Rushing / FF Civi

[yemshi]

Since when is ger/fr rush bad lol

[Kaiserklein]

French rush is usually not good, as in you want to do something else in most match ups. But overall, it's decent I guess, compared to the weak rush potential of a lot of civs.
German rush is basically bad. I mean, yeah you have extra uhlans obviously, but your infantry sucks, and I don't understand how a german rush is ever supposed to win, unless the opponent doesn't adapt.

[Ashvin]

Go renegado strat on great plains with ger, works at lt level.

[yemshi]

Xbow/pike is underrated nowadays

[[Armag] diarouga]

No it's not

[Garja]

French rush isn't that great because you don't have much of an early spike and cdbs being a bigger investment/reward than normal vills doesn't cope well with the rush development curve.
French do have a good early timing with 2 raxes and crate spam. That reflects their good early efficiency (more vills early on than most of civs).

Ger are like French but with cheaper vills, cheaper units to spam (not dopps I guess) and with stronger shipments (early on the xp penalty is not as bad as later on). Whether or not it wins game is another story. That's more about rushes in general winning games.

[bwinner]

French rush isn't that great because you don't have much of an early spike and cdbs being a bigger investment/reward than normal vills doesn't cope well with the rush development curve.
French do have a good early timing with 2 raxes and crate spam. That reflects their good early efficiency (more vills early on than most of civs).

Ger are like French but with cheaper vills, cheaper units to spam (not dopps I guess) and with stronger shipments (early on the xp penalty is not as bad as later on). Whether or not it wins game is another story. That's more about rushes in general winning games.

How have ger cheaper units to spam ?
+This vils think doesn't matter at all, either russia would be bad at rushing.
Thing is that ger don't have musk and their best age 2 shipment overall is an economic shipment (3sw), so they are really not good at rushing.

[Garja]

Ulhans are cheaper than huss while performing about the same task traditionally. You can tell you run out of steam soon with French and you struggle to spam stuff while with German you always have units popping out and fueling the contain. That's due both French not having much stuff for free aside from 3 huss and 8xbows (and thus having to 2x rax) and also cbds being more expensive.
Russia vills are in fact cheaper dunno while you bring Russia (who also have 3x unit cards, 2 of which are premium). Musks are not a good unit for rush honestly. It's the unit that basically gives more value to TC fire and mm. RI traditionally is, for a number of reasons. I guess very strong musks like sepoy and jans are good too if you can have a big spike early on (which otto and India do).
Germans have always been one of the strongest rush civs, on every patch. With xbows nerfed (includign 9 xbow card) their rush is significantly worse now and more importantly it is worse in comparison with their other strats.

[Kaiserklein]

Xbow/pike is underrated nowadays

no

[Hazza54321]

No one really rushes with ranged inf because cav start is so common

[[Armag] diarouga]

No one really rushes with ranged inf because cav start is so common

Cav start is not that common. It's mostly because it's a big invesment and you have to cut some eco, and most of the time it doesn't achieve anything.

[Hazza54321]

German fre port brit spain dutch sioux all cav start in a large portion of games what you chattin’

[[Armag] diarouga]

German fre port brit spain dutch sioux all cav start in a large portion of games what you chattin’

Germany: Yes
France: No, people now understand that in many situations musk semi is stronger. I'd say that the cav start is the best options in 6-7 MUs out of 14, ie less than 50%
Port: Do they? They can't afford a cav start in many MUs, it either hurts their eco too hard or delays their age up by a lot. It's an option but no, they don't cav start too often.
Dutch: Well yea, they start cav in some MUs, but sometimes they just ff without units or start skirm, I'd say it's a bit more than 50% here, but not like 70%
Brit: If the civ is played correctly they should actually never start cav, but the civ isn't really played correctly. It just depends on the player though, you know that some players are going to start cav and that some aren't.
Spain: What? Who the hell goes for a cav start as Spain?
Sioux: Well yea Sioux of course.

All in all, 2 civs are going to cav start for sure, and 3 go for a cav start half of the time. It's not even 5 civs out of 14.

Anyway, cav start is not the reason why you don't want to bow/pike. Actually I'd say that if you go bow/pike and face a cav start you're happy.

[Hazza54321]

Cant be bothered to tell you youre wrong

[Garja]

Cav start is the norm. All euro civs start cav unless there is a specific reason not to. Only civs that open with inf more often are jap, india and arguably brit and iro. And those civs have great infantry for a reason.

[[Armag] diarouga]

Cav start is very overrated. Most of the time you don't do shit with a cav start (unless the opponent is sloppy), and it is a big eco investment as cav is more expensive than infantry, which means that you'll have to delay your ageup, which is always something you don't want to do.

[Garja]

Running around your base without killing a single vill > 30 secs faster age up.
It is true tho that on EP often making units is not useful. But that's cause the EP meta is becoming retarded.

[[Armag] diarouga]

Running around your base without killing a single vill > 30 secs faster age up.

This statement makes no sense. It's obviously better to age 30 sec than to spend your resources in units that do nothing.

It is true tho that on EP often making units is not useful. But that's cause the EP meta is becoming retarded.

Yes, but that's not the point. My point is that making early units that don't do shit is a waste of time, and it's true in the current EP meta.

[Garja]

They scout what you're doing and prevent any vill from moving outside of base to reach further resources. And since most civs can't invest those resources in more eco it's better to make units anyway. Especially if you have to wait for 700g to age up anyway. Not to mention making units give xp and it's probably the primary reason why you always want to make units in AOE3.
If EP maps even just had some big treasure (e.g 320xp) then that would be another reason to make units. Sadly only 2-3 maps have that.
If you refer explicitly to 5 cav vs let's 10 musk cav is always superior because of raids later on and because it is more useful in typical age3 combos.

[[Armag] diarouga]

They scout what you're doing

Yes, but it's just so easy to scout in aoe3. You can scout with the explorer, or just assume what your opponent is going to do.

and prevent any vill from moving outside of base to reach further resources.

Yes, that's true, but you should herd 2 hunts in age 1 to make sure you have all the food you need, and then you'll have goons to move out, so that's not really relevant.

And since most civs can't invest those resources in more eco it's better to make units anyway.

If you can't invest more into eco or tech, then it's definitely better to spend it in units. However, most civs can just age 30 sec faster, and thus get a 30 sec faster timing, or simply get more eco, which is why cav start is not the best.

Especially if you have to wait for 700g to age up anyway.

That's true, but if your opponent isn't starting cav, you can just go 4v/700w instead of 4v/700w/700c and be a lot faster on everything.
If he goes for a cav start, then it depends on your civ and on the exp treasures you got, but most of the time you can just make 5 musks instead of 5 huss, and defend while being faster on everything.
For example if you have a TP start with France, going for 5 huss actually delays your age up since you get 700c very early.
Likewise, it's possible to go for a 4v/700w 5musk semi as France vs cav starts. But of course, if you have to wait for 700c, going for a cav start is better, it just doesn't happen very often.

Not to mention making units give xp and it's probably the primary reason why you always want to make units in AOE3.

Sure, but you'll make these units later and get that exp in the end. And unless you need to wait for 700c (which I explained, can be avoided), you don't need that exp. Furthermore, on most maps you can go for an extra TP instead of cav.
That's something I used to do when I was active, go 5 musks+TP instead of 5 huss.

If EP maps even just had some big treasure (e.g 320xp) then that would be another reason to make units.

No, on the contrary, that would be a reason to skip units, because you wouldn't have to wait for 700c.

If you refer explicitly to 5 cav vs let's 10 musk cav is always superior because of raids later on and because it is more useful in typical age3 combos.

In this situation, 5 cav is obviously better than 10 musks, but that's not the point. You want to make infantry because it is cheaper, so that would be 5musks vs 5huss and a 30 sec faster age up.

[Garja]

The explorer dies and you can't guess ecactly how many units are out for example. If you actually scout you know how many and where units are.
If you didn't build in the middle it's not like you can claim it later.
Going greedier but without map is not going to help you because you just burn resources faster (-700g on the mine) and the supposed VS of 700w > 700g are nullified by the vill idle time. On top of that because you will get some idle time you will in fact not age faster. Even if you do age 30 secs faster you are on the backfoot so your not in a position to do a timing.
You can't realistically go 2 TPs with 5 musks. If opponent makes 10 cav you're fucked. If he makes 10 cav and musks in colo you're even more fucked. Alternatively he can just siege the TPs and age behind it.
If maps have big treasures in the middle you want units to take it. Whoever make units is going to take it. And that's basically an extra card. You don't have to argue over everything you know...
5 musks ain't gonna do shit. If opponent just makes units and pushes you then you regret you made only 5 musks.

As much as you like the passive greedy play style and advocate for it, AOE3 isn't that type of game. Units will always have a dominant role, except for some exceptions and unless you change the game too much. With EP the "sit in base and do nothing" style is already buffed to quite some extent and that's a shame since it's boring af. Everyone is complaining about it.

[Hazza54321]

Dont worry garja, disrougas just the community troll and acts like hes new to aoe

[macacoalbino]

Tbh this discussion is pointless. Both builds have their strenghs and weaknesses, just use whichever you prefer

[macacoalbino]

Feels to me like the discussion between 500f or tower+200g as brits

[[Armag] diarouga]

The explorer dies and you can't guess ecactly how many units are out for example. If you actually scout you know how many and where units are.

Does it matter? You can just guess tbh.

If you didn't build in the middle it's not like you can claim it later.

Why would you want to build in the middle? Going for a fb when you semi ff makes 0 sense.

Going greedier but without map is not going to help you because you just burn resources faster (-700g on the mine) and the supposed VS of 700w > 700g are nullified by the vill idle time. On top of that because you will get some idle time you will in fact not age faster. Even if you do age 30 secs faster you are on the backfoot so your not in a position to do a timing.

You're going to get the map back when you reach the 3rd age because you will get 5 goons and the huss will become totally irrelevant, so it doesn't matter if you deplete your resources faster because you will gather in the middle of the map later on.
That's the point of a timing actually, invest into eco in order to get as many units as possible at a given time. And of course you'll get more units for the timing since you're going for a timing while your opponent is not.
It's just the same in every RTS game really, it's like saying that it's better to build a late 3rd base in tvz in sc2 because you'll get more units early on. That doesn't matter, all what matters is the 2/2 timing, and it's the same with aoe3.
Also you're not going to be iddled since you have 5 musks to defend the raids, and your hunts are close to your TC on good maps. And you can of course do a timing since you'll not be on the backfood anymore when you get your 5 goons.

You can't realistically go 2 TPs with 5 musks. If opponent makes 10 cav you're fucked. If he makes 10 cav and musks in colo you're even more fucked. Alternatively he can just siege the TPs and age behind it.

Of course you can. If he makes 10 cav you make 5 more musks and you have the mm to hold, that's totally fine. You'll age 1min-1min30 before him and he'll be fucked because you'll have a 13 skirm timing so he won't be allowed to gather, and it will just snowball from here.
He can siege the TP with 10 cav and 5 musks for sure, but that's just the same situation, you'll age much earlier and the game will snowball, because in skirm/goon wars when you have a 10 skirm advantage it just snowballs.

If maps have big treasures in the middle you want units to take it. Whoever make units is going to take it. And that's basically an extra card. You don't have to argue over everything you know...
5 musks ain't gonna do shit. If opponent just makes units and pushes you then you regret you made only 5 musks.

That's obviously situational. Of course if after the age 1 there are still big treasures in the middle, you want to control the map, but that's just not a thing in the current meta.

As much as you like the passive greedy play style and advocate for it, AOE3 isn't that type of game.

I don't really like it honestly. I think that it's more interesting that dumb rushes, but still bad because you don't have a lot of options compared to aoe2/sc2.
Still, aoe3 is exactly that type of game. The community understands it, look at all the people who complain about the greedy/stale meta. aoe3 on the current EP is a game where you want to make enough units to survive and then hit a timing when you run out of resources, and that's exactly what musk start does. Cav start however, means more mobility in early game, but a weaker timing.

Units will always have a dominant role, except for some exceptions and unless you change the game too much. With EP the "sit in base and do nothing" style is already buffed to quite some extent and that's a shame since it's boring af. Everyone is complaining about it.

Yes exactly, we're in the "sit in base and do nothing" meta. People indeed complain about it, and it might be boring, but that's just how the game currently works.
And as a result, it's better to make more eco/age faster, cav in early game are useless.
You're arguing against it because of a personal bias. You hate this type of games, and you don't want to acknowledge that passive style is just better because in your opinion it's not how the game should be played, but I'm sorry, it's the best way to play it on the current patch.

Actually I'm not even sure if you're arguing for cav start because you genuially believe that cav start is better, or because you want people to cav start in order to have more active games.

Dont worry garja, disrougas just the community troll and acts like hes new to aoe

Well it's just the same. You're a team player and you like to go for a cav start because it is more apm intensive, and it provides more active games, but that's just not the best way to play in 1v1 if both players play well.
You want to go as greedy as possible in early game in order to get the stronger timing.

Anyway, cav start is the kind of strat which is only possible because nobody really plays the game seriously. If there we had a pro scene, people who go cav start would get punished super hard because they would age later and it would snowball from here, but since nobody really plays the game seriously, almost every strat is possible.