ESOCommunity

This thread is a derivative of LordRaphael's farewell thread, where there was some good discussion about the balance of walls and water in the wake of Raphael's loss to kynesie in the semi-finals of the Autumn Championship 2018.

I've split them so as to keep Raphael's goodbyes and the balance discussion nice and neat. All discussion of water and walls should be kept to this thread, please!

Mitoe wrote:no



Edit: but can you be more specific about what style of AoE you don't like before you disappear off the face the Earth? Just curious.

no, what ?
oh the walling style obviously not just because i lost to kynesie, whos imo not even a top 8 player, i played so terrible that series, and those 2 games i won it felt like i was playing a capt. And nowadays you see this style on every level which is incredible sad and i consider it to be aoes swarmhost problem ( for those that know what i mean)

Walls should be enabled in age 3 only id even move the stone upgrade to age 4. Aoe 3 is unlike aoc not made for heavy turtle play ( i think mainly because civs are much more different compared to aoe and because of the card system which allows for some pretty lame play to be made ( like the advanced dock plus coastal defense shit is just broken and theres obviously more) it makes games very dull to play and id say to watch aswell.
docks should not shoot anymore with boats in it. Its already enough that you can garrison them.
outposts should get real attack vs boats again ( its so frustrating when they gather like nothing happening while 5 towers stand next to them.

also the semi ff meta really is not that entertaining and i know im one of the guys that plays it like that, but back in the day i was actually known for a pretty agressive playstyle, which is not really possible anymore.

yeah i think if u dont semi ff youre pretty much put yourself behind in most situations

if you think about it, how do fishing boats shoot cannon balls once they're inside the dock

Time to nerf age fast

lordraphael wrote:

Mitoe wrote:no



Edit: but can you be more specific about what style of AoE you don't like before you disappear off the face the Earth? Just curious.

no, what ?
oh the walling style obviously not just because i lost to kynesie, whos imo not even a top 8 player, i played so terrible that series, and those 2 games i won it felt like i was playing a capt. And nowadays you see this style on every level which is incredible sad and i consider it to be aoes swarmhost problem ( for those that know what i mean)

Walls should be enabled in age 3 only id even move the stone upgrade to age 4. Aoe 3 is unlike aoc not made for heavy turtle play ( i think mainly because civs are much more different compared to aoe and because of the card system which allows for some pretty lame play to be made ( like the advanced dock plus coastal defense shit is just broken and theres obviously more) it makes games very dull to play and id say to watch aswell.
docks should not shoot anymore with boats in it. Its already enough that you can garrison them.
outposts should get real attack vs boats again ( its so frustrating when they gather like nothing happening while 5 towers stand next to them.

also the semi ff meta really is not that entertaining and i know im one of the guys that plays it like that, but back in the day i was actually known for a pretty agressive playstyle, which is not really possible anymore.

Preach it brotha

lordraphael wrote:

Mitoe wrote:no



Edit: but can you be more specific about what style of AoE you don't like before you disappear off the face the Earth? Just curious.

no, what ?
oh the walling style obviously not just because i lost to kynesie, whos imo not even a top 8 player, i played so terrible that series, and those 2 games i won it felt like i was playing a capt. And nowadays you see this style on every level which is incredible sad and i consider it to be aoes swarmhost problem ( for those that know what i mean)

I think saying this is a little bit arrogant, to be honest.

If you are truly better than Keynesie (let's say an ELO-skill margin of 100 equivalent), then you should have a ~65% probability of beating him in any one game.

Therefore, the probability that you lost to Keynesie even though you're better than him is about ~13%. This is even lower factoring in your 4-2 loss (rather than, for example, 4-2). It seems that, mathematically speaking, you are at-best on par with Keynesie but likely worse. Unless you have any strong evidence to suggest otherwise, I'm not sure why you need to flame somebody who beat you fair-and-square.

advanced dock is a joke card tho tbh XD

100% attack increase
+3 range
33% faster warship training
100% faster ship healing.

its basically 2-3 cards in one.


Strangely enough, the german advanced dock is different, it's more like how all advanced docks should be.

umeu wrote:advanced dock is a joke card tho tbh XD

100% attack increase
+3 range
100% faster warship training
100% faster ship healing.

its basically 3 cards in one.


Strangely enough, the german advanced dock is different, it's more like how all advanced docks should be.

