf would be better.

Xbow buff sounds nice, though, a greater range seems a strange change to me. Gurkha's aren't the problem. Like you said, HI trading well vs their suppossed counter is. Why not up the multiplier with 0.25? Makes them trade better and still outrange HI...


How about asian civilizations who get a dock and a smaller bonus, instead of full blown schooners? Does the card for them stays the same (thus giving 49w boats, dock, but no trainging speed change)?

[gamevideo113]

- Fishing Boat cost decreased to 70w (down from 100w)
- "Schooners" shipment effect changed from "-60% Fishing Boat cost" to "-20w Fishing Boat cost and -40% train time" (decreases train points from 25 to 15)

I like the general cost change for fishing ships, but schooners also reducing the training time by 40% might make fishbooming even stronger than before. With advanced dock and schooners, fishing ships would take 10 seconds to train, which is insanely fast compared to villagers, also considering that you can make infinite docks. Sure, advanced dock+schooners+wood shipments is a pretty big investment into water but with two docks and 700 wood you can have 14 ships in 1 minute 10 seconds, whereas a tc trains 14 vils in 11 minutes 40 seconds

Also i agree with Asateo, xbow needs a better multiplier vs infantry. Right now an xbow needs 10 hits to kill a sepoy and a sepoy kills an xbow in 5 hits

[Hazza54321]

yeah pls dont

[Dsy]

When you need to play age2 against otto abus "rush", with 16 range xbow you rather make musk huss since you cant even shoot them. Same against gurkhas. You get kited for the end.
But change their multi also an option. Then against age 2 outranges civs like those you need cav also... But whatever they need just something buff since they dont cost effective vs anything now...

Fishing boats need a build limit!!! I mentioned it million times. You make maps which limit boat numbers, but if you make the boat numbers limited you can make any maps and re maps will be precompatible. And gives opportunities to make huge water maps...

[Hazza54321]

When you need to play age2 against otto abus "rush", with 16 range xbow you rather make musk huss since you cant even shoot them. Same against gurkhas. You get kited for the end.
But change their multi also an option. Then against age 2 outranges civs like those you need cav also... But whatever they need just something buff since they dont cost effective vs anything now...

Fishing boats need a build limit!!! I mentioned it million times. You make maps which limit boat numbers, but if you make the boat numbers limited you can make any maps and re maps will be precompatible. And gives opportunities to make huge water maps...

they have a build limit of 99 EleGiggle

[SoldieR]

Sepoy never die, they just run around your base ignoring anything that isn't a skirm, killing batches of vils. Ex: tit

[Garja]

@WickedCossack I don't think the changes combined make early pressure builds as much weaker as you seem to think. Nothing is getting "nuked". Let's just see how it turns out.

- Culverin multiplier against warships increased to 12.5 (up from 10)
- Fishing Boat cost decreased to 70w (down from 100w)
- "Schooners" shipment effect changed from "-60% Fishing Boat cost" to "-20w Fishing Boat cost and -40% train time" (decreases train points from 25 to 15)
- Canoe range & line-of-sight decreased from 20 and 24 to 18 and 22 respectively
- War Canoe range & line-of-sight decreased from 30 and 34 to 25 and 29 respectively
- "European Cannons" shipment effect changed from "+20% warship attack and +5 warship range & line-of-sight" to "+30% warship attack"
- "Offshore Support" shipment effect changed from "+20% warship attack and +5 warship range & line-of-sight" to "+20% warship attack and +2 warship range & line-of-sight"
- "Admiralty" shipment effect changed from increased warship build limit to "Dock warship improvements cost & train points halved"

How 'bout them apples

Terrible changes, one worse than the other. Canoes don't need any nerf. Yes they're are good vs warships but they suck vs outposts.
Offshore support is supposed to give range, that's why it's fuckin called offshore support. Maybe reduce it by 1 or 2 max. Warship tend to have goofy movement anyway so range is a bit fake.
Culverins are rather useless in general so just stick to the original idea of reducing cost.
Who is going to send the card for the tech upgrades? I don't know if that will actually be used. And if it is good enough it can be abused by the water player. Admirality is not that problematic imo.
Also the schooner change is bad. 50w with faster train time means that you're not able to substain boat production in transition to colo which is the most legit part of using schooners (think about Ports). And 70w for civs like French or Germans means they can go water probably even better than schooners civs (they can already go water with 100w boats if they really want to).

[Dsy]

When you need to play age2 against otto abus "rush", with 16 range xbow you rather make musk huss since you cant even shoot them. Same against gurkhas. You get kited for the end.
But change their multi also an option. Then against age 2 outranges civs like those you need cav also... But whatever they need just something buff since they dont cost effective vs anything now...

Fishing boats need a build limit!!! I mentioned it million times. You make maps which limit boat numbers, but if you make the boat numbers limited you can make any maps and re maps will be precompatible. And gives opportunities to make huge water maps...

they have a build limit of 99 EleGiggle

Thats true. I ment changing that number for a "bit" less...

But seriusly make boats viable is a nice idea. But then you must limit its eco potential...

[Asateo]

With the speed change for training fishing boats, no asian civ will be able to go waterboom against a schooners civ. They would have to rush to avoid being outboomed.

[Goodspeed]

The speed of your boom isn't decided by boat train time. It's mostly about the wood cost.

[Asateo]

The speed of your boom isn't decided by boat train time. It's mostly about the wood cost.

Faster boats = faster new resources come in so it does matter, no? Atm people boom with a whole bunch of docks. I've seen up to 4 docks, that couldbe brought down to 2, opening up 400w --> 8 fishing boats extra to be made.
40% just seems alot.

[gamevideo113]

The speed of your boom isn't decided by boat train time. It's mostly about the wood cost.

It's also about the train time. You don't want to waste all your wood making docks instead of fishing ships to boom faster. I guess it's nice to have a benefit on this aspect as a secondary effect of schooners but 40% os really a lot In my opinion it is really risky, i'd start with a lower number.

[momuuu]

yeah lets have another skirm goon 2 hands on dick tp stagecoach civ

this

[deleted_user0]

Sweet. I got out aoe before gs nuked the game!

[Hidddy_]

I think people should be more accepting of the patch ideas and play test them as soon as they can. One of the points of a community patch is that it be supported by the community and thus be played frequently to allow a give and take between the developers and the player base. Changes can always be reverted or tweaked. You never know, you might play with the new changes and find yourself going back on previous opinions. You guys can throw around numbers all you want but it'd be more organic to just tweak the changes until the game plays smoothly and properly.

[HUMMAN]

Schooners is kinda ok but it may be polished. I think 1 ship per dock and 40 w ships is better. The problem with the ships are not their cost, not their stats. Its the upgrades.. You can double a ship's stats and heal it. Also they are in low in quantity and higher in quality relative to the land units which makes them stronger than their stats. A 1k hp 100 damage unit kills 10 100 hp 10 damage unit easily. So in long term water pays off. To balance it in specific maps where water is overwhelming you can add native upgrades which increases anti ship damage of cannons/building etc. So culverin buff is ok i think, it can be increased or decreased according to the outcomes. I dont know if new admirality is bad or good.
Also note that most ships are both good vs water and good vs land. You can make ship that is only good vs water(there is fire ship for india i believe) for the land player. It may be mercenary card/native upgrade etc actually maps are easy to balance since there are natives special to map.

[SoldieR]

The issue with water is that india, Brit, and Japan have an extra age 2 ship upgrade card.. not schooners

Then, each of those civ natural boomyness becomes a huge problem if you don't win sea early and end up way behind because all your eco went into sea while their land eco naturally expanded at the same time

[WickedCossack]

@WickedCossack I don't think the changes combined make early pressure builds as much weaker as you seem to think. Nothing is getting "nuked". Let's just see how it turns out.

Well I'll end it there since I can see your mind is made up.

If you wanted to argue from a balance perspective I'd have been convinced if you'd had a look at strategies that are causing imbalances such as the consulate all-in, rather than having the imbalances be the least impacted by the change.

Looking at all the changes in the patch (and a brief chat with noel yesterday) I get the sense that the general direction is to try to spice up the game and make sure each game is interesting and has options. Which is fine and probably what you should have based your arguments on. Instead we had an entire discussion on balance where you didn't bring any balance points to the table which was super frustrating to partake in since I'm just arguing against ghosts without knowing it.

Lastly, perhaps you could lead by example in the next tournament and showcase some of the changes and how they work. If I have to see Brits as by far the most played civ again for the 3rd tournament in a row I'm going to start to wonder ...

[spanky4ever]

not gonna pretend I have red all the 16 pages of this thread - I would not bother anyway - its just bickering over 50 wood. Im more waiting for the real deal? when will that one occur on the horizon? shhhhhhhh , you amaze me bois - the chit chat is going on and on and on and on - never ending.

[Goodspeed]

@WickedCossack I don't think the changes combined make early pressure builds as much weaker as you seem to think. Nothing is getting "nuked". Let's just see how it turns out.

If you wanted to argue from a balance perspective I'd have been convinced if you'd had a look at strategies that are causing imbalances such as the consulate all-in, rather than having the imbalances be the least impacted by the change.

You keep saying that. The consulate all in is sepoy-based. Sepoy were nerfed. We intend for it to be impacted and I can't for the life of me figure out why you would think it's the "least impacted". Least out of what?

Again, we felt HP was the right statistic because it is most relevant when trying to balance early pressure builds, which would likely become (more of) an issue after we buffed house cost. The TC 2-hitting the unit effectively prevents early sepoy pressure from being potentially uncounterable in some MUs. Part of it is risk management.

[jesus3]

zoom says:
"Unlike is the case with some of the complaints in this thread, a lot of effort and time went into developing this patch. I am disappointed by the bigoted and presumptuous response to his previewing certain changes, and I am genuinely upset by the lack of decency, and the outright spite towards Goodspeed on display from some posters. How can you seriously personally attack him, then krai when he does not feel like responding to you? Get a fucking grip!

I am personally very much interested in learning how these changes will pan out in the coming tournament, and am excited for the release. However flawed it may be, it cannot be nearly as bad as some of you would have one think.

I suggest you make less assumptions and do more thinking, and I urge you to, please, at least attempt acting with a minimum of respect.

P.S.: hai"

[Goodspeed]

Looking at all the changes in the patch (and a brief chat with noel yesterday) I get the sense that the general direction is to try to spice up the game and make sure each game is interesting and has options. Which is fine and probably what you should have based your arguments on. Instead we had an entire discussion on balance where you didn't bring any balance points to the table which was super frustrating to partake in since I'm just arguing against ghosts without knowing it.

I mentioned maybe 10 times that this is about increasing build order variety in India games. If you honestly didn't catch that I question whether you even read my posts past the "we saw too many sepoy in the tournament" part, which you kept coming back to.

Lastly, perhaps you could lead by example in the next tournament and showcase some of the changes and how they work. If I have to see Brits as by far the most played civ again for the 3rd tournament in a row I'm going to start to wonder ...

I'll play in the tournament, though am unlikely to spend much time practicing new builds. Anyway I'm confident other players are perfectly capable of finding innovative ways to adapt to the changes.

I think on the right map Brits are probably top civ, and have been for years, but they remain very map dependent and many of the newer maps favour aggression more than the early ESOC maps. It's funny, I've been trying to nerf them for ages but never got the proper backing, and now with the newer maps I'm not so sure but others seem to be coming around to the opposite side. Also we didn't want to do too much in 1 release. I'm curious to see how well Brit does this event though. I think on most maps they are strong but counterable.