User avatar
Canada dansil92
ESOC Maps Team
Posts: 918
ESO: dansil92

12 Jan 2020, 00:31

It turns a batch of 6 units from a war academy into 16-17ish worth of units its not up for debate lol
No Flag RefluxSemantic
Howdah
Posts: 1878

12 Jan 2020, 00:39

Like, what game are you playing were people are constantly at 200/200? Have you been confusing pr20 3v3 deccan games with ESOC Patch balance?
User avatar
Canada dansil92
ESOC Maps Team
Posts: 918
ESO: dansil92

12 Jan 2020, 00:42

Nope, cometk is right. Im out too. This is ridiculous
User avatar
Italy Garja
ESOC Maps Team
Donator 02
Posts: 8013
ESO: Garja

12 Jan 2020, 00:45

Can someone remind me of how this discussion started, cause you know OHR is perfectly fine atm on EP...
No Flag RefluxSemantic
Howdah
Posts: 1878

12 Jan 2020, 00:50

dansil92 wrote:Nope, cometk is right. Im out too. This is ridiculous

Can't take one witty remark? After calling the other guy countless names?

I'm just wondering, in what world of aoe3 is the cost of a unit completely irrelevant? That's just completely ridiculous.

I bet you think halberdiers are like the greatest unit aoe3 has ever seen? Because apart from their ridiculously high cost, they have ridiculous stats.

And even in maxed out scenarios, one of the most important thing is how cost effective your units are. It's not like strelets are suddenly bad for example, even though they have really poor stats per unit (which you just argued is really important?). Even Treaty games, the pinnacle of lategame, are decided over who is more cost efficient. I just cannot understand how the cost of a unit can be considered irrelevant?
No Flag RefluxSemantic
Howdah
Posts: 1878

12 Jan 2020, 00:53

dansil92 wrote:It turns a batch of 6 units from a war academy into 16-17ish worth of units its not up for debate lol

This is also factually incorrect. In age 4, it turns a batch of 6 units into 10 units. You're literally 70% off with your "calculation". Also, again you're not even considering that they're also 50% more expensive.
User avatar
Canada dansil92
ESOC Maps Team
Posts: 918
ESO: dansil92

12 Jan 2020, 00:54

Just stop.
No Flag RefluxSemantic
Howdah
Posts: 1878

12 Jan 2020, 00:55

dansil92 wrote:Just stop.

Sorry for pointing out that your "calculation" is literally 70% off. Maybe I too should stop looking at facts and calculations and just ridicule you for being pr20 (lol)

How did you even come up with the statement that a 100% stat increase makes a batch of old han give you 16-17 units? Even if you didn't know that upgrade cards apply to base stats, which are only 2/3rd of the stats of Guard CKN/Qiangs, your calculations should've given you the number 12? How the fuck did you get 16-17? Do you know how to operate a calculator?
User avatar
France Kaiserklein
Pro Player
Posts: 8197
Location: Paris
GameRanger ID: 5529322

12 Jan 2020, 02:40

I can't be assed to read all of your discussion, but basically everyone knows old hand was broken (note "broken" doesn't mean "op") on RE, so there's nothing to discuss really
It's like saying instant cuirs or 20 range goons is fine... No, even if you barely ever see it in 1v1, it's not fine
Can sirmusket calculate 5x - x??
[Armag] diarouga wrote:Playing Aztec is a 10% handicap

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 ..
No Flag RefluxSemantic
Howdah
Posts: 1878

12 Jan 2020, 03:01

Thing is, if you look at the numbers closely it doesnt really seem insanely strong. Like, it seems pretty good of course, but I dont think it should be auto win. At least, based on the stats it doesnt seem to me like it makes ckn and qiangs over the top strong.

I just dont know how to explain this. Yes, old han has always seemed to make ckn invincible, but when you look at the facts nothing implies that they are actually that broken. To me the most likely explanation is that age 4 china is just really strong in general, and the seemingly ridiculous 100% stat increase (even though in many aspects its like a 17-18% combat card) acted as a very strong distraction/placebo.
User avatar
Canada Mitoe
Advanced Theory Craftsman
EWTNWC LAN Top 8
Posts: 4495
ESO: Mitoe
GameRanger ID: 346407

12 Jan 2020, 03:45

RefluxSemantic wrote:Thing is, if you look at the numbers closely it doesnt really seem insanely strong. Like, it seems pretty good of course, but I dont think it should be auto win. At least, based on the stats it doesnt seem to me like it makes ckn and qiangs over the top strong.

