[Armag] diarouga wrote:Well, «whales don't matter in water games» «Russia is tier 1» «rams are good» «I would send schooners on GL» Just stop lol
"Whales aren't a factor in half the games that are played on maps featuring them." "Russians are a tier one civilization (out of two or three tiers in total) on non-TP maps." "Rams are good at sieging." "I would sometimes send Schooners on GL."
I think that is a more fair paraphrasing of what Garja said. What's more, to my understanding King-Ragu himself was banned for yet another infraction of site rules after multiple warnings in a short period of time. I very much doubt it's permanent as well...
Ahah thank you for taking the time to actually report the correct quotes. I couldn't be arsed to do that. I checked, and no Diargouga doesn't seem banned at the moment.
[Armag] diarouga wrote:Well, «whales don't matter in water games» «Russia is tier 1» «rams are good» «I would send schooners on GL» Just stop lol
"Whales aren't a factor in half the games that are played on maps featuring them." "Russians are a tier one civilization (out of two or three tiers in total) on non-TP maps." "Rams are good at sieging." "I would sometimes send Schooners on GL."
I think that is a more fair paraphrasing of what Garja said. What's more, to my understanding King-Ragu himself was banned for yet another infraction of site rules after multiple warnings in a short period of time. I very much doubt it's permanent as well...
Well he said «in half the games», that's still the same lol . He did not only said that they are tier 1 on non tp map, he also said that they are tier 1. After all, they beat fre/ger/sioux on the RE batch so why wouldn't they? He also said that rams are good. «Sometimes» ofc since not every civ has schooners, but still that's simply bad.
[Armag] diarouga wrote:Well, «whales don't matter in water games» «Russia is tier 1» «rams are good» «I would send schooners on GL» Just stop lol
"Whales aren't a factor in half the games that are played on maps featuring them." "Russians are a tier one civilization (out of two or three tiers in total) on non-TP maps." "Rams are good at sieging." "I would sometimes send Schooners on GL."
I think that is a more fair paraphrasing of what Garja said. What's more, to my understanding King-Ragu himself was banned for yet another infraction of site rules after multiple warnings in a short period of time. I very much doubt it's permanent as well...
Ahah thank you for taking the time to actually report the correct quotes. I couldn't be arsed to do that. I checked, and no Diargouga doesn't seem banned at the moment.
Garja wrote:That's simply not true. I could tell you just go watch the last 10k TAD games that you find between AS and the JP sitea nd you'll find like 100 instances of people sending schooners on GL. There isn't even an argument here. Anyone who played this game for atleast 3-4 years knows perfectly that spring GL is a water map and that water is key to control the map, on top of booming. Just because you ignore those things doesn't mean what I say is wrong or anything. You only admit you're wrong when you are exposed to the crude truth after claiming something and disregarding other opinions like you just did here. You should just accept that it is impossible for anyone to know the game perfectly so you cannot make claims like you do.
Now, back to the fuckin topic. Ruyter spam is a thing. There is no fuckin doubt about that. And yes, I saw people complaining about it already, which leads me to say that it can be considered as lame as laming goons, which is, again, something that I heard people complaining about.
Water is a key on gl, I totally agree but sending schooners is a waste. 1st you want to control the tps so atp>schooners 2nd no whales so you can t really boom, you can only make like 10 boats so you spend a shipment+600w to get 10unupgraded boats=>not worth at all. Lol, I admit I'm wrong when I think I am wrong, not when people think I am wrong. It s also funny to hear that from a guy who keeps saying that russia is tier 1 btw and that they beat fre, ger, sioux and can beat azzy on RE maps.
I'm not as good as you guys by any means, but I have to say diarouga's arguments here are just better — you can certainly find 100k games where something like a TC wagon is sent, but hell it doesn't mean it's any good lol
You could argue and counter argue both points extensively, really.
These blanket statements are littered with exceptions, I'm sure of that. Just take into account schooners on great lakes: it can be a card worth sending. Always? Maybe not. Does it have its place in meta? Probably, in some circumstances.
You could argue about it endlessly if you wanted to, since most often these statements are sometimes true, sometimes not. Those statements being true or not certainly depends on the meta as well.
We can do this for most things in AoE3, that's the beauty of the game, e.g. goodspeed's thread on Virginia Company.
Another good example is how India went from being one of the best civs (pre ESOC patch) to not a civ in the top tier (after ESOC patch). What is actually good compared to what is perceived as good is not often the same and that changes with maps and meta.
pecelot wrote:I'm not as good as you guys by any means, but I have to say diarouga's arguments here are just better — you can certainly find 100k games where something like a TC wagon is sent, but hell it doesn't mean it's any good lol
To be fair though you won't find any high level game where someone sends a TC wagon. If something is often done at high level, it means it's good. Or if it's bad, it means it used to be good and the meta changed I guess
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 ..
Ruyters work pretty well from a technical point of view if you know how not to overkill and micro with them. A 1pop dragoon with worse stats is a nice idea, but apart from that Ruyters are just stupid units, just like there are many stupid units in AoE3. Their plain name translates to "Rider" and it's a reference to the actually German historical "Reiters", which were so successful they became the role model cavalrymen of the 17th century. Their royal guard upgrade "Carabineers" refers to the elite Karabiniers. Are the shitty Ruyter stats appropriate to display that? I don't think so.
This unit is so unrelated to Dutch history because ES with their type case design only wanted to force that fancy unit idea of a 1pop cavalryman. In the next version of NE Dutchies will eventually get Dragoons. (RIP Ruyter)
well i never thought it was a good idea to send the TC wagon, only good thing is that you can start villager production >really< fast, which is like a few extra vills i guess (time it takes to train vills vs time it takes to build a TC?)
but even that should be bad, you should just build TC as soon as you age
so honestly i don't see TC wagon ever being good on paper, maybe some people know things i don't
TC wagon is ofc bad because it is just 600w+ some building time saved. It was just a bad comparison with the schooners on GL which is something totally viable depending on the situation.
Garja wrote:TC wagon is ofc bad because it is just 600w+ some building time saved. It was just a bad comparison with the schooners on GL which is something totally viable depending on the situation.
TC wagon is 600w compared to a 1000w shipment, that's enough to be bad. But also think that your tc wagon can be killed while going to where you want to place it. More importantly, even once it is placed, it doesn't build very fast so it can be sieged down easily (unlike for example a factory wagon) and then it's lost. If your explo is building a TC, and the TC gets sieged (happens quite frequently tbh), you will get some wood back. The TC wagon builds faster than the explo I guess, but you won't even train an extra vil with that.
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 ..
tilanus wrote:Ruyters work pretty well from a technical point of view if you know how not to overkill and micro with them. A 1pop dragoon with worse stats is a nice idea, but apart from that Ruyters are just stupid units, just like there are many stupid units in AoE3. Their plain name translates to "Rider" and it's a reference to the actually German historical "Reiters", which were so successful they became the role model cavalrymen of the 17th century. Their royal guard upgrade "Carabineers" refers to the elite Karabiniers. Are the shitty Ruyter stats appropriate to display that? I don't think so.
This unit is so unrelated to Dutch history because ES with their type case design only wanted to force that fancy unit idea of a 1pop cavalryman. In the next version of NE Dutchies will eventually get Dragoons. (RIP Ruyter)
Ruyter might not refer to german reiters though in the sense that ruyter is dutch for rider aswell. But yeah, gamedesign matters more in the end I guess. Itd have been better the other way around. For dutch's special unit to be a weaker but cheaper thing is kinda lame.
tilanus wrote:Ruyters work pretty well from a technical point of view if you know how not to overkill and micro with them. A 1pop dragoon with worse stats is a nice idea, but apart from that Ruyters are just stupid units, just like there are many stupid units in AoE3. Their plain name translates to "Rider" and it's a reference to the actually German historical "Reiters", which were so successful they became the role model cavalrymen of the 17th century. Their royal guard upgrade "Carabineers" refers to the elite Karabiniers. Are the shitty Ruyter stats appropriate to display that? I don't think so.
This unit is so unrelated to Dutch history because ES with their type case design only wanted to force that fancy unit idea of a 1pop cavalryman. In the next version of NE Dutchies will eventually get Dragoons. (RIP Ruyter)
Ruyter might not refer to german reiters though in the sense that ruyter is dutch for rider aswell. But yeah, gamedesign matters more in the end I guess. Itd have been better the other way around. For dutch's special unit to be a weaker but cheaper thing is kinda lame.
tilanus wrote:Ruyters work pretty well from a technical point of view if you know how not to overkill and micro with them. A 1pop dragoon with worse stats is a nice idea, but apart from that Ruyters are just stupid units, just like there are many stupid units in AoE3. Their plain name translates to "Rider" and it's a reference to the actually German historical "Reiters", which were so successful they became the role model cavalrymen of the 17th century. Their royal guard upgrade "Carabineers" refers to the elite Karabiniers. Are the shitty Ruyter stats appropriate to display that? I don't think so.
This unit is so unrelated to Dutch history because ES with their type case design only wanted to force that fancy unit idea of a 1pop cavalryman. In the next version of NE Dutchies will eventually get Dragoons. (RIP Ruyter)
Ruyter might not refer to german reiters though in the sense that ruyter is dutch for rider aswell. But yeah, gamedesign matters more in the end I guess. Itd have been better the other way around. For dutch's special unit to be a weaker but cheaper thing is kinda lame.
It's not lame at all. When you consider that they are cheaper than goons, cost mostly gold, and only take one pop slot, they are an incredibly cost-efficient unit. Just because a unit is weak does not mean it is bad - just look at strelets.
i never thought it was a good idea to send the TC wagon, only good thing is that you can start villager production >really< fast, which is like a few extra vills i guess (time it takes to train vills vs time it takes to build a TC?)
