TC is like 5 musks

User avatar
No Flag Jaeger
Jaeger
Posts: 4492
Joined: Feb 28, 2015

TC is like 5 musks

Post by Jaeger »

I knew TC fire was strong, but I never realized how strong it actually is on paper. It does 90 damage, and a musk does approximately 20 damage; and I think the RoF for TC and musks is the same; so when you are being pushed and you have few units, you can remember that you have an invisible, invincible 4-5 musks constantly shooting at the enemy's army.

And 5 musks is a huge deal in 20 pop armies, so it's no wonder rushes do so bad sometimes.
last time i cryed was because i stood on Lego
No Flag deleted_user0
Ninja
Posts: 13004
Joined: Apr 28, 2020

Re: TC is like 5 musks

Post by deleted_user0 »

A musk does 23 dmg. So its almost exactly 4 musk worth of dps.

Tc fire is great if u only have 10v in there. More and they quickly become very expensibe 4 musks
User avatar
France [Armag] diarouga
Ninja
NWC LAN Gold
Posts: 12710
Joined: Feb 26, 2015
ESO: diarouga
Location: France

Re: TC is like 5 musks

Post by [Armag] diarouga »

Also you have minutemen, so it ends up being 10 musks, so yea, rush are meant to be bad in this game.
User avatar
No Flag Jaeger
Jaeger
Posts: 4492
Joined: Feb 28, 2015

Re: TC is like 5 musks

Post by Jaeger »

[Armag] diarouga wrote:Also you have minutemen, so it ends up being 10 musks, so yea, rush are meant to be bad in this game.

I guess rush is bad if the enemy is prepared for it, but is it bad if for example the enemy loses their explorer in age 1 and can't scout? Or for example if you do a hidden fb at the edge of the map? I feel like the meta has been getting greedier and greedier, because "a little more greedy" beats "a little less greedy". But at a point doesn't "very greedy" lose to rush?
last time i cryed was because i stood on Lego
User avatar
France [Armag] diarouga
Ninja
NWC LAN Gold
Posts: 12710
Joined: Feb 26, 2015
ESO: diarouga
Location: France

Re: TC is like 5 musks

Post by [Armag] diarouga »

ovi12 wrote:
[Armag] diarouga wrote:Also you have minutemen, so it ends up being 10 musks, so yea, rush are meant to be bad in this game.

I guess rush is bad if the enemy is prepared for it, but is it bad if for example the enemy loses their explorer in age 1 and can't scout? Or for example if you do a hidden fb at the edge of the map? I feel like the meta has been getting greedier and greedier, because "a little more greedy" beats "a little less greedy". But at a point doesn't "very greedy" lose to rush?

It does, but you can always adapt, so when you rush you have to hope your opponent doesn't scout, else you lose.
That's how it works in every RTS game, rush is only meant to work as a surprise. Unfortunately, since aoe3 is a bad RTS, it's too easy to scout. Thus, to win with a rush, you have to hope your opponent makes a mistake and loses his explorer/doesn't scout.
Furthermore, in aoe3 civs are specialized, so civs like Russia have to rush, else they auto lose, and some civs like Dutch can't really rush. That's the reason we're in a stale meta. That's not because of maps, it's because of the game design. TCs are too strong, and civs don't have options because of how valuable shipments are, and because you don't have a lot options.

It's a bit of topic but I'm going to list the reasons why you don't have options in aoe3, while you do in sc2.

1) In aoe3 you can train 5 units per batch, a rax costs 200w and a TC costs 500w on the EP. In sc2 you can only try 1 unit per batch (without reactors), a rax costs 150 minerals, and a CC 400 minerals. No need to explain why building CCs is a must on sc2, while it isn't viable in 1v1 on aoe3... Thus, you can invest into eco in sc2, while in aoe3, only Ports/Brit/Jap can manage their eco

2) In sc2, you can't put gatherers in your TC. As a result, it's very common to see rushes ending the game at 3 min because all the workers were killed, or drops killing 20 workers (even at pro level). That's why in sc2 agressive options are available, while in aoe3 they're not since the TC shuts them down.