Yes, but there was nothing stopping Lord from playing that card as well.

that's irrelevant. that card basically makes it impossible to be agressive vs water with ships. warships make it impossible to be aggressive vs water from land. meaning you basically can't contest water with most civs. thats a huge balance problem. instead of dealing with this... ESOC has focused on schooners... which was never really a problem anyway. They "nerfed" it, even though its more like a buff, at least it is for TAD civs. really buffing culvs and nerfing monitors is too fringe and euro centered anyway.

umeu wrote:that's irrelevant. that card basically makes it impossible to be agressive vs water with ships. warships make it impossible to be aggressive vs water from land. meaning you basically can't contest water with most civs. thats a huge balance problem. instead of dealing with this... ESOC has focused on schooners... which was never really a problem anyway. They "nerfed" it, even though its more like a buff, at least it is for TAD civs. really buffing culvs and nerfing monitors is too fringe and euro centered anyway.

Sure, that's a balance issue then, but both games in question were a port mirror so you can't say that Keynesie had any kind of unfair advantage.

VooDoo_BoSs wrote:I think saying this is a little bit arrogant, to be honest.

If you are truly better than Keynesie (let's say an ELO-skill margin of 100 equivalent), then you should have a ~65% probability of beating him in any one game.

Therefore, the probability that you lost to Keynesie even though you're better than him is about ~13%. This is even lower factoring in your 4-2 loss (rather than, for example, 4-2). It seems that, mathematically speaking, you are at-best on par with Keynesie but likely worse. Unless you have any strong evidence to suggest otherwise, I'm not sure why you need to flame somebody who beat you fair-and-square.

You can't draw conclusions (let alone making stats) on one series lol, not only because it's just a few games, but also cause there's a lot of psychological factors to take into account

Mitoe wrote:no



Edit: but can you be more specific about what style of AoE you don't like before you disappear off the face the Earth? Just curious.

Obviously the one he just lost to

Interjection wrote::hmm: I'd personally like to see a few changes to spice up the dead politicians

Nerfing The Exiled Prince would be a great start. I've been saying this since 2011, though.

VooDoo_BoSs wrote:

lordraphael wrote:

Mitoe wrote:no



Edit: but can you be more specific about what style of AoE you don't like before you disappear off the face the Earth? Just curious.

no, what ?
oh the walling style obviously not just because i lost to kynesie, whos imo not even a top 8 player, i played so terrible that series, and those 2 games i won it felt like i was playing a capt. And nowadays you see this style on every level which is incredible sad and i consider it to be aoes swarmhost problem ( for those that know what i mean)

I think saying this is a little bit arrogant, to be honest.

If you are truly better than Keynesie (let's say an ELO-skill margin of 100 equivalent), then you should have a ~65% probability of beating him in any one game.

Therefore, the probability that you lost to Keynesie even though you're better than him is about ~13%. This is even lower factoring in your 4-2 loss (rather than, for example, 4-2). It seems that, mathematically speaking, you are at-best on par with Keynesie but likely worse. Unless you have any strong evidence to suggest otherwise, I'm not sure why you need to flame somebody who beat you fair-and-square.

Rafu is easily the better player of the two, overall. He underperformed in that series.

Kaiserklein wrote:

VooDoo_BoSs wrote:I think saying this is a little bit arrogant, to be honest.

If you are truly better than Keynesie (let's say an ELO-skill margin of 100 equivalent), then you should have a ~65% probability of beating him in any one game.

Therefore, the probability that you lost to Keynesie even though you're better than him is about ~13%. This is even lower factoring in your 4-2 loss (rather than, for example, 4-2). It seems that, mathematically speaking, you are at-best on par with Keynesie but likely worse. Unless you have any strong evidence to suggest otherwise, I'm not sure why you need to flame somebody who beat you fair-and-square.

You can't draw conclusions (let alone making stats) on one series lol, not only because it's just a few games, but also cause there's a lot of psychological factors to take into account

I'm not drawing conclusions - on the contrary, I'm saying there is no evidence to support Lord Raphael's conclusion that he is better than Kynesie. I did not say that I am confident that Kynesie is better, though said if we HAD to draw a conclusion based on the latest evidence (this series), then that would have to be it.

There is plenty of evidence to support Rafu being better than Kynesie. However, there is only a single piece of evidence to the contrary.

Who cares if kynesie is the best player on earth or not. That playstyle is straight up cancerous and I personally too would have zero interest in playing the game if that was more than 10% of the games I played. To me, Kynesie has proven that it is a legitemate style to play on water maps at least. He has also proven to me that it will always be a boring style that I dont want to watch or play against.

I hope EP wipes walls out of existance.

umeu wrote:that's irrelevant. that card basically makes it impossible to be agressive vs water with ships. warships make it impossible to be aggressive vs water from land. meaning you basically can't contest water with most civs. thats a huge balance problem. instead of dealing with this... ESOC has focused on schooners... which was never really a problem anyway. They "nerfed" it, even though its more like a buff, at least it is for TAD civs. really buffing culvs and nerfing monitors is too fringe and euro centered anyway.

i actually had a strat prepared against ports but i knew if he send advanced docks it would be an auto win for him

I think it's pretty obvious that Raphael is the better overall player(not by as much as many people act like though) but kynesie is the less tilty player, which can be a huge advantage especially since losing a long game can be pretty frustrating

Kid's got everyone by the balls psychologically

Let's compare docks and tcs:

Dock:
- costs 200w
- no build limit in any age
- can reach 600 anti ship attack with 10 boats inside and 2 cards (coastal defences + advanced docks). In other words, it will kill a caravel (400 res) with the 50% hp upgrade in 2 shots, or kill an unupgraded galley (400 res) in 1 shot

TC:
- costs 500w
- build limit of only 1 in colo / 3 later
- can reach 180 ranged attack with 10 vils inside and 2 cards (assuming you would be able to ship CM twice, for the sake of the comparison). In other words, it will kill sepoys/ashis (120 res) in one shot, or hussars (200 res) in 3 shots

So can we nerf docks and/or their cards already? It's just absurd right now. Basically if you have an upgraded dock with 10 boats inside, there's no way warships can break it, unless you have a mass of upgraded warships or something (btw, in fort with the arsenal upgrade, docks get another 150 attack...). If you also have warships yourself, then land units also can't get that dock down. Even monitors have a 0.1 multiplier vs docks. So how do you destroy these docks, besides massing artillery (which won't punish the water boom)?


Now walls. Like I mentioned in another thread already, why can walls have their hp upgraded by 400% in colonial? Obviously we halved the hp of walls so that people can't simply camp without any units. But it's still possible because the bastion upgrade has in fact been buffed to make up for the wall hp nerf! The only point where walls need so much hp is super late game, so you shouldn't be able to research such a broken upgrade until age 4 or 5... Just turn bastion into a cheaper and weaker upgrade, available in fortress, and add another wall upgrade for late game.


Kynesie basically won with ports+water 2x (by abusing docks) and with jap 2x (by abusing walls). We need to change these broken mechanics.

also don't forget u can't monitor docks XD the special monitor shot does like 200 dmg to docks LMAO

Yea I mentioned that

Kaiserklein wrote:Let's compare docks and tcs:

Dock:
- costs 200w
- no build limit in any age
- can reach 600 anti ship attack with 10 boats inside and 2 cards (coastal defences + advanced docks). In other words, it will kill a caravel (400 res) with the 50% hp upgrade in 2 shots, or kill an unupgraded galley (400 res) in 1 shot

TC:
- costs 500w
- build limit of only 1 in colo / 3 later
- can reach 180 ranged attack with 10 vils inside and 2 cards (assuming you would be able to ship CM twice, for the sake of the comparison). In other words, it will kill sepoys/ashis (120 res) in one shot, or hussars (200 res) in 3 shots

So can we nerf docks and/or their cards already? It's just absurd right now. Basically if you have an upgraded dock with 10 boats inside, there's no way warships can break it, unless you have a mass of upgraded warships or something (btw, in fort with the arsenal upgrade, docks get another 150 attack...). If you also have warships yourself, then land units also can't get that dock down. Even monitors have a 0.1 multiplier vs docks. So how do you destroy these docks, besides massing artillery (which won't punish the water boom)?

do docks really need to be nerfed? i may be missing something because i haven't watched all of kynesie's series', but isn't the only match we've seen them sent in the game vs rapha on manchuria? do we really need to nerf docks because of 1 game?

Now walls. Like I mentioned in another thread already, why can walls have their hp upgraded by 400% in colonial? Obviously we halved the hp of walls so that people can't simply camp without any units. But it's still possible because the bastion upgrade has in fact been buffed to make up for the wall hp nerf! The only point where walls need so much hp is super late game, so you shouldn't be able to research such a broken upgrade until age 4 or 5... Just turn bastion into a cheaper and weaker upgrade, available in fortress, and add another wall upgrade for late game.

100% agree that walls can be changed. i would say keep the 400w 600c cost, and make bastion give them up to 5000 hp (266% or w/e). then the remaining 2500 hp can be granted as a shadow tech upon hitting imperial age