Ottomans Discussion Thread

User avatar
Canada dansil92
Retired Contributor
Posts: 2231
Joined: Nov 3, 2018
ESO: dansil92

Re: Ottomans Discussion Thread

Post by dansil92 »

Hazza54321 wrote:
Goodspeed wrote:
Show hidden quotes
Put on your thinking face, I'm sure you'll figure it out.
So you think abus should do more damage to hand cav and cannons?
Well, other skirms have 0.75 vs cav and no negatives vs artillery so why shouldnt abus be the same? :hmm:
Image
User avatar
France bwinner
Howdah
Donator 01
Posts: 1292
Joined: Mar 14, 2016
ESO: bwinner

Re: Ottomans Discussion Thread

Post by bwinner »

dansil92 wrote:
Hazza54321 wrote:
Show hidden quotes
So you think abus should do more damage to hand cav and cannons?
Well, other skirms have 0.75 vs cav and no negatives vs artillery so why shouldnt abus be the same? :hmm:
Abus have *0.5 vs cav. Although it's okay vs goons since they ignore the .2 rr, but it's not vs ww who don't have rr for instance and that's a big problem cuz jans also can't do shit vs ww.
Then yeah abus are great vs canons for sure. But I don't think this is a bad thing because ottomans have a lot of bad points to compensate this :
-abus are not pop effectiv which makes them not broken in late game (especially since huss/br are not very cost effectiv either) and (I know I will get flamed for this one) I think they lose to the heavy carder skirms (dutch/iro/india) in very late game just cuz they are outnumbered.
-you very rarely come to the point where you can mass abus in age 3 because : they require a foundry or 2 (300-600w), vet tech (200w+200g) and your only abus shipment worth 750 ressources which is terrible for an age 3 shipment (same as russian 5 cos age 2 shipment lol), your eco takes a time to scale so you don't have the ressources for it.

So with both of this, abus are not that good either in early age 3 nor in late game, so there is just a window in middle age 3 where they are good, but you know what ? 2 minutes after they become good, you are forced to go age 4 because otherwise you can't make vils anymore which kills you half the time.

So overall I think there is already enough compensations for abus being good vs canons.
Image
User avatar
France Guigs
Tournament Admin
Posts: 941
Joined: Jan 22, 2017
ESO: Guigs
Location: France

  • Quote

Post by Guigs »

Can we stop talking about otto as if "it" is a civ
Image

Image
User avatar
Armenia Sargsyan
Jaeger
Donator 01
Posts: 3372
Joined: Dec 18, 2017
ESO: lamergamer
Location: North Macedonia
Clan: c0ns

Re: Ottomans Discussion Thread

Post by Sargsyan »

dansil92 wrote:
Hazza54321 wrote:
Show hidden quotes
So you think abus should do more damage to hand cav and cannons?
Well, other skirms have 0.75 vs cav and no negatives vs artillery so why shouldnt abus be the same? :hmm:
because abus do siege damage vs artillery and guess what artillery doesn't have siege resist
krichk wrote:For some reason, you want the world to know that you're brave enough to challenge Challenger_Marco
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: Ottomans Discussion Thread

Post by Goodspeed »

Hazza54321 wrote:
Goodspeed wrote:
Show hidden quotes
Put on your thinking face, I'm sure you'll figure it out.
So you think abus should do more damage to hand cav and cannons?
You were quoting Zoi, not me, but since you asked yes I do. Abus are an artillery unit, they have siege damage so they should ignore RR. That's the unit design.
Australia Hazza54321
Pro Player
Winter Champion 2020 x2Donator 01
Posts: 8049
Joined: May 4, 2015
ESO: PrinceofBabu

Re: Ottomans Discussion Thread

Post by Hazza54321 »

Zoi is too influenced by you so id assume youd have the same opinion. Regarding abus just so were clear you think abus should do even more damage vs cav and cannons currently?
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: Ottomans Discussion Thread

Post by Goodspeed »

I don't think they should be buffed if that's what you're asking
Australia Hazza54321
Pro Player
Winter Champion 2020 x2Donator 01
Posts: 8049
Joined: May 4, 2015
ESO: PrinceofBabu

Re: Ottomans Discussion Thread

Post by Hazza54321 »

Well that was one of my initial points if you cared to put your thinking face on rather than talk condescendingly.
User avatar
Armenia Sargsyan
Jaeger
Donator 01
Posts: 3372
Joined: Dec 18, 2017
ESO: lamergamer
Location: North Macedonia
Clan: c0ns

Re: Ottomans Discussion Thread

Post by Sargsyan »

well you just said you think they should do more damage to cav
krichk wrote:For some reason, you want the world to know that you're brave enough to challenge Challenger_Marco
Vietnam duckzilla
Jaeger
Posts: 2497
Joined: Jun 26, 2016

Re: Ottomans Discussion Thread

Post by duckzilla »

Sargsyan wrote:because abus do siege damage vs artillery and guess what artillery doesn't have siege resist
On a sidenote: I have no idea why the developers thought its a good choice to only allow a single type of resistance for every unit. This design just decreases your level of freedom when balancing a unit.
It must have been a deliberate choice, since it is a deviation from AoE2 where every unit had two different types of resistances.
Whatever is written above: this is no financial advice.

