Do some of the recent EP changes even make sense?

User avatar
Norway spanky4ever
Gendarme
iwillspankyou
Posts: 8389
Joined: Apr 13, 2015

Re: Do some of the recent EP changes even make sense?

Post by spanky4ever »

I_HaRRiiSoN_I wrote:I honestly think even on RE patch where sioux shines is the 11min DS BB timing slamming in 7 DS + ~15 vet AR + 5 RR (ship) + 5 BR (from colonial) where you alternate between war dance and siege dance. I dont think the civ is broken on the lt./capt level. Possible strat for the next tourney is on klondike, take tp as standard, try and control centre and drop teepees on the exposed gold mines and gold starve the opponent, (force them to push out of base). [there is only 2K gold in base and no other extremly close mine]

If that where the case - I guess most ppl would play sioux -
How often do you play them - and if you dont - why not if you think they are so OP :?: :?:
Hippocrits are the worst of animals. I love elifants.
User avatar
New Zealand zoom
Gendarme
Posts: 9314
Joined: Apr 26, 2015
ESO: Funnu
Location: New_Sweland

Re: Do some of the recent EP changes even make sense?

Post by zoom »

iwillspankyou wrote:
zoom wrote:
Show hidden quotes
No. The civilization is by far the least popular in the entire game – on either patch. This only makes even worse the fact that it is a niche civilization whose strength is difficult to determine in general, and when changed in particular. In other words, buffing Sioux is risky business, and it was decided that to improve the state of balance before changing Sioux without knowing its strength.


Im not arguing that Sioux are not played as much as some other civs - but being played only once in a whole tournament AFTER THE EP CHANGES is something COMPLETELY different. I do not think you have any difficulty with seeing that :ugeek:
The Patch team could start with undoing the changes you did in the first place - and then have a look if they can make some additional changes to the eco - to make sioux a civ that could have a chance in age IV and V. (hint: eco + defense).
Not really; the sample size is too small to jump to any conclusions on its strength. At the very most it's saying that people literally are guessing that it isn't above average strength.

Also, I think you missed an important part of my post: Sioux is a niche civilization whose strength is difficult to determine in general, and when changed in particular. In other words, buffing Sioux is risky business, and it was decided to improve the state of balance before changing Sioux without knowing its strength.
User avatar
Norway spanky4ever
Gendarme
iwillspankyou
Posts: 8389
Joined: Apr 13, 2015

Re: Do some of the recent EP changes even make sense?

Post by spanky4ever »

I wish ppl would get real: there are hardly any games with Sioux; in tournaments or streams! they ARE fun to watch and to play. Not so fun though if you are bound to loose almost every MU.
The patch team had a chance to do something about it - but they choose not to. I think its a shame, and a loss for the fun of the game.
Hippocrits are the worst of animals. I love elifants.
User avatar
Norway spanky4ever
Gendarme
iwillspankyou
Posts: 8389
Joined: Apr 13, 2015

Re: Do some of the recent EP changes even make sense?

Post by spanky4ever »

@zoom :
I think you missed an important part of my post: Sioux is a niche civilization whose strength is difficult to determine in general, and when changed in particular. In other words, buffing Sioux is risky business, and it was decided to improve the state of balance before changing Sioux without knowing its strength.


Why did the team nerf the civ?
now that you see the result: no games - do you think it was a mistake?
did you even concider making change to the civ
or do you want the civ to be " unplayed" and "forgotten"

are you happy to see Sioux not played in tournaments or in streams?
Hippocrits are the worst of animals. I love elifants.
User avatar
Italy Garja
Retired Contributor
Donator 02
Posts: 9729
Joined: Feb 11, 2015
ESO: Garja

Re: Do some of the recent EP changes even make sense?

