Abus Gun Design

[duckzilla]

Not at all, the damage cap of 80 suggest that it should be 40 base attack. Btw 1AoE is not that big of a deal, samurai have that do and see how op they are.

Did you just compare samurais and abus guns? Two units which are pretty much on the opposite ends of the spectrum with one being a melee low base dmg anticav unit and the other one a high-range, high base dmg anti-everything unit?

[[Armag] diarouga]

Show hidden quotes

aqwer is the biggest troll in ESOC, not even close.

So disappointing @[Armag] diarouga ; having position discussions about aoe3 is trolling?

Suggesting that abus should have area damage without getting nerfed is trolling. If you give them area damage, then you should divide their attack by like 2.

Not at all, the damage cap of 80 suggest that it should be 40 base attack. Btw 1AoE is not that big of a deal, samurai have that do and see how op they are.

Ye, so if you want to add area damage without affecting the balance too much, you'd need to lower the base attack to 20 or something.

Samurais have 1aoe but they're more expensive than abus, they're melee units and they only have 25 attack (compared to 40 for abus). If you want to remove the range attack for abus (ie make them melee unit) and give them 1aoe, I'm totally fine with that.

[aqwer]

Not at all, the damage cap of 80 suggest that it should be 40 base attack. Btw 1AoE is not that big of a deal, samurai have that do and see how op they are.

Did you just compare samurais and abus guns? Two units which are pretty much on the opposite ends of the spectrum with one being a melee low base-dmg anticav unit and the other one a high-range anti-everything?

Not compared, but emphasized on the effect of 1 AoE. And abus are not anti-everything, if you are still not okay with that then I would like to see some rec where you go pure abus and win competitively.

[aqwer]

Show hidden quotes

aqwer is the biggest troll in ESOC, not even close.

So disappointing @[Armag] diarouga ; having position discussions about aoe3 is trolling?

Suggesting that abus should have area damage without getting nerfed is trolling. If you give them area damage, then you should divide their attack by like 2.

Not at all, the damage cap of 80 suggest that it should be 40 base attack. Btw 1AoE is not that big of a deal, samurai have that do and see how op they are.

Ye, so if you want to add area damage without affecting the balance too much, you'd need to lower the base attack to 20 or something.

Samurais have 1aoe but they're more expensive than abus, they're melee units and they only have 25 attack (compared to 40 for abus). If you want to remove the range attack for abus (ie make them melee unit) and give them 1aoe, I'm totally fine with that.

I am talking about the effect of 1 AoE, which are minimal. You will barely notice it.

[[Armag] diarouga]

Show hidden quotes

aqwer is the biggest troll in ESOC, not even close.

So disappointing @[Armag] diarouga ; having position discussions about aoe3 is trolling?

Suggesting that abus should have area damage without getting nerfed is trolling. If you give them area damage, then you should divide their attack by like 2.

Not at all, the damage cap of 80 suggest that it should be 40 base attack. Btw 1AoE is not that big of a deal, samurai have that do and see how op they are.

Ye, so if you want to add area damage without affecting the balance too much, you'd need to lower the base attack to 20 or something.

Samurais have 1aoe but they're more expensive than abus, they're melee units and they only have 25 attack (compared to 40 for abus). If you want to remove the range attack for abus (ie make them melee unit) and give them 1aoe, I'm totally fine with that.

I am talking about the effect of 1 AoE, which are minimal. You will barely notice it.

You will haha.

[aqwer]

Show hidden quotes

aqwer is the biggest troll in ESOC, not even close.

So disappointing @[Armag] diarouga ; having position discussions about aoe3 is trolling?

Suggesting that abus should have area damage without getting nerfed is trolling. If you give them area damage, then you should divide their attack by like 2.

Not at all, the damage cap of 80 suggest that it should be 40 base attack. Btw 1AoE is not that big of a deal, samurai have that do and see how op they are.

Ye, so if you want to add area damage without affecting the balance too much, you'd need to lower the base attack to 20 or something.

Samurais have 1aoe but they're more expensive than abus, they're melee units and they only have 25 attack (compared to 40 for abus). If you want to remove the range attack for abus (ie make them melee unit) and give them 1aoe, I'm totally fine with that.

I am talking about the effect of 1 AoE, which are minimal. You will barely notice it.

You will haha.

Barely

[[Armag] diarouga]

Then if it's irrelevant, why do you want to change that haha ?
I'm telling you that 1aoe would make abus even more op than they currently are.

[aqwer]

Then if it's irrelevant, why do you want to change that haha ?
I'm telling you that 1aoe would make abus even more op than they currently are.

Because it makes sense design wise.

[princeofcarthage]

EP designers don't consider game design, unit design, historical design, realism of utmost priority, get used to it.

/s

[Garja]

I do, still abus buff doesnt fit

[[Armag] diarouga]

EP designers don't consider game design, unit design, historical design, realism of utmost priority, get used to it.

/s

I'd argue that with Zoi this has changed unfortunately. But EP was right to consider balance before design and history of course. If you have a balanced game with bad design, it might get boring (which sucks) but at least you can play it.
If design comes before balance, then it's simply impossible to play the game.
Ideally, you'd want to improve both balance and design with each patch (ie make balance changes that are also good design-wise, or good design changes that don't affect balance), but a design change which ruins the balance should not even be considered.

[princeofcarthage]

EP designers don't consider game design, unit design, historical design, realism of utmost priority, get used to it.

/s

I'd argue that with Zoi this has changed unfortunately. But EP was right to consider balance before design and history of course. If you have a balanced game with bad design, it might get boring (which sucks) but at least you can play it.
If design comes before balance, then it's simply impossible to play the game.
Ideally, you'd want to improve both balance and design with each patch (ie make balance changes that are also good design-wise, or good design changes that don't affect balance), but a design change which ruins the balance should not even be considered.

I'd agree with you more or less.

My post wasn't serious rather sarcastic and directed to aqwer crying about design change. My emote and /s which I think stands for sarcasm should make it clear :)

[[Armag] diarouga]

EP designers don't consider game design, unit design, historical design, realism of utmost priority, get used to it.

/s

I'd argue that with Zoi this has changed unfortunately. But EP was right to consider balance before design and history of course. If you have a balanced game with bad design, it might get boring (which sucks) but at least you can play it.
If design comes before balance, then it's simply impossible to play the game.
Ideally, you'd want to improve both balance and design with each patch (ie make balance changes that are also good design-wise, or good design changes that don't affect balance), but a design change which ruins the balance should not even be considered.

I'd agree with you more or less.

My post wasn't serious rather sarcastic and directed to aqwer crying about design change. My emote and /s which I think stands for sarcasm should make it clear :)

Didn't know /s standed for sarcarsm.
And honestly, it's not easy to know if it's sarcasm. A lot of people joined the "anti elite" bandwagon lol.

[princeofcarthage]

Fair enuf
(I think it does) not sure what's the current lingo.

[fei123456]

with the EP maps change, abus suddenly becomes far less powerful. they're expensive, have poor siege damage, and die fast to TC fire. even if we bring RE abus back, they won't perform great in EP now.

on RE poor maps Otto can starve the opponent, forcing him to fight outside the base, and they can abuse the lame abus. but on EP maps your opponent just go age 3, and abus can do nothing. Otto can age up too, but expensive cost + less range + no auto upgrade + poor shipment (5 abus=750 res) still prevents us from training abus. jan, cannon, spahi, mameluke, it's still the old style.

considering the basic stats of abus is still great, we might buff them from some different degree: what about giving them auto-upgrade? or give them 6+5 abus shipments in age 3?

[aqwer]

I do, still abus buff doesnt fit

Fair enough. But that is not a buff per se, just design improvement inline with game.

[Squamiger]

EP designers don't consider game design, unit design, historical design, realism of utmost priority, get used to it.

