[Top 8] Most random EP changes

[gamevideo113]

#EPLOGIC

[Hazza54321]

Shoulda been a top 10 list with the warhut politician and banner army changes

[I_HaRRiiSoN_I]

I feel EP 8.2 could review progress so far on some of the changes made. Overall it has been positive.

What has been positive ?

if you want me to list all of the bugs and balance changes which i think are positive its going to be a long list, are you sure you want me to copy and paste such a long list?

[vividlyplain]

rekt

[[Armag] diarouga]

Agreed on karni mata teepee, but @[Armag] diarouga, not everything works as planned.
What do you say about Mongolian army and black flag army?

I don't even know the changes.

[[Armag] diarouga]

I feel EP 8.2 could review progress so far on some of the changes made. Overall it has been positive.

What has been positive ?

if you want me to list all of the bugs and balance changes which i think are positive its going to be a long list, are you sure you want me to copy and paste such a long list?

I thought you were talking about EP8, in which case I genuinely what the positive changes are.

[princeofcarthage]

I feel EP 8.2 could review progress so far on some of the changes made. Overall it has been positive.

What has been positive ?

if you want me to list all of the bugs and balance changes which i think are positive its going to be a long list, are you sure you want me to copy and paste such a long list?

I don't remember which but few these bug fixes changed game very much as they had been part of meta and/or gameplay for 10+ years. I am not sure at that point if it is balance change or just simple bug fix.

[Garja]

Advanced dock was nerfed by EP not the other way around.
AK were buffed to make them a sort of recurrent/viable. Range nerf doesn't make much sense, culvs also destroy artillery so should AK (and they don't as well because they're infantry).

[Le Hussard sur le toit]

You forgot the "bug fix" on Japan's deck checking.

[[Armag] diarouga]

Advanced dock was nerfed by EP not the other way around.
AK were buffed to make them a sort of recurrent/viable. Range nerf doesn't make much sense, culvs also destroy artillery so should AK (and they don't as well because they're infantry).

AK were buffed to make them more viable but the nerf is just bigger than the buff in a standard 1v1 game now lol.
So what's the logic ? The unit is bad so you buff it, but then it's good so you nerf it again and it's worse than before the buff xD.

[[Armag] diarouga]

You forgot the "bug fix" on Japan's deck checking.

Yea, should have added that to the list.

[Zutazuta]

You forgot the "bug fix" on Japan's deck checking.

Yea, should have added that to the list.

I'm in this picture and I don't like it!

[Zeke]

You forgot the "bug fix" on Japan's deck checking.

Tbf this should be a bug, as you can't scout the deck of other civs

[dansil92]

Arrow knights should just get like 6x vs artillery and revert pop and range. Maybe change the 6AK ship to 7 or whatever. Idk they're garbage units anyway

[Garja]

AK need to be 1 pop do be any viable. With 2 pop you get some of them and then they're a liability forever.

[Mitoe]

#2 : They were better before in 1v1 games. You're not going to make more than 5-10 of them, so it's just 100/200w (ie 2-3 maces). The 2 range however is just much more important when you want to trade 5 arrow knights for 2 falcs defended by a skirm mass, especially when you can only train 5 units per batch.
The pop change was broken in team games, yes, and I remember that 2v2 we played, but a smart person would have reverted "random buffs" instead of nerfing the unit range.
Fortunately, the arrow knight change is not too relevant but I still believe that it's the 2nd most random EP change. Buffing a unit and nerfing it instead of reverting the change is just retarded.
Finally, we got rekt because Japan/Aztec is an insane combo in late game. Japan goes pure yumi with flaming arrows while aztec goes ark/erk to deny cav/artillery which are the only counters to yumi/arrows.

I honestly cannot agree with you on this. 28 range is still huge, and you cannot pick off Arrow Knights easily at all with skirmishers or anything of the sort. I think you jump to conclusions very quickly sometimes, and I really doubt you have enough experience to say that 28 range down from 30 makes the unit useless when it was so good before.

[Mitoe]

Advanced dock was nerfed by EP not the other way around.
AK were buffed to make them a sort of recurrent/viable. Range nerf doesn't make much sense, culvs also destroy artillery so should AK (and they don't as well because they're infantry).

The problem isn't that culvs destroy artillery and AK don't, the problem is that culvs have a counter unit (other culvs) and AK do not. What's easier, trying to focus down 8-10 Arrow Knights with units that have no multipliers vs them or trying to pick off 1 or 2 culvs with culvs or goons of your own?

[Garja]

Cannons themselves do decent vs AK. Also I guess it's the advantage of being infantry.

[[Armag] diarouga]

#2 : They were better before in 1v1 games. You're not going to make more than 5-10 of them, so it's just 100/200w (ie 2-3 maces). The 2 range however is just much more important when you want to trade 5 arrow knights for 2 falcs defended by a skirm mass, especially when you can only train 5 units per batch.
The pop change was broken in team games, yes, and I remember that 2v2 we played, but a smart person would have reverted "random buffs" instead of nerfing the unit range.
Fortunately, the arrow knight change is not too relevant but I still believe that it's the 2nd most random EP change. Buffing a unit and nerfing it instead of reverting the change is just retarded.
Finally, we got rekt because Japan/Aztec is an insane combo in late game. Japan goes pure yumi with flaming arrows while aztec goes ark/erk to deny cav/artillery which are the only counters to yumi/arrows.

I honestly cannot agree with you on this. 28 range is still huge, and you cannot pick off Arrow Knights easily at all with skirmishers or anything of the sort. I think you jump to conclusions very quickly sometimes

28 range is just 2 more than falcs, so if you have your skirms in front of your falcs you can easily snipe the arrow knights. I guess you haven't trained ark since the nerf and you jumped to conclusions without testing.

and I really doubt you have enough experience to say that 28 range down from 30 makes the unit useless when it was so good before

That's no what I said lol, nice straw man fallacy. 1 pop 30 range ark were too good in some specific situations in team games. In 1v1, they were just fine so it's not like they were "so good before". And 28 doesn't "make the unit useless", it makes it bad. You still need to train ark to counter artillery because you don't have a good cav/ranged cav unit against artillery, but ark are worse than before.

I'm not jumping quickly to conclusions, just saying that ark were considered to be bad (and that's why they got buffed in the first place) and now they're worse than before the buff in 1v1 xD. Don't you think that's an issue ? A unit is too weak so you nerf it

[Mitoe]

#2 : They were better before in 1v1 games. You're not going to make more than 5-10 of them, so it's just 100/200w (ie 2-3 maces). The 2 range however is just much more important when you want to trade 5 arrow knights for 2 falcs defended by a skirm mass, especially when you can only train 5 units per batch.
The pop change was broken in team games, yes, and I remember that 2v2 we played, but a smart person would have reverted "random buffs" instead of nerfing the unit range.
Fortunately, the arrow knight change is not too relevant but I still believe that it's the 2nd most random EP change. Buffing a unit and nerfing it instead of reverting the change is just retarded.
Finally, we got rekt because Japan/Aztec is an insane combo in late game. Japan goes pure yumi with flaming arrows while aztec goes ark/erk to deny cav/artillery which are the only counters to yumi/arrows.

I honestly cannot agree with you on this. 28 range is still huge, and you cannot pick off Arrow Knights easily at all with skirmishers or anything of the sort. I think you jump to conclusions very quickly sometimes

28 range is just 2 more than falcs, so if you have your skirms in front of your falcs you can easily snipe the arrow knights. I guess you haven't trained ark since the nerf and you jumped to conclusions without testing.

and I really doubt you have enough experience to say that 28 range down from 30 makes the unit useless when it was so good before

That's no what I said lol, nice straw man fallacy. 1 pop 30 range ark were too good in some specific situations in team games. In 1v1, they were just fine so it's not like they were "so good before". And 28 doesn't "make the unit useless", it makes it bad. You still need to train ark to counter artillery because you don't have a good cav/ranged cav unit against artillery, but ark are worse than before.

I'm not jumping quickly to conclusions, just saying that ark were considered to be bad (and that's why they got buffed in the first place) and now they're worse than before the buff in 1v1 xD. Don't you think that's an issue ? A unit is too weak so you nerf it

I think Arrow Knights were bad because they crippled your unit composition. I think they're still quite good right now and I don't think anything really counters them very well. Aztec don't seem to have many issues vs artillery right now, especially given that Aztec now has another counter to cannons in the form of the Warchief.

I don't know what to say to you man. I think anyone can see from how angry you get about every single change no matter how large or how small that you jump to conclusions very quickly, especially given how rarely you play the game yourself--which is exactly the reason you yourself criticize Zoi. You claim he doesn't play the game, so it doesn't make sense for him to make changes, but then you rarely play either, and when you do it's for a week or so every few months, and usually only vs majors/captain or unrated games on forced matchups and maps vs decent players.

No matter what arguments you make you cannot be the sole authority on the game. You claim so many changes are random or unnecessary or have 0 thought process behind them, but a lot of them have very clear goals that you would recognize if you just thought about them for a few minutes instead of instantaneously posting about about shit they are. I am 100% with you on how overly complex some of the changes are. Mahouts need to function differently from Sowars? Hell no they don't. That's unnecessary I completely agree. But you seem to have equal rage available for the smallest of tweaks as well as the most ridiculous of changes.

[[Armag] diarouga]

The problem isn't that culvs destroy artillery and AK don't, the problem is that culvs have a counter unit (other culvs) and AK do not.

AK only counter artillery so them destroying artillery is the only thing that matters. If culvs didn't destroy artillery and didn't have a counter unit (ie didn't get countered by other culvs), they'd be super shit.

What's easier, trying to focus down 8-10 Arrow Knights with units that have no multipliers vs them or trying to pick off 1 or 2 culvs with culvs or goons of your own?

Killing 28 range AK is just much easier than sniping culvs lol.
In skirm/goon wars, 1 culv is often enough to hold 2 falcs (which is why some Dutch players go for a foundry and 1 culv vs Spain sometimes) because the culv only needs to shoot and then go back, and you can't snipe it with goons because of skirms.
With 4 28 range ark however (which are about as expensive as 1 culv), you need to wait for the shitty animation to start and then they take forever to kill the falcs. Honestly, with 4 28range ark against 2 falcs and some skirm, you probably lose all your ark without doing as much damage as a culv shot.
And even when you can get a big ark mass (which is super expensive btw), your maces/eagle take several canon shots before they die because ark take ages to kill a falc compared to culvs.

I think you just got frustrated after losing one game to ark, so you sneaked an ark nerf in the EP8.1.

[Mitoe]

I think you just got frustrated after losing one game to ark, so you sneaked an ark nerf in the EP8.1.
Image

I've played plenty of games vs arrow knights--just ask Lukas how many times I've played vs his Aztec FF/FI in the last few patches. Making artillery vs Aztec in age 3 & beyond is 100% pointless at the moment because of AK + Warchief. That's not good.

I'm not saying that 28 range is the best choice, either, but at 30 range with 4 speed and 1 pop they are far too good at countering artillery for a civ that already arguably has little issue with them IMO.

[[Armag] diarouga]

I don't know what to say to you man. I think anyone can see from how angry you get about every single change no matter how large or how small

Of course I get angry when you nerf a unit which was already weak, especially when you do that behind everybody's back. You have the right to think that ARK shouldn't have 30 range, and 28 is enough, but at least mention it so that we can have constructive dicussions about it, instead of sneaking the change in.
I agree with you regarding aoe3 and EP most of the time, and your suggestions are often well-thought but implementing changes without discussing it with anyone isn't right lol.

you jump to conclusions very quickly

Eh, you're the one who concluded that 30 range ark was an issue and that removing 2 range was better than reverting the buffs. You didn't even discuss the issue on the forums, it really feels like you got frustrated after losing a game.

especially given how rarely you play the game yourself--which is exactly the reason you yourself criticize Zoi

I've been playing a few games everyday for like 1 month now. I don't play 10 games a day sure, but I'm far from being inactive.

No matter what arguments you make you cannot be the sole authority on the game.

LOL. How dare you say that ? You asked Zoi to implement that change without discussing it on the forums. Basically, you decided that your authority was enough to decide 30 range ark were too strong. What do you expect ? You sneak in changes based on your sole experience and authority and I don't have the right to criticize them because them I'm arrogant, nice one.

[Mitoe]

I agree with you regarding aoe3 and EP most of the time, and your suggestions are often well-thought but implementing changes without discussing it with anyone isn't right lol.

. . .

No matter what arguments you make you cannot be the sole authority on the game.

LOL. How dare you say that ? You asked Zoi to implement that change without discussing it on the forums. Basically, you decided that your authority was enough to decide 30 range ark were too strong. What do you expect ? You sneak in changes based on your sole experience and authority and I don't have the right to criticize them because them I'm arrogant, nice one.

I think you assume I have more power than I do. I'm in the exact same boat as you or any other top player at the moment. Zoi asks me questions, I answer them. Or I talk through other suggestions with him. I would like to have a group of players to discuss these changes with but that's simply not how Zoi did EP this time around.

Zoi asked me about changes to India as a quick hotfix before the EPL, and if I thought there might be any other balance issues as well. I responded to him as best as I could in both regards, which included my concerns that AK might be too good. Some things he listened to or agreed with, others he didn't, or didn't think would be appropriate for such a short-notice change.

I'm not trying to force my own agenda onto the patch because I was angry about losing a game, 2v2 especially doesn't mean anything to me.

[[Armag] diarouga]

I think you just got frustrated after losing one game to ark, so you sneaked an ark nerf in the EP8.1.
Image

I've played plenty of games vs arrow knights--just ask Lukas how many times I've played vs his Aztec FF/FI in the last few patches. Making artillery vs Aztec in age 3 & beyond is 100% pointless at the moment because of AK + Warchief. That's not good.

With the cover mode bug fixed and the healing dance nerfed, WC just isn't good anymore.

I'm not saying that 28 range is the best choice, either, but at 30 range with 4 speed and 1 pop they are far too good at countering artillery for a civ that already arguably has little issue with them IMO.

Then if you don't think it's the best choice, why don't you let people suggest better changes ? As I said, it's fine if we disagree, but don't implement a questionable change without discussing it.