Post by Garja »

Team made the nerf because BR were OP.
"Do you think it was a mistake?" Not really. Reverting the change wouldn't even improve Sioux win rate significantly but rather only cause situations where they win hard by abusing the unit instead of just winning.
Civ will be buffed in the future.
Image Image Image
Netherlands momuuu
Ninja
Posts: 14237
Joined: Jun 7, 2015
ESO: Jerom_

Re: Do some of the recent EP changes even make sense?

Post by momuuu »

Then why are yumis not nerfed?
France Kaiserklein
Pro Player
Posts: 10278
Joined: Jun 6, 2015
Location: Paris
GameRanger ID: 5529322

Re: Do some of the recent EP changes even make sense?

Post by Kaiserklein »

iwillspankyou wrote:My guess is that you do not know the civ, have almost/never played them, and yet you upgrade yourself to some kind of expert on sioux! You say you do not have the time - (I for one, think you are full of it!)


Lol ofc I never play sioux, I never said I did. Never said I'm an expert either. Not sure why you would draw that kind of weird conclusions. And I basically meant I didn't want to waste my time with this civ... Not that I couldn't.
Either way what matters is I won't play this civ because it's not interesting, and I don't need to play it to know how it works, how easy it is, and how decent it is.
Image
Image
Image
LoOk_tOm wrote:I have something in particular against Kaisar (GERMANY NOOB mercenary LAMME FOREVER) And the other people (noobs) like suck kaiser ... just this ..
User avatar
Italy Garja
Retired Contributor
Donator 02
Posts: 9729
Joined: Feb 11, 2015
ESO: Garja

Re: Do some of the recent EP changes even make sense?

Post by Garja »

Jerom wrote:Then why are yumis not nerfed?

Not yet. Should have been nerfed sooner, I agree.
Image Image Image
Netherlands momuuu
Ninja
Posts: 14237
Joined: Jun 7, 2015
ESO: Jerom_

Re: Do some of the recent EP changes even make sense?

Post by momuuu »

And that is not standardizing?

Even with normal bow riders, I dont think sioux plays out like a civ that masses one unit to be honest. Their semi FF is much better, the entire broken part is that they cant really semi FF without dying coz they dont have minutemen. The old solution was to play colonial and mass bow riders then, but by nerfing that and forcing sioux to do some weird cetan bow colonial thing that is super weak, the civ has been ruined.

That being said, if you can safely semi FF, like vs dutch, then sioux is a great civ I think (thats also the broken part).
France Kaiserklein
Pro Player
Posts: 10278
Joined: Jun 6, 2015
Location: Paris
GameRanger ID: 5529322

Re: Do some of the recent EP changes even make sense?

Post by Kaiserklein »

@iwillspankyou btw you say sioux are a fun civ, but they're first of all a very unfun civ to play against. Almost everyone hates playing vs sioux, because they're broken. They have such sccary timing and units that you can't really commit against them in most match ups (also because of the siege dance + speed aura, they can basetrade easily), and other than that they don't have a very good eco so you can often outscale them by waiting a lot. It's kinda boring.
Anyway if sioux didn't have some strong aspects, people wouldn't have playing vs them like that.

Jerom wrote:Then why are yumis not nerfed?

Well they should, especially since japan could probs do with a slight nerf. I think yumis could have slightly worse base attack, like 18, and the 20% attack upgrade should be 15%, then it would be better.
Image
Image
Image
LoOk_tOm wrote:I have something in particular against Kaisar (GERMANY NOOB mercenary LAMME FOREVER) And the other people (noobs) like suck kaiser ... just this ..
User avatar
Norway spanky4ever
Gendarme
iwillspankyou
Posts: 8389
Joined: Apr 13, 2015

Re: Do some of the recent EP changes even make sense?

Post by spanky4ever »

with all the changes - and not so many of them good - I would suggest that reject and get back to standard will be the best option.
Hippocrits are the worst of animals. I love elifants.
Netherlands momuuu
Ninja
Posts: 14237
Joined: Jun 7, 2015
ESO: Jerom_

Re: Do some of the recent EP changes even make sense?