Beati pauperes spiritu.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: Ottomans Discussion Thread

Post by Goodspeed »

Hazza54321 wrote:Well that was one of my initial points if you cared to put your thinking face on rather than talk condescendingly.
I think they should do more damage to cav and cannons than skirms, yes. Not more than they do currently. No one is even talking about buffing the unit, are they? Certainly not me.
User avatar
Canada dansil92
Retired Contributor
Posts: 2231
Joined: Nov 3, 2018
ESO: dansil92

Re: Ottomans Discussion Thread

Post by dansil92 »

Sargsyan wrote:
dansil92 wrote:
Show hidden quotes
Well, other skirms have 0.75 vs cav and no negatives vs artillery so why shouldnt abus be the same? :hmm:
because abus do siege damage vs artillery and guess what artillery doesn't have siege resist
1urgjs.jpg
Image
User avatar
Armenia Sargsyan
Jaeger
Donator 01
Posts: 3372
Joined: Dec 18, 2017
ESO: lamergamer
Location: North Macedonia
Clan: c0ns

Re: Ottomans Discussion Thread

Post by Sargsyan »

dansil92 wrote:
Sargsyan wrote:
Show hidden quotes
because abus do siege damage vs artillery and guess what artillery doesn't have siege resist
1urgjs.jpg
sorry
krichk wrote:For some reason, you want the world to know that you're brave enough to challenge Challenger_Marco
User avatar
Canada dansil92
Retired Contributor
Posts: 2231
Joined: Nov 3, 2018
ESO: dansil92

Re: Ottomans Discussion Thread

Post by dansil92 »

If i could make an honest suggestion, abus should do 1/2 to "Hand Cav" and "Coyoteman" and do base damage to goons. This would incresse their viability vs goon civs like sioux, even azzy to some extent without over nerfing or overbuffing vs hand cav, which would be the case if we messed with the base multiplier vs "abstractcav"
Image
Germany amiggo1999
Advanced Player
Donator 01
Posts: 768
Joined: Aug 7, 2016
ESO: miggo1999
Location: Hannover

Re: Ottomans Discussion Thread

  • Quote

Post by amiggo1999 »

idk, if goons are bad vs abus, it feels like otto won't really have any weakness
Image Image
France Kaiserklein
Pro Player
Posts: 10278
Joined: Jun 6, 2015
Location: Paris
GameRanger ID: 5529322

Re: Ottomans Discussion Thread

Post by Kaiserklein »

I don't think abus should be stronger vs cav, since they're kinda artillery. They're as good as (or slightly better than) skirms vs goons, as long as they're covered, which is okay I guess. But they should definitely not be that much stronger vs hand cav, it's ridiculous.
It's also fine that they do better vs artillery, but since abus are a mix of art and inf themselves, you'd kinda expect them to lose to falcs, right? But in fact they beat falcs, which doesn't make sense.
Could give abus x0.5 vs art (instead of 0.75), and considering nerfing them vs hand cav too.
bwinner wrote:You almost never play them though+when you do it's only on 4+ TP map/hard counterpick while you play german whenever none of your civ has anything special for the map, so I would say if any result is biased it's this one.
Also yeah ofc your otto overall winrate is not alone a reason to say otto is bad, but that's just to answer the other guy who said it was just me lowering the overall otto winrate alone^^
You mean I almost always play them? Then yeah we agree. And often picking them first too.
I usually pick ger on standard maps with a nice TP and nice resources, kinda the equivalent of otto 3/4 TP maps.
But yeah all these stats mean nothing
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
New Zealand zoom
Gendarme
Posts: 9314
Joined: Apr 26, 2015
ESO: Funnu
Location: New_Sweland

Re: Ottomans Discussion Thread

Post by zoom »

Hazza54321 wrote:
zoom wrote:
Hazza54321 wrote:No shit theyre supposed to beat skirms, they still do at 18 range. Its like the musk vs crossbow mechanic except the difference is 2 range instead of 4 and abus animation is instant. What abus shouldn’t be better at meanwhile is killing cav and cannons which is exactly where the range buff matters alot.
Actually, it seems pretty clear to me that they should.
That they should what?
That they should do better against artillery and heavy cavalry, than regular RI units. Evidently, the unit was designed that way, whether we like it or not. Although I do agree that buffing the unit, in that capacity, is risky, it isn't necessarily a problem. Players seem split on whether it is the case.
User avatar
New Zealand zoom
Gendarme
Posts: 9314
Joined: Apr 26, 2015
ESO: Funnu
Location: New_Sweland