3) In sc2 you can only have 22 scvs gathering from a base, while on aoe3 it doesn't matter, you can have 80 vills and one TC because they can gather in the middle of the map, and don't need to drop the resources at a TC. That's why map control is a bit dumb in aoe3, and also why you don't have an incentive to make more TCs.

4) Finally, each civ has less units in aoe3, and only has one or two unit composition, and upgrades are shit in aoe3.

I think that the reason why aoe3 is so awkward is that vills don't have to drop resources at a TC actually. Imagine if you had to and TCs weren't so op, then you would have to build more TCs to get a decent eco, but on the other hand you would be very vulnerable to rushes, and the game would be a lot more interesting.
User avatar
No Flag Jaeger
Jaeger
Posts: 4492
Joined: Feb 28, 2015

Re: TC is like 5 musks

Post by Jaeger »

[Armag] diarouga wrote:
ovi12 wrote:
[Armag] diarouga wrote:Also you have minutemen, so it ends up being 10 musks, so yea, rush are meant to be bad in this game.

I guess rush is bad if the enemy is prepared for it, but is it bad if for example the enemy loses their explorer in age 1 and can't scout? Or for example if you do a hidden fb at the edge of the map? I feel like the meta has been getting greedier and greedier, because "a little more greedy" beats "a little less greedy". But at a point doesn't "very greedy" lose to rush?

It does, but you can always adapt, so when you rush you have to hope your opponent doesn't scout, else you lose.
That's how it works in every RTS game, rush is only meant to work as a surprise. Unfortunately, since aoe3 is a bad RTS, it's too easy to scout. Thus, to win with a rush, you have to hope your opponent makes a mistake and loses his explorer/doesn't scout.
Furthermore, in aoe3 civs are specialized, so civs like Russia have to rush, else they auto lose, and some civs like Dutch can't really rush. That's the reason we're in a stale meta. That's not because of maps, it's because of the game design. TCs are too strong, and civs don't have options because of how valuable shipments are, and because you don't have a lot options.

It's a bit of topic but I'm going to list the reasons why you don't have options in aoe3, while you do in sc2.

1) In aoe3 you can train 5 units per batch, a rax costs 200w and a TC costs 500w on the EP. In sc2 you can only try 1 unit per batch (without reactors), a rax costs 150 minerals, and a CC 400 minerals. No need to explain why building CCs is a must on sc2, while it isn't viable in 1v1 on aoe3... Thus, you can invest into eco in sc2, while in aoe3, only Ports/Brit/Jap can manage their eco

2) In sc2, you can't put gatherers in your TC. As a result, it's very common to see rushes ending the game at 3 min because all the workers were killed, or drops killing 20 workers (even at pro level). That's why in sc2 agressive options are available, while in aoe3 they're not since the TC shuts them down.

3) In sc2 you can only have 22 scvs gathering from a base, while on aoe3 it doesn't matter, you can have 80 vills and one TC because they can gather in the middle of the map, and don't need to drop the resources at a TC. That's why map control is a bit dumb in aoe3, and also why you don't have an incentive to make more TCs.

4) Finally, each civ has less units in aoe3, and only has one or two unit composition, and upgrades are shit in aoe3.

I think that the reason why aoe3 is so awkward is that vills don't have to drop resources at a TC actually. Imagine if you had to and TCs weren't so op, then you would have to build more TCs to get a decent eco, but on the other hand you would be very vulnerable to rushes, and the game would be a lot more interesting.


Well that's true for land maps I guess but don't water maps give more civs the opportunity to boom, like Russia?
last time i cryed was because i stood on Lego
User avatar
France [Armag] diarouga
Ninja
NWC LAN Gold
Posts: 12710
Joined: Feb 26, 2015
ESO: diarouga
Location: France

Re: TC is like 5 musks

Post by [Armag] diarouga »

ovi12 wrote:
[Armag] diarouga wrote:
Show hidden quotes

It does, but you can always adapt, so when you rush you have to hope your opponent doesn't scout, else you lose.
That's how it works in every RTS game, rush is only meant to work as a surprise. Unfortunately, since aoe3 is a bad RTS, it's too easy to scout. Thus, to win with a rush, you have to hope your opponent makes a mistake and loses his explorer/doesn't scout.
Furthermore, in aoe3 civs are specialized, so civs like Russia have to rush, else they auto lose, and some civs like Dutch can't really rush. That's the reason we're in a stale meta. That's not because of maps, it's because of the game design. TCs are too strong, and civs don't have options because of how valuable shipments are, and because you don't have a lot options.

It's a bit of topic but I'm going to list the reasons why you don't have options in aoe3, while you do in sc2.

1) In aoe3 you can train 5 units per batch, a rax costs 200w and a TC costs 500w on the EP. In sc2 you can only try 1 unit per batch (without reactors), a rax costs 150 minerals, and a CC 400 minerals. No need to explain why building CCs is a must on sc2, while it isn't viable in 1v1 on aoe3... Thus, you can invest into eco in sc2, while in aoe3, only Ports/Brit/Jap can manage their eco

2) In sc2, you can't put gatherers in your TC. As a result, it's very common to see rushes ending the game at 3 min because all the workers were killed, or drops killing 20 workers (even at pro level). That's why in sc2 agressive options are available, while in aoe3 they're not since the TC shuts them down.

3) In sc2 you can only have 22 scvs gathering from a base, while on aoe3 it doesn't matter, you can have 80 vills and one TC because they can gather in the middle of the map, and don't need to drop the resources at a TC. That's why map control is a bit dumb in aoe3, and also why you don't have an incentive to make more TCs.

4) Finally, each civ has less units in aoe3, and only has one or two unit composition, and upgrades are shit in aoe3.

I think that the reason why aoe3 is so awkward is that vills don't have to drop resources at a TC actually. Imagine if you had to and TCs weren't so op, then you would have to build more TCs to get a decent eco, but on the other hand you would be very vulnerable to rushes, and the game would be a lot more interesting.


Well that's true for land maps I guess but don't water maps give more civs the opportunity to boom, like Russia?

Water maps are awkward because if you lose the sea you can't get it back. Also when you go for a sea boom you have to commit and it's not a RTS game anymore, rather a guy walling and going nr10 while his opponent either tries to contest the sea or booms hard to win in late game.
It's surely a nice alternative which provides fun/interesting games, but it goes against the concepts of RTS games.
User avatar
Germany yemshi
Jaeger
Posts: 2311
Joined: Jun 3, 2015
ESO: yemshi
Location: Germany

Re: TC is like 5 musks

  • Quote

Post by yemshi »

Could you tell me why you even play aoe3 if literally any rts does everything better in your opinion?
User avatar
France [Armag] diarouga
Ninja
NWC LAN Gold
Posts: 12710
Joined: Feb 26, 2015
ESO: diarouga
Location: France

Re: TC is like 5 musks

Post by [Armag] diarouga »

I don't play aoe3 anymore.
User avatar
China fei123456
Jaeger
Posts: 3283
Joined: Apr 23, 2015
ESO: fei123456
Location: Alderaan

Re: TC is like 5 musks

Post by fei123456 »

you temporarily lose 10 vills while your TC fires. and it may be 10+. and your vills have to walk in and out, the bison decay.
TC is not strong as you imagine, that's why iro otto india are OP in RE.
User avatar
France [Armag] diarouga
Ninja
NWC LAN Gold
Posts: 12710
Joined: Feb 26, 2015
ESO: diarouga
Location: France

Re: TC is like 5 musks

Post by [Armag] diarouga »

fei123456 wrote:you temporarily lose 10 vills while your TC fires. and it may be 10+. and your vills have to walk in and out, the bison decay.
TC is not strong as you imagine, that's why iro otto india are OP in RE.

Of course TC is strong. The reason Iro/Otto/India are op on no hunt maps is because they prevent you from gathering food, and since your hunts are far, they can snipe vills, and go back when you put vills in your TC or send mm.
If you could move your TC to the next hunt, these civs wouldn't be nearly as strong (well Iro still would because rushing isn't the right way anyway).
User avatar
China fei123456
Jaeger
Posts: 3283
Joined: Apr 23, 2015
ESO: fei123456
Location: Alderaan

Re: TC is like 5 musks

Post by fei123456 »

these civs are still top tier even if you play on ESOC maps. rush isn't the only reason.
tc+8xbow+6mm can beat 4 kanya 7 aenna etc, but you can't beat a 50+ infantry timing push with upgrades.
User avatar
France [Armag] diarouga
Ninja
NWC LAN Gold
Posts: 12710
Joined: Feb 26, 2015
ESO: diarouga
Location: France

Re: TC is like 5 musks

Post by [Armag] diarouga »

fei123456 wrote:these civs are still top tier even if you play on ESOC maps. rush isn't the only reason.
tc+8xbow+6mm can beat 4 kanya 7 aenna etc, but you can't beat a 50+ infantry timing push with upgrades.

Yes, these civs are decent, but not because of the rush, because rush sucks thanks to the TC. Thus, the "TC is too strong" argument is still valid, RE Iro wins because they outmass, that's it.
User avatar
China fei123456
Jaeger
Posts: 3283
Joined: Apr 23, 2015
ESO: fei123456
Location: Alderaan

Re: TC is like 5 musks

Post by fei123456 »

[Armag] diarouga wrote:
fei123456 wrote:these civs are still top tier even if you play on ESOC maps. rush isn't the only reason.
tc+8xbow+6mm can beat 4 kanya 7 aenna etc, but you can't beat a 50+ infantry timing push with upgrades.

Yes, these civs are decent, but not because of the rush, because rush sucks thanks to the TC. Thus, the "TC is too strong" argument is still valid, RE Iro wins because they outmass, that's it.

you shouldn't define "rush" as "no eco no brain 1z2z all in". map control is a part of them.
even if you do have some food in base, they can still do TPboom and send unit upgrades to outmass you. TC and minutemen are strong against early rush, but they don't really hold a timing push.
User avatar
Italy Garja
Retired Contributor
Donator 02
Posts: 9729
Joined: Feb 11, 2015
ESO: Garja

Re: TC is like 5 musks

Post by Garja »

Ye the contain part is what makes rush legit in AOE3. In fact in AOE3 there is only a soft strat counter system (rush > boom > turtle > rush). In general colo play and adapt from there (rush, boom or age up) is the dominant strat.

TC and minutemen (and building restriction radius) are the asnwer to very hard rushes in AOE3. And that's cause vills, rush distance and other defensive buildings aren't a good deterrant as in other games.
Image Image Image
User avatar
France Rikikipu
Retired Contributor
Posts: 1679
Joined: Feb 27, 2015
ESO: p-of
Location: In your base

Re: TC is like 5 musks

Post by Rikikipu »

I agree with everything about diarouga said about TCs.

Water maps are awkward because if you lose the sea you can't get it back. Also when you go for a sea boom you have to commit and it's not a RTS game anymore, rather a guy walling and going nr10 while his opponent either tries to contest the sea or booms hard to win in late game.


I would say though that thanks to EP water changes, you don't need to commit entirely on water anymore. We see more and more people doing some (~ around 10/15) fishing boats to boost their eco.
User avatar
France [Armag] diarouga
Ninja
NWC LAN Gold
Posts: 12710
Joined: Feb 26, 2015
ESO: diarouga
Location: France

Re: TC is like 5 musks

Post by [Armag] diarouga »

That's the aim of the EP change, but that's not how it works in practice.
If you make 10 boats (from 1 dock), that's 700w or something. It means that, unless you're otto, you're going to lose the map, and potentially the TP line, and that you're going to be defending the whole game.

Basically, it means that you're going to invest in eco early on, and then try to defend to survive the next 10 min, using the TC which should hold any push which doesn't involve artillery. All in all, it's still one guy booming, and the other having to boom as well because commiting isn't possible.
And this is not just the EP and the EP maps, it's the design of the game: you shouldn't kill your opponents without siege units, and it's also how it works in aoe2, but it's not awkward there because siege is easy to get, and the economy is balanced.
No Flag deleted_user
Ninja
Posts: 14364
Joined: Mar 26, 2015

Re: TC is like 5 musks

  • Quote

Post by deleted_user »

I wish you disliked AoE3 as much as you say you do.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 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