I just dont know how to explain this. Yes, old han has always seemed to make ckn invincible, but when you look at the facts nothing implies that they are actually that broken. To me the most likely explanation is that age 4 china is just really strong in general, and the seemingly ridiculous 100% stat increase (even though in many aspects its like a 17-18% combat card) acted as a very strong distraction/placebo.

...Did you ever actually play with or against Old Han Reforms? It is overpowered. I have no idea how you can argue that a card that literally increases stats by 100% can actually be 17-18%? That just makes absolutely no sense. The Veteran upgrade is 20%, and increases CKN damage by 3, whereas Old Han Reforms increases it by 15. That's nothing like a 17-18% combat card lol. It's the same value as TWO imperial age upgrades.

I can tell you with certainty that I was not winning PR30+ team games on RE 1v3 with Old Han off of placebo or "distraction."
User avatar
Tuvalu gibson
Ninja
Posts: 10224
Location: USA

12 Jan 2020, 03:59

How can you say the power spike you get from it isn't insane? Name another card that basically doubles the size of your army, name another card that increases unit stats like old han does.
User avatar
France Kaiserklein
Pro Player
Posts: 8197
Location: Paris
GameRanger ID: 5529322

12 Jan 2020, 04:04

Okay so let's put it this way, doing some pseudo maths. OHR makes your old han units go from 150% (assuming guard) to 250% of their stats. So it's like multiplying their current stats by 5/3, while making them cost 50% more.
Paying 50% more is roughly like paying for a vet cuir (300 res) instead of a vet huss (200 res). And an imperial huss (200% stats) has 5/3 times the stats of a vet huss (120% stats). So, assuming OHR affects huss: it's like if suddenly, after sending OHR, when you click to train a vet huss you pay the price of a cuir, but prod an imperial huss instead. Besides, the card turns all the vet huss you already have into imperial huss. You do have to pay 1000f when sending it though.

Obviously it's not the greatest comparison, but I think you get the point : the card has extremely strong effects. I dont know about the exact % it's worth, but I think we can all appreciate the difference between a cuir and an imperial huss.

Btw you can also ship 21 bows and 21 pikes, which buffs OHR again.
Can sirmusket calculate 5x - x??
[Armag] diarouga wrote:Playing Aztec is a 10% handicap

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 ..
User avatar
France [Armag] diarouga
Ninja
NWC LAN Gold
Posts: 10543
ESO: diarouga
Location: France

12 Jan 2020, 08:09

On the RE Japan was better in age 4 so it's not like Old Han was that imba.
Image
User avatar
France Rikikipu
ESOC Maps Team
Posts: 1628
ESO: p-of
Location: In your base

12 Jan 2020, 10:22

As a chinese player, I do agree that Old Han was OP. I believe that I won 90% games where I sent old han and a card shouldn't give you this ability to autowin the game. I do agree that the nerf is far too important though because now the card doesn't sound appealing anymore. The nerf be halved and I think it would be fine: Card wouldn't be op anymore, but still a strong card that rewards the chinese player to go age IV.
User avatar
France Rikikipu
ESOC Maps Team
Posts: 1628
ESO: p-of
Location: In your base

12 Jan 2020, 10:32

Mitoe wrote:
RefluxSemantic wrote:- the effect most esoc maps have on gameplay. Mapscrews suck, but every civ having 3+ safe hunts and 2+ safe mines makes the game boring as fuck.

This is something I have been actively speaking up about for years. The problem here is not so much the patch team or map makers, but the community. Every time a new map is introduced that isn't "standard" or is very unique, players go absolutely berserk about how "shit" the map is instead of adapting. This has dis-incentivized anyone from making more unique or non-standard maps as frequently as well as made it more acceptable to simply avoid non-standard maps.
ore "generic," but ok.


@Mitoe has perfectly summed up the problem :love: . If I can, I would make maps with less resources at base, because right now in every single stream you see that usually people stay at base during the first 12-14 minuts because they have sooo much resources. But if you even try to remove one or two animals then there is the NR10 lobby which pops out, and starts making posts on the forum saying how much the map sucks, how much russia is op on this map, starts flooding every single twitch chat saying that the mapmaker is a dumbass low corporal that doesn't know how to play this game etc.