Post by momuuu »

I agree with spanky. I dont think nerfing the bow rider hp did anything towards making sioux less broken. For as far as I am concerned, the mass bowrider strategy isn't even OP on EP maps nor is it actually that boring. Its definitely not their only thing, since the sioux semi FF is sick if it works, and it honestly is a nice change of pace from all the standard stuff we see 24/7. Instead of going "oh another match up in which we both semi ff" playing vs sioux can sometimes because a "how will I handle that bow rider mass effectively" which is interesting. Theres 14 civs already, and most play out in a very similair semi FF style right now. Sioux may be a weird civ, but thats just good for the variety. Having 14 civs offer you the potential of "gimick civs" which increase variety. Nerfing bow riders was just standardizing the game and toning down the really strong parts of the game, and with it the variety in the game.

The real problem sioux faces, imo, which has only been increased by the patch, is that they cant defend musk all in pushes while doing their strongest strat, the semi ff, because they do not have minutemen or a good bow shipment (6 cetan bow just doesnt cut it). If they can do their semi FF they are actually a pretty strong civ, its just that in most mus they can be punished. Civs like France, Brit, Ports, India, Ottos, Aztec can just destroy their attempt to semi ff, and really dont lose to colonial play from EP sioux. On RE, they could at least try a mass bow rider style, which still struggled against these civs, but at least gave sioux more of a fighting chance.
User avatar
Norway spanky4ever
Gendarme
iwillspankyou
Posts: 8389
Joined: Apr 13, 2015

Re: Do some of the recent EP changes even make sense?

Post by spanky4ever »

Jerom wrote:I agree with spanky. I dont think nerfing the bow rider hp did anything towards making sioux less broken. For as far as I am concerned, the mass bowrider strategy isn't even OP on EP maps nor is it actually that boring. Its definitely not their only thing, since the sioux semi FF is sick if it works, and it honestly is a nice change of pace from all the standard stuff we see 24/7. Instead of going "oh another match up in which we both semi ff" playing vs sioux can sometimes because a "how will I handle that bow rider mass effectively" which is interesting. Theres 14 civs already, and most play out in a very similair semi FF style right now. Sioux may be a weird civ, but thats just good for the variety. Having 14 civs offer you the potential of "gimick civs" which increase variety. Nerfing bow riders was just standardizing the game and toning down the really strong parts of the game, and with it the variety in the game.

The real problem sioux faces, imo, which has only been increased by the patch, is that they cant defend musk all in pushes while doing their strongest strat, the semi ff, because they do not have minutemen or a good bow shipment (6 cetan bow just doesnt cut it). If they can do their semi FF they are actually a pretty strong civ, its just that in most mus they can be punished. Civs like France, Brit, Ports, India, Ottos, Aztec can just destroy their attempt to semi ff, and really dont lose to colonial play from EP sioux. On RE, they could at least try a mass bow rider style, which still struggled against these civs, but at least gave sioux more of a fighting chance.


Yes - finally somebody makes a post that makes some sense. And I can understand, that you know the Sioux civ and have played them a few times.
I agree to most of what you are saying - it pretty much nails it :smile:
Hippocrits are the worst of animals. I love elifants.
User avatar
Canada Mitoe
Advanced Theory Craftsman
Posts: 5486
Joined: Aug 23, 2015
ESO: Mitoe
GameRanger ID: 346407

Re: Do some of the recent EP changes even make sense?

Post by Mitoe »

I think nerfing bow riders was a good change because it forces Sioux players to have to think about their unit composition a bit more, rather than just spamming a single unit type, beating its own counter, and getting map control with minimal effort.

However while this change may be good, other changes are required to make the civ competitive. At the moment they're a civ that relies on raiding and map control in order to keep up or gain an advantage vs other civs. This is a good design unique to Sioux; however, unfortunately, at the moment with better maps and very few ways to boom, Sioux's become a very risky civ to play. They can still succeed, but as long as the opponent plays correctly they will usually lose. There's very little room for Sioux to outplay their opponent, so they just end up doing a win or lose type timing, and that's why they've fallen short compared to other civs.