/s

abus guns are like, what? a big clunky musket on a stand? why would it make sense for it to do area damage, from a historical perspective?

[princeofcarthage]

EP designers don't consider game design, unit design, historical design, realism of utmost priority, get used to it.

/s

abus guns are like, what? a big clunky musket on a stand? why would it make sense for it to do area damage, from a historical perspective?

Read my reply to diarouga

[harcha]

Abus gun only has bonus against HI, and they are not very good at late stages of the game.

They are very good, you are wrong

So, I thin abus gun should have "AoE" just like any other unit with "siege type" ranged attack. Which may become helpful for otto late game because otto have terrible late game units.

There is nothing bad with otto lategame units, they all range from decent to very strong.

I suggest that it should be available through a hc card that gives 1 AoE and +2 range. Which will satisfy most people not happy with associating +1 range with vet and guard techs.

These people should consider that abus already cannot be engaged by skirmishers in fortress if the abus are kited properly.

[aqwer]

Maybe just maybe adding an aoe splash with the imperial upgrade MAYBE could be ok. But plz, no. Dont do this to otto...

That could be interesting, vet tech +1 range, guard tech +1 range, imperial tech +1 AoE. I like the flow here, very good design wise too. It could be a good alternative to my original suggestion.

Edit : And it will effect only team games where otto really on a disadvantage late game.

[Guigs]

Maybe just maybe adding an aoe splash with the imperial upgrade MAYBE could be ok. But plz, no. Dont do this to otto...

That could be interesting, vet tech +1 range, guard tech +1 range, imperial tech +1 AoE. I like the flow here, very good design wise too. It could be a good alternative to my original suggestion.

Edit : And it will effect only team games where otto really on a disadvantage late game.

ffs

[duckzilla]

lol, abus guns with aoe.
Just a quick comparison to horse artillery. Abus guns cost 150 res/2 pop, horse artillery cost 600 res/6 pop. Depending on pop space, you can afford 3-4 abus guns instead of one horse artillery.
Imp. Abus guns (no cards): 50f/100c, 2pop, 260hp, 20%RR, 80dmg, 3.5 rof, 1 aoe
Imp. Horse art (no cards): 100w/500c, 6pop, 350hp, 75%RR, 219dmg, 4.0 rof, 3 aoe

[aqwer]

lol, abus guns with aoe.
Just a quick comparison to horse artillery. Abus guns cost 150 res/2 pop, horse artillery cost 600 res/6 pop. Depending on pop space, you can afford 3-4 abus guns instead of one horse artillery.
Imp. Abus guns (no cards): 50f/100c, 2pop, 260hp, 20%RR, 80dmg, 3.5 rof, 1 aoe
Imp. Horse art (no cards): 100w/500c, 6pop, 350hp, 75%RR, 219dmg, 4.0 rof, 3 aoe

Horse art has 26 range and 6.5 speed, no way 4 abus gun are better than 1 horse art (same res) lol

[harcha]

lol, abus guns with aoe.
Just a quick comparison to horse artillery. Abus guns cost 150 res/2 pop, horse artillery cost 600 res/6 pop. Depending on pop space, you can afford 3-4 abus guns instead of one horse artillery.
Imp. Abus guns (no cards): 50f/100c, 2pop, 260hp, 20%RR, 80dmg, 3.5 rof, 1 aoe
Imp. Horse art (no cards): 100w/500c, 6pop, 350hp, 75%RR, 219dmg, 4.0 rof, 3 aoe

Horse art has 26 range and 6.5 speed, no way 4 abus gun are better than 1 horse art (same res) lol

they are better in the sense that you get them whole 2 ages sooner

[aqwer]

Maybe just maybe adding an aoe splash with the imperial upgrade MAYBE could be ok. But plz, no. Dont do this to otto...

That could be interesting, vet tech +1 range, guard tech +1 range, imperial tech +1 AoE. I like the flow here, very good design wise too. It could be a good alternative to my original suggestion.

Edit : And it will effect only team games where otto really on a disadvantage late game.

@zoom