I've thought about it and I some point I had in mind to organize a tourney that could be played on maps really more diversed and say it from start so people should just know that this is not a NR10 Arkansas tourney, so they would need to adapt a bit more if they agree to sign up.
No Flag RefluxSemantic
Howdah
Posts: 1878

12 Jan 2020, 11:43

Kaiserklein wrote:Okay so let's put it this way, doing some pseudo maths. OHR makes your old han units go from 150% (assuming guard) to 250% of their stats. So it's like multiplying their current stats by 5/3, while making them cost 50% more.
Paying 50% more is roughly like paying for a vet cuir (300 res) instead of a vet huss (200 res). And an imperial huss (200% stats) has 5/3 times the stats of a vet huss (120% stats). So, assuming OHR affects huss: it's like if suddenly, after sending OHR, when you click to train a vet huss you pay the price of a cuir, but prod an imperial huss instead. Besides, the card turns all the vet huss you already have into imperial huss. You do have to pay 1000f when sending it though.

Obviously it's not the greatest comparison, but I think you get the point : the card has extremely strong effects. I dont know about the exact % it's worth, but I think we can all appreciate the difference between a cuir and an imperial huss.

Btw you can also ship 21 bows and 21 pikes, which buffs OHR again.

Instead of a complicated comparison, I think you can just calculate the stats per villager second right? You probably didnt read this yet so Ill post it again:

Without reforms
Base stats * 1.5/cost

With reforms
Base stats * 2.5/(cost*1.5)

Then if you divide new/old (which gives the increase) you get 2.5/(1.5*1.5) =1.111

Quick comparison to other cards: inf combat gives you 1.65/1.5 = 1.1, Boyars gives you 1.7/1.5= 1.13

So at least in the long term this effect shouldnt be that OP, should it? Considering that ckn/qiangs are otherwise tier two units that need more than an inf combat improvement to be viable. So what I dont understand is that Old Han units feel like they become unkillable even though they are not.

And of course you have the instantaneous effect of it. I expected that to then be the thing that made it so broken. But of course the 100% boost in practice is only 67%, like you also mentioned, so its not quite doubling your CKN and Old Han shipments. So I ran the numbers, still expecting it to be really good.

So I compared it to when you just go arq/chandao instead. So first we have extra cost for the veteran upgrades (200w 100c total), and of course the 1000f cost for the old han reforms shipment. Then - and I admit this is an approximation - I feel like you have to take into account that apart from the initial boost, old han is comparable to an age 3 card. Its a slightly stronger infantry combat that applies to slightly weaker units. So thats like a 1000 villager seconds (this is an approximation for the difference between age3 and age 4 shipments) that it needs to give you in value. Add all these numbers up, and I found that you need 17 CKN ans 17 Qiangs alive or shipped after you send Old Han Reforms for it to basically be an on par age 4 shipment.

This is definitely possible, and it explains to some extend why it can feel so OP. If you manage to ship it very early, or get a big ckn/qiang army and then ship it, its just insane. It also explains why it often does not work; you just need to prevent them from getting a sizable mass.

I think if you consider jt like this, it looks strong, but not really broken to me. The payoff can be huge of course, but I dont think its reasonable for that to happen. In some sense you can almost compare it to say surorov reforms. That card can have a huge payoff that just automatically wins the game, but getting there is just not realistically possible. Now Old Han Reforms, unlike Surorov reforms, is also pretty reasonable if you get a medium payoff so its probably a good card. It just doesnt look like a broken card.

And here is where I am confused. Initially I wanted to argue that Old Han Reforms wasnt good because you couldnt get there. I also have felt that it is just insane to play against. If I hadnt ran the numbers I too would think this insane. But the numbers dont lie. These calculations sketch an entirely different picture from what we have all believed and this difference demands an explanation. Of course, maybe the calculations are off, but I doubt this.