Re: Ottomans Discussion Thread

Post by zoom »

dansil92 wrote:If i could make an honest suggestion, abus should do 1/2 to "Hand Cav" and "Coyoteman" and do base damage to goons. This would incresse their viability vs goon civs like sioux, even azzy to some extent without over nerfing or overbuffing vs hand cav, which would be the case if we messed with the base multiplier vs "abstractcav"
At least at this time, buffing the unit seems inadvisable.
User avatar
New Zealand zoom
Gendarme
Posts: 9314
Joined: Apr 26, 2015
ESO: Funnu
Location: New_Sweland

Re: Ottomans Discussion Thread

Post by zoom »

dansil92 wrote:
Hazza54321 wrote:
Show hidden quotes
So you think abus should do more damage to hand cav and cannons?
Well, other skirms have 0.75 vs cav and no negatives vs artillery so why shouldnt abus be the same? :hmm:
Probably because it were overpowered.
User avatar
New Zealand zoom
Gendarme
Posts: 9314
Joined: Apr 26, 2015
ESO: Funnu
Location: New_Sweland

Re: Ottomans Discussion Thread

Post by zoom »

deleted_user wrote:Guiz, let's not forget abuse are twice as expensive (and a little more because of pop) as skirms
Although it's still a good point, the unit is less than 50% more expensive.
User avatar
Canada dansil92
Retired Contributor
Posts: 2231
Joined: Nov 3, 2018
ESO: dansil92

Re: Ottomans Discussion Thread

Post by dansil92 »

zoom wrote:
dansil92 wrote:
Show hidden quotes
Well, other skirms have 0.75 vs cav and no negatives vs artillery so why shouldnt abus be the same? :hmm:
Probably because it were overpowered.
1urgjs.jpg
Image
User avatar
Armenia Sargsyan
Jaeger
Donator 01
Posts: 3372
Joined: Dec 18, 2017
ESO: lamergamer
Location: North Macedonia
Clan: c0ns

Re: Ottomans Discussion Thread

Post by Sargsyan »

abus are 30.4 % more expensive
krichk wrote:For some reason, you want the world to know that you're brave enough to challenge Challenger_Marco
User avatar
New Zealand zoom
Gendarme
Posts: 9314
Joined: Apr 26, 2015
ESO: Funnu
Location: New_Sweland

Re: Ottomans Discussion Thread

Post by zoom »

Goodspeed wrote:
zoom wrote:
Goodspeed wrote:People always forget that abus are supposed to beat skirms cost effectively. Their downside is that they are worse against ranged cavalry and against anything that gets up close. They are an artillery unit.
If you revert the range change, skirms will be able to trade with abus and this is not acceptable considering the many downsides of the unit.

If Age3 abus are an issue your changes should make them more specialized, not less, and this change makes them closer to being just another skirm. Why not just nerf their HP?
Another option is increasing the cost of the veteran abus upgrade, since it has a second effect now.
Do you see anyone saying that the unit isn't supposed to counter ranged infantry?
It's the result of the change, so yes, indirectly, by arguing for it.
The idea that changing Abuse Gun range from that of the Skirmisher makes it more like a Skirmisher, while changing it to that of the Skirmisher makes it less like one, is interesting.
A concept being counter-intuitive doesn't stop you from understanding it, surely?
Surely not. That particular concept only tells me that you don't acknowledge the half of it that doesn't fit your narrative.

I see some arguing that the unit is too strong, in general; not that it shouldn't counter other ranged infantry. The result of reverting Abuse Range is a weaker unit—against artillery and cavalry even more so than ranged infantry.

Isn't adding range to the unit making it less specialized? Where is the sense in nerfing RoF—then buffing range—then nerfing hitpoints, only because you want the unit to do at least as well against ranged infantry?? Why not have Veteran Abuse Guns restore RoF, or buff the ranged resistance of the unit??? You seem to be making a case against yourself, which is a shame since the sentiment that the unit should trade well against other ranged infantry is perfectly sound.

Surely you aren't cherry picking the facts that are convenient, to you?

Ultimately, you confuse me.
User avatar
New Zealand zoom
Gendarme
Posts: 9314
Joined: Apr 26, 2015
ESO: Funnu
Location: New_Sweland

Re: Ottomans Discussion Thread

Post by zoom »

Hazza54321 wrote:Actually its more of a problem in 1v1
Oh. That's reassuring, then.
User avatar
New Zealand zoom
Gendarme
Posts: 9314
Joined: Apr 26, 2015
ESO: Funnu
Location: New_Sweland

Re: Ottomans Discussion Thread

Post by zoom »

Hazza54321 wrote:Zoi is too influenced by you so id assume youd have the same opinion. Regarding abus just so were clear you think abus should do even more damage vs cav and cannons currently?
I'm more easily influenced by people who offer constructive feedback with a minimum of patience. Still, I do my best to listen to everyone.
:flowers:

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