I want to say more, but I'm at work at the moment so I'll have to add it later.
France Kaiserklein
Pro Player
Posts: 10278
Joined: Jun 6, 2015
Location: Paris
GameRanger ID: 5529322

Re: Do some of the recent EP changes even make sense?

Post by Kaiserklein »

aoe > work wtf is wrong with you
Image
Image
Image
LoOk_tOm wrote:I have something in particular against Kaisar (GERMANY NOOB mercenary LAMME FOREVER) And the other people (noobs) like suck kaiser ... just this ..
User avatar
France [Armag] diarouga
Ninja
NWC LAN Gold
Posts: 12710
Joined: Feb 26, 2015
ESO: diarouga
Location: France

Re: Do some of the recent EP changes even make sense?

Post by [Armag] diarouga »

Mr_Bramboy wrote:
[Armag] diarouga wrote:
_venox_ wrote:Sioux lacks many means to build a regular economy and their infantry in colonial is weak, spice trade is 20% upgrade to a high percentage of their early game resource income which buffs their eco, making 700w 600w and training infantry units more attractive. Besides tp boom they can't go water and can't boom in any other way than just 3v 4v and hunting dogs and placer mines which is absurd. Should they really have to send spice trade as a 125w 125g substitute because most other civs have decent market ups?

what can we do?

As you said, ESOC maps nerfed raiding in general. Therefore reverting the bow rider nerf would be a good place to start.

Hum yea but it was a design change, because we don't want people to go 100% brs every games lol.
User avatar
France [Armag] diarouga
Ninja
NWC LAN Gold
Posts: 12710
Joined: Feb 26, 2015
ESO: diarouga
Location: France

Re: Do some of the recent EP changes even make sense?

Post by [Armag] diarouga »

Kaiserklein wrote:
iwillspankyou wrote:My guess is that you do not know the civ, have almost/never played them, and yet you upgrade yourself to some kind of expert on sioux! You say you do not have the time - (I for one, think you are full of it!)


Lol ofc I never play sioux, I never said I did. Never said I'm an expert either. Not sure why you would draw that kind of weird conclusions. And I basically meant I didn't want to waste my time with this civ... Not that I couldn't.
Either way what matters is I won't play this civ because it's not interesting, and I don't need to play it to know how it works, how easy it is, and how decent it is.

I play sioux though and I know that they're not as trash as spank says.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: Do some of the recent EP changes even make sense?

Post by Goodspeed »

A disappointing thread, not only the OP but most of the replies as well. Again I notice the pattern that if people don't get exactly what they want, the patch sucks. Surely you all can see that it's not possible to give everyone exactly what they want. Did we not improve balance? I think we did.
Anyway while the reasoning behind changes was explained before, some good points are brought up in the OP so I will reply to that as well as the Sioux discussion the thread seems to have devolved into.

- Native Scout snare effect removed.
Ok. So the native scout is now completely different and a very uninteractive unit in age 1. In previous patches you had to play slightly differently vs France to avoid fighting the scout or to escape it, now you can just pretend like it doesn't exist. It wasn't even a balance issue. The number of times someone actually lost a game because of the native scout snaring you is very very low. I feel like this change is just popular because people don't like having to play differently vs the scout, and all this change does is remove some of the skill from the early game.
Although this is a highly popular change meaning it won't be simply reverted, we can and will look at nerfing the scout differently. Halve attack or HP for example.

Ports - Genitours home-city shipment decreased from +6 range to +5 range.
...
This actually just accomplishes nothing? Jinetes with this card are still unbelievably strong, arguably no weaker at all from previous patches.

What it accomplishes is exactly what it says: genitours have -1 range. How this is nothing is beyond me. The idea of the change is that skirms should be better against genitours than they currently are, and this change will make sure that in larger fights (which is the norm at that point in the game) more skirms are firing at the genitours than otherwise would be. Anyway this change is easily tweakable and if genitours are still an issue we can make it -2. I don't see what the hurry is.

Russia - Settler batch cost decreased from 270f to 255f.
"17 Strelets" home-city shipment increased to 20 Strelets.
Ok. You now save maybe 200f per game, assuming the game hasn't already ended at the 8 minute mark as many Russian games do. And people think this civ is broken now? It was considered the worst civ last patch by many and it still is. A disappointing and unoriginal change.

Also the unsendable (because it's bad) Strelet card is still unsendable. Nice.

"Yeah well that's only like, your opinion, man." from the Big Lebowski. Sadly that can be the answer to about 99% of the posts ITT including the OP. If Russia went from shit to pretty good with these changes, and the changes didn't change how the civ plays, we did our job. If you still think Russia is shit, you may be right but almost everyone else disagrees and surely you can see why, when making changes, we should act on the majority's opinion.

Spain - "Unction" home-city shipment damage-aura effect decreased from 5% to 4% per Missionary (i.e. maximum potential damage increase reduced from ~63% to ~48%). Missionary cost decreased from 100w, 100c to 50w, 50c.
Just... why? In what universe was this change actually necessary? This change feels like a change where someone said "hey it would be cool if this was viable, so let's buff it" instead of actually addressing issues with the civ.
This change does address issues with the civ (lack of colonial options and lack of long-term options) and does so in a way that uses a fun mechanic which is unique to the civ. If we can make this a viable card without breaking Spain we will have made it a much more interesting civ than before, without changing their FF builds in any way which we didn't deem necessary (other than the shipment changes, which are small).

And then there's the disappointing LACK of changes.

India - Weak civ remains weak because people are afraid of buffing and making it strong.
Sioux - The same.
Iroquois - Got some very minor buffs, but realistically didn't solve any of the civ's problems. The same problem.
Otto - Well... I don't know anything about this civ so I won't talk. At least the jan nerf got reverted?

Yes there is a lack of changes, and there are good reasons for that as I'm sure you could have figured out if you'd thought about it or asked me before making this thread.
We decided early on that we wouldn't change too much per iteration, in order to keep a solid grasp on the state of balance. Knowing the state of balance becomes extremely difficult if we change things around every patch version. Because these civs are unpopular we decided to fix the rest of the civs first, although we have already made changes to these civs to steer them in the right direction.

We absolutely plan to change Otto and Sioux in future patches because these civs are clearly not in a good place right now. Iro is a different story, because some players who are experienced with the civ are saying they are not as bad as everyone thinks. This is definitely something we'll look at in the future though.

Making a lot of changes sounds great, we can try to fix everything with 1 patch, but the chance we'll kill inter-civ balance in the process is 100%. ASFP made this mistake and we learned from it.
Netherlands momuuu
Ninja
Posts: 14237
Joined: Jun 7, 2015
ESO: Jerom_

Re: Do some of the recent EP changes even make sense?

Post by momuuu »

Mitoe wrote:I think nerfing bow riders was a good change because it forces Sioux players to have to think about their unit composition a bit more, rather than just spamming a single unit type, beating its own counter, and getting map control with minimal effort.

However while this change may be good, other changes are required to make the civ competitive. At the moment they're a civ that relies on raiding and map control in order to keep up or gain an advantage vs other civs. This is a good design unique to Sioux; however, unfortunately, at the moment with better maps and very few ways to boom, Sioux's become a very risky civ to play. They can still succeed, but as long as the opponent plays correctly they will usually lose. There's very little room for Sioux to outplay their opponent, so they just end up doing a win or lose type timing, and that's why they've fallen short compared to other civs.

I want to say more, but I'm at work at the moment so I'll have to add it later.

I think you make a lot of assumptions, most of which arent actually ones I necessarily agree with. To begin, I do not even think mass bow rider is their strongest strategy or that bow riders actually beat their counter in the quanitity that sioux can get them out. Mass bow rider is the only strategy they used to be able to use in some mus because you otherwise just die to a musk rush. When doing mass bow rider raiding is important because you're basically using a handicapped civ that doesnt have much else going for it. On esoc maps raiding is so much harder that I dont even think with normal hp bowriders this playstyle would be that great.

The core problem of sioux is not the bow riders at all. I think the patch team honestly failed to look beyond the obvious here. I think the core problem when it comes to sioux is that their real thing is semi ff (even more so when you delete their only colonial option) which you just cant pull off against a strong musk timing because you dont have minutemen, walls, building placement or a good bow shipment, oh and the semi ff units you used to make were also nerfed making it even harder.

In that sense, all this bow rider change has honestly achieved is that sioux is more broken in the sense that the match ups vs musk rushes are even more unwinnable now.
User avatar
New Zealand zoom
Gendarme
Posts: 9314
Joined: Apr 26, 2015
ESO: Funnu
Location: New_Sweland

Re: Do some of the recent EP changes even make sense?

Post by zoom »

Jerom wrote:I agree with spanky. I dont think nerfing the bow rider hp did anything towards making sioux less broken. For as far as I am concerned, the mass bowrider strategy isn't even OP on EP maps nor is it actually that boring. Its definitely not their only thing, since the sioux semi FF is sick if it works, and it honestly is a nice change of pace from all the standard stuff we see 24/7. Instead of going "oh another match up in which we both semi ff" playing vs sioux can sometimes because a "how will I handle that bow rider mass effectively" which is interesting. Theres 14 civs already, and most play out in a very similair semi FF style right now. Sioux may be a weird civ, but thats just good for the variety. Having 14 civs offer you the potential of "gimick civs" which increase variety. Nerfing bow riders was just standardizing the game and toning down the really strong parts of the game, and with it the variety in the game.

The real problem sioux faces, imo, which has only been increased by the patch, is that they cant defend musk all in pushes while doing their strongest strat, the semi ff, because they do not have minutemen or a good bow shipment (6 cetan bow just doesnt cut it). If they can do their semi FF they are actually a pretty strong civ, its just that in most mus they can be punished. Civs like France, Brit, Ports, India, Ottos, Aztec can just destroy their attempt to semi ff, and really dont lose to colonial play from EP sioux. On RE, they could at least try a mass bow rider style, which still struggled against these civs, but at least gave sioux more of a fighting chance.
What makes you think so?
Netherlands momuuu
Ninja
Posts: 14237
Joined: Jun 7, 2015
ESO: Jerom_

Re: Do some of the recent EP changes even make sense?

Post by momuuu »

Playing as and against sioux throughout the years and observing people play as and against sioux.

That is the inspiration, I think most of the rest of the post is based on deductive logic.
User avatar
Netherlands Mr_Bramboy
Retired Contributor
Donator 01
Posts: 8219
Joined: Feb 26, 2015
ESO: [VOC] Bram
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Do some of the recent EP changes even make sense?

Post by Mr_Bramboy »

zoom wrote:
Jerom wrote:I agree with spanky. I dont think nerfing the bow rider hp did anything towards making sioux less broken. For as far as I am concerned, the mass bowrider strategy isn't even OP on EP maps nor is it actually that boring. Its definitely not their only thing, since the sioux semi FF is sick if it works, and it honestly is a nice change of pace from all the standard stuff we see 24/7. Instead of going "oh another match up in which we both semi ff" playing vs sioux can sometimes because a "how will I handle that bow rider mass effectively" which is interesting. Theres 14 civs already, and most play out in a very similair semi FF style right now. Sioux may be a weird civ, but thats just good for the variety. Having 14 civs offer you the potential of "gimick civs" which increase variety. Nerfing bow riders was just standardizing the game and toning down the really strong parts of the game, and with it the variety in the game.

The real problem sioux faces, imo, which has only been increased by the patch, is that they cant defend musk all in pushes while doing their strongest strat, the semi ff, because they do not have minutemen or a good bow shipment (6 cetan bow just doesnt cut it). If they can do their semi FF they are actually a pretty strong civ, its just that in most mus they can be punished. Civs like France, Brit, Ports, India, Ottos, Aztec can just destroy their attempt to semi ff, and really dont lose to colonial play from EP sioux. On RE, they could at least try a mass bow rider style, which still struggled against these civs, but at least gave sioux more of a fighting chance.
What makes you think so?

Is that a serious question..?
User avatar
New Zealand zoom
Gendarme
Posts: 9314
Joined: Apr 26, 2015
ESO: Funnu
Location: New_Sweland

Re: Do some of the recent EP changes even make sense?

Post by zoom »

Jerom wrote:Playing as and against sioux throughout the years and observing people play as and against sioux.

That is the inspiration, I think most of the rest of the post is based on deductive logic.
I think the first paragraph of your post is perfectly agreeable, and it's important to keep in mind. While it's perfectly possible that Sioux needs buffs, however, I'm not sure that it's the case. Practically, the question is whether the civilization is now underpowered, and unfortunately its answer cannot be conclusively determined at this time.
User avatar
New Zealand zoom
Gendarme
Posts: 9314
Joined: Apr 26, 2015
ESO: Funnu
Location: New_Sweland

Re: Do some of the recent EP changes even make sense?

Post by zoom »

Mr_Bramboy wrote:
zoom wrote:
Jerom wrote:I agree with spanky. I dont think nerfing the bow rider hp did anything towards making sioux less broken. For as far as I am concerned, the mass bowrider strategy isn't even OP on EP maps nor is it actually that boring. Its definitely not their only thing, since the sioux semi FF is sick if it works, and it honestly is a nice change of pace from all the standard stuff we see 24/7. Instead of going "oh another match up in which we both semi ff" playing vs sioux can sometimes because a "how will I handle that bow rider mass effectively" which is interesting. Theres 14 civs already, and most play out in a very similair semi FF style right now. Sioux may be a weird civ, but thats just good for the variety. Having 14 civs offer you the potential of "gimick civs" which increase variety. Nerfing bow riders was just standardizing the game and toning down the really strong parts of the game, and with it the variety in the game.

The real problem sioux faces, imo, which has only been increased by the patch, is that they cant defend musk all in pushes while doing their strongest strat, the semi ff, because they do not have minutemen or a good bow shipment (6 cetan bow just doesnt cut it). If they can do their semi FF they are actually a pretty strong civ, its just that in most mus they can be punished. Civs like France, Brit, Ports, India, Ottos, Aztec can just destroy their attempt to semi ff, and really dont lose to colonial play from EP sioux. On RE, they could at least try a mass bow rider style, which still struggled against these civs, but at least gave sioux more of a fighting chance.
What makes you think so?

Is that a serious question..?
Why yes – yes it is. There seems to be a lot of theoretical assumptions made.
Netherlands momuuu
Ninja
Posts: 14237
Joined: Jun 7, 2015
ESO: Jerom_

Re: Do some of the recent EP changes even make sense?

Post by momuuu »

zoom wrote:
Jerom wrote:Playing as and against sioux throughout the years and observing people play as and against sioux.

That is the inspiration, I think most of the rest of the post is based on deductive logic.
I think the first paragraph of your post is perfectly agreeable, and it's important to keep in mind. While it's perfectly possible that Sioux needs buffs, however, I'm not sure that it's the case. Practically, the question is whether the civilization is now underpowered, and unfortunately its answer cannot be conclusively determined at this time.

To start off, the question if sioux is overpowered or not never seems to have been of much weight. The motivation as explained was Mart's/the belief that sioux was broken. I think, and have explained why I think so, that the changes to sioux didn't solve any issues but just made them worse. More so, I think my logic almost claims that the changes to sioux made illustrate a lack of insight when it comes to the civ and why it would be 'broken'.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 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