Im starting to think that its a bit of a placebo effect. If you ever get in a position where you can age up to industrial and ship an expensive card thats for at least half of it an upgrade card (something you dont want to be shipping in age 4 really) and upgrade all your units to guard, without dying or suffering huge economic losses, then obviously you will win that game. But did Old Han Reforms then make you win the game? Or were you going to win the game anyways. To give an example, sometimes as Dutch I ship 3 skirm cards and when I win I attribute that to how strong my skirms are. But really, wasnt the thing that allowed me to win that I was in a position where I could ship 3 upgrade cards without falling behind in mass? Maybe something similar has happened with Old Han Reforms. Especially because your first instinct when looking at the card is that its something like an effective 50% increase in cost effectiveness, or at least something close to that. But that initial guess is a factor 4 off.

There could also be other explanations, but I find these numbers pretty convincing. Actually, they convinced me that China FI without Old Han Reforms should be pretty comparable in strength. This is actually a counterargument to why I brought up the Old Han changes in the first place. I'm saying this to show that these calculations actually made me change my mind, despite having also thought at many point in time that Old Han Reforms was broken.
Great Britain WickedCossack
Retired Contributor
Posts: 1786

12 Jan 2020, 11:48

Looking at the recent aoe2 tourny they seem to play on a wide variety of maps e.g Islands, base walled, big gold in middle etc

Much easier to do with their civ balance though, the biggest issue we have is that after 1 month it can become clear that only 2-5 civs are viable (tournament setting) on an outlier map.

Having said that I really enjoy new maps and variety of maps and it's a shame the majority of the top players are not more amenable to some different concepts.

I've always wanted to see a low fish islands map in a tournament setting. Would be interesting to see how it plays out dropping vils/military off on each others islands. Would need low sea resources to bring in some other civ viability beyond ports/india/brits etc.
No Flag RefluxSemantic
Howdah
Posts: 1878

12 Jan 2020, 12:02

I have always thought a map like Fertile Crescent let to playpatterns that are more fun. It's not necessarily a weird map, but it just doesn't give as many inbase resources as some others.
User avatar
France [Armag] diarouga
Ninja
NWC LAN Gold
Posts: 10543
ESO: diarouga
Location: France

12 Jan 2020, 12:09

As Wicked said, the issue with unstandard map is that only a few civs are viable.
It's fine if the game play is interesting (and it is on water maps such as Indonesia, NE etc imo) but on low resources maps it's just a Russia/India feast which is super boring. That's the reason why I hate Thar Desert, the map is meant to be unique but the only way to play is to take the map and rush, it removes all the strategy from the game and it's all about microing and raiding.
Image
User avatar
France Kaiserklein
Pro Player
Posts: 8197
Location: Paris
GameRanger ID: 5529322

12 Jan 2020, 14:07

@RefluxSemantic no, that's the point, you can't calculate "stats per villager second". That was never accurate at all, it's very misleading.
Say you have unit A with 50 hp, 25 attack, cost 1 resource, and unit B with 100 hp, 50 attack, cost 2 resources. Units A and B have the same stats/VS, yet if you make 2 units A fight vs a unit B (same 2 resources investment), you'll find that the unit B wins with 25% hp left. And this leftover 25% hp unit B is still as strong as one full hp unit A. That's what happens with the old han units, in short, better stats means more cost efficient.

I believe that's what GS mentioned earlier. If you're not taking that phenomenon into account, your calculations are honestly useless. That's why I bothered finding 2 similar units with a 50% cost difference (cuir and huss).
And my comparison, albeit a bit awkward, is actually accurate (at least I believe), and shows what OHR does. Now, if you agree the comparison is indeed accurate, I think you'll also agree that spending 1000f + a card in age 4, to turn all your vet huss into imperial huss + let you train more imperial huss for the cost of cuirs, is extremely broken if you get away with it? (ah and you can also ship like 9 imperial huss twice, the equivalent of 21 bows and 21 pikes)


Anyway, at the end of the day, I'd value the experience of all these players over theory. And out of experience, almost everyone seems to agree old han was stupidly broken if you could get away with it. I understand your point about the placebo effect, but I really don't think it's the case here.
Can sirmusket calculate 5x - x??
[Armag] diarouga wrote:Playing Aztec is a 10% handicap

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 ..
No Flag RefluxSemantic
Howdah
Posts: 1878

12 Jan 2020, 15:25

I know, it's just hard to take that into account and I do think stats per villager second is pretty relevant. It's more relevant than saying they become age 6 units in age 4 at the very least. And actually, Old Han Reforms needs to be a lot better than what I calculated for it to make Old Han units "invincible/age 6 units in age4". Let's not forget that without upgrades, Old Han is just bad. I don't think an effective ~17% increase in stats cost effectively would even really be enough to make them better than arqs/chandaos to be honest. So for Old Han Reformed units to even be strong, there needs to be something else. So yeah, I know that putting more stats on a more expensive unit is good, and this is probably what makes Old Han Reformed units pretty good, but I don't really know if that effect can ever be so huge that it matters.

Reformed Qiang Pikes for example are still pretty bad. A musketeer is 131 villager seconds, an old han reformed Qiang Pike roughly 166 (I averaged the CKN/Qiang cost here), so a bit more expensive than a musketeer.
A guard musk has 225 HP, a reformed guard Qiang has 262.5 hp. So the difference isn't huge, yet a Qiang is significantly more expensive and you've shipped an upgrade card to improve it. So maybe it'd be fair to consider a guard musk with musk combat shipped, which would have 247.5 hp. In terms of attack, a musk combat guard musk has 21.45 hand attack and 64.35 attack vs cav. A qiang pikeman has 17.5 hand attack and 87.5 attack versus cav. But then a musketeer also has 38 ranged attack. I don't think that looks very good for the Qiang Pike, considering it's 27% more expensive yet has only 6% more hp and 36% more attack vs cav and is terrible against anything else and has no ranged attack. So you could point at the higher hp, but its hp is only 6% higher than that of a musketeer so I don't think that should matter that much.

Actually, maybe comparing it to an EP halberdeer is good too. Halbs are 176 villager seconds, so slightly more expensive. Guard halbs with infantry combat have 290 hp, deal 40.6 damage against normal units and 81.2 damage versus cav. Halbs are 6% more expensive, they have 10% more hp, 132% more attack vs normal units and 8% less attack vs cav (but wouldn't this be compensated because they have far more hp?). Old Han Reformed Qiang Pikes seem to look worse to me than Halberdiers.

For CKN it's really hard. One of their biggest downsides is that they have 16 range instead of 20 range, but it's really hard to calculate that. You can try to compare them to Cetan Bows and Aennas though. A CKN is again 166 villager seconds, a cetan bow 135 villager seconds. Even without shipping any upgrade cards, Cetan Bows would have 45 dps, compared to Old Han CKN which would have 37.5 dps. With an inf combat shipment this would even be 49.5 attack. EP Cetans would have 165 hp and 236 ranged hp, CKN would have 225 hp and 281 ranged hp. So CKN do look better than Cetan Bows by quite the margin, but Cetan Bows are also really terrible by quite a margin.

Aennas, which cost 119 villager seconds, would have 181.5 hp (with guard upgrade and infantry combat) and 259 ranged hp. They would also deal 39.6 dps. Old Han CKN are 40% more expensive, have 25% more hp, 8% more ranged hp and 6% less dps. Aennas would DESTROY old han reformed CKN in a ranged battle with equal costs. Aennas are also not viable in normal games.

So I don't see how this hp effect is strong enough to elevate CKN and Qiangs to the territory of super strong. I could see how Old Han reforms is a good card and how it does make CKN/Qiangs pretty reasonable, but statwise it's like you're producing Guard Aenna and Guard Halberdiers with an infantry combat card.
User avatar
European Union Scroogie
Dragoon
Posts: 354
ESO: Scroogie
GameRanger ID: 10056919

12 Jan 2020, 15:42

Pls continue this OHR discussion in the Meme thread.
Stuck at PR20. Pick up lvl10 HC India Sepoy rush = winstreak.
No Flag RefluxSemantic
Howdah
Posts: 1878

12 Jan 2020, 15:56

Doing some tests now: 14 Aennas cost the same (actually slightly less than) as 10 CKN, so I've put 28 Aenna against 20 CKN in the scenario editor. 13 aennas were left. THIRTEEN!

For Halberdiers, I needed to use EP Halb stats for them to be even vs cav. 11 Qiangs are slightly more expensive than 10 halbs, I tested them against 12 hussars. 3 halbs left and 3 qiangs left. But Halbs are far stronger against anything else really.
User avatar
United States of America Cometk
ESOC Media Team
Posts: 5101
ESO: DJ_Cometk
Location: California

12 Jan 2020, 16:02

The counter to OHR FI China is to play Iroquois, FI yourself and go Guard Aenna
Image

Forum Info

Return to “News”



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest