No Flag RefluxSemantic
Howdah
Posts: 1878

12 Jan 2020, 16:03

Cometk wrote:The counter to OHR FI China is to play Iroquois, FI yourself and go Guard Aenna

I edited with tests of OHR Qiangs compared to Halbs. Guard Halb Aenna is apperantly broken.

Like sure, Old Han feels broken, but Old Han units just simply aren't that great still. It's not that their increased stats compensate for their very mediocre stats/cost either, as these simple tests show. I just don't know how these Old Han units would be unbeatable or broken at all? They seem like mediocre units at best?
User avatar
Malawi princeofcarthage
Retired Contributor
Posts: 2645
ESO: Princeofcarthage
Location: Milky Way!

12 Jan 2020, 16:11

OHR is good because:
1) Power spike from follow up shipments
2) Composition
3) Other player is usually age 2 or 3.
Image
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
Canada dansil92
ESOC Maps Team
Posts: 918
ESO: dansil92

12 Jan 2020, 16:17

Jumping in again, if guard halbs had 5 speed and you could ship 20 of them, then they too, would be op (yes i know dutch halbs can get that fast but not normally)

Aenna have among the highest dps of any ranged infantry, especially with cards (cetan are higher though). Again if you could ship 21, you would.

However the comparison is quite accurate in the above regard, other than ckns 3x multiplier vs goon/hi
No Flag RefluxSemantic
Howdah
Posts: 1878

12 Jan 2020, 16:18

So do we finally agree that at least in lategame, old han units aren't even close to OP? Because I recall you saying that Qiang Pikes beat skirmishers earlier in this thread..
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
EPL Reigning Champs
Posts: 9022

12 Jan 2020, 16:22

Cometk wrote:The counter to OHR FI China is to play Iroquois, FI yourself and go Guard Aenna
Do I get to mass them up for 70f a piece before I upgrade them and also send 30?
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
EPL Reigning Champs
Posts: 9022

12 Jan 2020, 16:23

RefluxSemantic wrote:So do we finally agree that at least in lategame, old han units aren't even close to OP? Because I recall you saying that Qiang Pikes beat skirmishers earlier in this thread..
You don't need to do math to know that late game old han is inferior to the alternatives. Just look at treaty.
No Flag RefluxSemantic
Howdah
Posts: 1878

12 Jan 2020, 16:32

Goodspeed wrote:
RefluxSemantic wrote:So do we finally agree that at least in lategame, old han units aren't even close to OP? Because I recall you saying that Qiang Pikes beat skirmishers earlier in this thread..
You don't need to do math to know that late game old han is inferior to the alternatives. Just look at treaty.

Isn't Old Han pretty good in treaty though? Because of how pop efficient it is? Or do they still go for Arq/Chandao?
No Flag RefluxSemantic
Howdah
Posts: 1878

12 Jan 2020, 16:33

Goodspeed wrote:
Cometk wrote:The counter to OHR FI China is to play Iroquois, FI yourself and go Guard Aenna
Do I get to mass them up for 70f a piece before I upgrade them and also send 30?

Again, if you actually do the calculations and take into account that the statboost is otherwise mediocre (worth a fortress shipment at best), it costs 1000f and you are forced to upgrade CKN/Qiangs to veteran, which you wouldn't have to do for Arq/Chang, then you would conclude that you'd need to be sending 30 of them to even get a reasonable deal out of it (it's still a bad deal too). Please, just do the calculations yourself. It's nowhere near as good as it may seem.

It's also really annoying that I'm the only one actually considering the scenarios here and running the numbers to see what it's actually like. How much does it actually cost to ship it, how much payoff would you need to get? How much does it actually improve the units? Are they actually broken after Old Han Reforms. Everyone else is just throwing out unfunded bullshit that completely disregards the actual facts. Like this statement, which is pretty far off reality because you refuse to actually put in effort. Yet you to some extend, and especially our dear 2nd lt friend Dansil92, have a very condescending tone. I find that somewhat disrespectful.
France Le Hussard sur le toit
Skirmisher
Posts: 150
ESO: LeHussardsurletoit

12 Jan 2020, 16:40

WickedCossack wrote: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.


That's why I proposed a different way to determine MUs, one that allows to reach fair match ups vith diverse civs on unstandard map. Who want to see Germany-China on Thar desert ?
User avatar
Italy Garja
ESOC Maps Team
Donator 02
Posts: 8013
ESO: Garja

12 Jan 2020, 17:03

Maps don't have to be completely crazy to add variety. The main problem is that players are so spoiled that they don't even accept maps like Klondike or Tibet which are essentially RE maps with good resources.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
EPL Reigning Champs
Posts: 9022

12 Jan 2020, 17:06

RefluxSemantic wrote:
Goodspeed wrote:
Cometk wrote:The counter to OHR FI China is to play Iroquois, FI yourself and go Guard Aenna
Do I get to mass them up for 70f a piece before I upgrade them and also send 30?
Again, if you actually do the calculations and take into account that the statboost is otherwise mediocre (worth a fortress shipment at best), it costs 1000f and you are forced to upgrade CKN/Qiangs to veteran, which you wouldn't have to do for Arq/Chang, then you would conclude that you'd need to be sending 30 of them to even get a reasonable deal out of it (it's still a bad deal too). Please, just do the calculations yourself. It's nowhere near as good as it may seem.
I'm not going off of the percentages though. I know the card is too strong on RE because I've used it and had it used against me, many times. For me there is no need to do any math.
It's also really annoying that I'm the only one actually considering the scenarios here and running the numbers to see what it's actually like. How much does it actually cost to ship it, how much payoff would you need to get? How much does it actually improve the units? Are they actually broken after Old Han Reforms. Everyone else is just throwing out unfunded bullshit that completely disregards the actual facts. Like this statement, which is pretty far off reality because you refuse to actually put in effort. Yet you to some extend, and especially our dear 2nd lt friend Dansil92, have a very condescending tone. I find that somewhat disrespectful.
Can you blame me for not engaging in this discussion in full detail, when I don't play the game and there is significant consensus among the community that the card is too strong on RE? Besides, this isn't something you can put into numbers easily. The fact that you can mass old han before sending the card is a big deal and something you can't really account for. Diminishing returns you can account for but you haven't, and is also a bigger deal than you seem to think. The 21 ckn and 21 pike shipments are also big and hard to account for.

In short, your cost efficiency numbers paint an incomplete picture. Whether reformed ckn/pike are more cost-effective than IV arq/changdao is not the only question you need to answer. Any conclusion you draw based on the answer of that question alone is not worth nearly as much as the collective opinion of experienced players.
No Flag RefluxSemantic
Howdah
Posts: 1878

12 Jan 2020, 17:20

If you're not interested in discussing something in full detail, then also don't throw some jabs at people that are willing to put in effort. It's pretty low.

As with regard to the community, someone like Hazza still thinks old han is "age 6 units in age 4 lol" and someone like Dansil (though a complete scrub) thought it made China units so good that China can play 1v3. I myself would have never believed that Old Han Reformed CKN would lose to Guard Aenna until I tested it, and I'm pretty sure I thought the exact same thing about Old Han as others did. Just going by what the masses think is bad practice, it's what a dumb person would do.

So let's at least agree that CKN/Pike when reformed are not actually great units, and that all the benefit comes from actually getting the units at a discounted rate before you ship the reforms? Because this is something that people didn't seem to agree with at all. But I don't see how CKN and Qiang Pikes are actually that good after old han reforms.
Latvia harcha
Lancer
Posts: 789
ESO: hatamoto_samurai

12 Jan 2020, 17:25

RefluxSemantic wrote:
Goodspeed wrote:
RefluxSemantic wrote:So do we finally agree that at least in lategame, old han units aren't even close to OP? Because I recall you saying that Qiang Pikes beat skirmishers earlier in this thread..
You don't need to do math to know that late game old han is inferior to the alternatives. Just look at treaty.

Isn't Old Han pretty good in treaty though? Because of how pop efficient it is? Or do they still go for Arq/Chandao?

If people can easily make cannons then they are not too op, but this is simply not the case. If you're going old han, the opponent has to counter it by killing you before you get numbers. And as @Kaiserklein already brilliantly explained, this is a very scary thing because going under villages is a bit of a suicide. There is no telling if china will pop 20 pikes, 20 bows, 26 rattans, 2 infinite crows (second reason why china IV is very strong), or 8cav+3crow shipment (this one is a bit underrated imo as it only costs food) on top of your stuff + you also get an invincible hero that shits units every time he punches you. Also going fortress cannons against industrial units is a bit of an uphill battle too. Even going fortress yumi + flaming arrows would be quite hard due to how fast china can get the numbers out with a backup of infinite crow spam (please consider that this japanese unit composition is completely unprotected).

Not to mention that the units themselves are just ridiculous. OP would be the appropriate expression. I would argue that you cannot compare shipments to researched upgrades, those two things are different mechanics. In this sense RE old han reforms stood alone. Researched upgrades scale very consistently with ageups and have been in aoe games since the beginning. It is always an interesting matchup where one player ages and the other doesn't. But this upgrade just upset the whole system where you could get 2 ageups ahead of your opponent without making even the investment for a single ageup.

Now you keep saying that it is a 11% upgrade but this is bs. The costs don't mean too much in reality - summer palace will make a very big part of your early military presence and will not be negatively impacted with the upgrade. 10% brit consulate was stupid on top of those units. It also makes it so that china doesn't need any coin anymore which is also imbalanced. Also should be considered is the fact that units such as bowmen rely less so on multipliers than skirmishers as they have a high base attack. So ckn can already trade decently against cav with this high attack and the additional 0.5 speed that they get. And they can also be upgraded with the equivalent of counter-infantry rifling (the only civ that benefits on 2 units from this upgrade) hence any fortress musk+cannon push ends up eventually defeated with faster ckn and ridiculous china cav or complementary crows or unkillable disciple tank-man

in conclusion: there is very little any other civ can do after RE old han reforms has come in... it just seems like you've never actually played games with re old hans, which doesn't help your credibility on this question

tldr: no, is op
User avatar
European Union Scroogie
Dragoon
Posts: 354
ESO: Scroogie
GameRanger ID: 10056919

12 Jan 2020, 17:28

Garja wrote:Maps don't have to be completely crazy to add variety. The main problem is that players are so spoiled that they don't even accept maps like Klondike or Tibet which are essentially RE maps with good resources.

I agree. Same BO shouldnt work on every map with every civ, adaptions are necessary.

One thing im not good enough to understand is, is rushing really so op on certain maps or are players not adapting their build correctly? Eg on Thar Desert, maybe you just need to cut the greedy stuff a bit and you're fine as Brit/Dutch, like in Kaiser vs Mitoe in NWC in Dutch-India-MU.
Stuck at PR20. Pick up lvl10 HC India Sepoy rush = winstreak.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
EPL Reigning Champs
Posts: 9022

12 Jan 2020, 17:35

RefluxSemantic wrote:If you're not interested in discussing something in full detail, then also don't throw some jabs at people that are willing to put in effort. It's pretty low.
I'm curious. What jab do you think I threw? My reply to comet was just illustrating important differences between simply a guard upgrade and OHR, which are that you can mass them for cheap before upgrading and have some very high value unit shipments.
No Flag RefluxSemantic
Howdah
Posts: 1878

12 Jan 2020, 17:35

As then for the 21 CKN and 21 Qiang shipments and the fact that you can make them before you ship old han. This is true, but then you also need to take into account that there are extra costs. I believe I have shown the longterm effect of the card to not actually be very amazing (both mathematically, as well as in scenario editor tests). So it's not fair to count that effect to be worth much at all, as that isn't nearly on par with what an age 4 shipment should be like. In my earlier calculations, I have been generous and have called it worth as much as an age 3 shipment and have claimed that the difference between an age 3 and age 4 shipment is roughtly 1000 villager seconds. This is generous. Because of how weak ckn/qiangs are, I think they almost need old han reforms to even be viable and I honestly think Arq/Changdaos with infantry combat would be stronger so counting this as an age 3 shipment is probably not even reasonable. Then take into account the cost for vet ckn/qiang upgrades and the 1000f for old han reforms, and thus the fact that Old Han Reforms needs to pay off by upgrading CKN/Qiangs that you've gotten at a discount for it to be on par with other age 4 shipments (like just shipping units), and there's quite a seizable opportunity cost that comes with shipping old han reforms. It's 2757 villager seconds to be precise. This is equal to 12.5 CKN and 12.5 Qiang pikes. For the effective 66.7% stat increase that Old Han gives us, we would need to have 19 CKN and 19 Qiang Pikes before we ship it.

So yes, it can definitely be good. That is, if you get away with shipping it before you ship any of the Old Han cards or if you somehow manage to amass more than 19 CKN/Qiangs without losing any of those before your shipment arrives. This is definitely possible, but I don't think that it's reasonable to expect that you get a lot more out of this. And even if you do get a bit more out of it, say you have 50 old han units upgraded with the shipment rather than the required 38 for it to pay off. This is the most ideal scenario that I can reasonably imagine. In this case you Old Han gives you about 800-900 villager seconds above the normal rate of an age 4 shipment. That's really strong yes, but this is also the very ideal scenario. I don't think this is nearly as broken as people make it out to be. Even if we're being very generous, the initial payoff is only on par with an age 4 shipment if you manage to have it apply to more than 30 units (calculations show 38, so we're being generous). That's doable, but even if you manage to somehow get a lot more out of it than that it doesn't become that broken. It doesn't even make the units very strong, and obviously it's very easy to prevent someone who just went to age 4 to get away with shipping a 1000f upgrade card that doesn't give them anything right away first.
No Flag RefluxSemantic
Howdah
Posts: 1878

12 Jan 2020, 17:39

harcha wrote:
RefluxSemantic wrote:
Show hidden quotes

Isn't Old Han pretty good in treaty though? Because of how pop efficient it is? Or do they still go for Arq/Chandao?

If people can easily make cannons then they are not too op, but this is simply not the case. If you're going old han, the opponent has to counter it by killing you before you get numbers. And as @Kaiserklein already brilliantly explained, this is a very scary thing because going under villages is a bit of a suicide. There is no telling if china will pop 20 pikes, 20 bows, 26 rattans, 2 infinite crows (second reason why china IV is very strong), or 8cav+3crow shipment (this one is a bit underrated imo as it only costs food) on top of your stuff + you also get an invincible hero that shits units every time he punches you. Also going fortress cannons against industrial units is a bit of an uphill battle too. Even going fortress yumi + flaming arrows would be quite hard due to how fast china can get the numbers out with a backup of infinite crow spam (please consider that this japanese unit composition is completely unprotected).

Not to mention that the units themselves are just ridiculous. OP would be the appropriate expression. I would argue that you cannot compare shipments to researched upgrades, those two things are different mechanics. In this sense RE old han reforms stood alone. Researched upgrades scale very consistently with ageups and have been in aoe games since the beginning. It is always an interesting matchup where one player ages and the other doesn't. But this upgrade just upset the whole system where you could get 2 ageups ahead of your opponent without making even the investment for a single ageup.

Now you keep saying that it is a 11% upgrade but this is bs. The costs don't mean too much in reality - summer palace will make a very big part of your early military presence and will not be negatively impacted with the upgrade. 10% brit consulate was stupid on top of those units. It also makes it so that china doesn't need any coin anymore which is also imbalanced. Also should be considered is the fact that units such as bowmen rely less so on multipliers than skirmishers as they have a high base attack. So ckn can already trade decently against cav with this high attack and the additional 0.5 speed that they get. And they can also be upgraded with the equivalent of counter-infantry rifling (the only civ that benefits on 2 units from this upgrade) hence any fortress musk+cannon push ends up eventually defeated with faster ckn and ridiculous china cav or complementary crows or unkillable disciple tank-man

in conclusion: there is very little any other civ can do after RE old han reforms has come in... it just seems like you've never actually played games with re old hans, which doesn't help your credibility on this question

tldr: no, is op

The units themselves are weaker than Guard Aenna Guard Halb with an inf combat card. It's just not true what you're saying. Do the tests in the scenario editor, run the numbers. The 11% is largely accurate, in the sense that it doesn't really make CKN/Qiangs overpowered or really strong in general. This is just a misconception, we've all failed to properly evaluate the card in the past and that has just clouded our judgement and made us biased. Just check with yourself, would you say that 20 Old Han Reforms Guard CKN would beat 28 aenna? Because I would have answered that with a resounding YES. But in reality it's a resounding NO. It's not even close.

As for the initial boost to the free units; you need quite a lot for it to pay off.

BTW: if you're that convinced that I'm clueless about OHR, you can play me on ESO and try it out against me. I'll promise I'll just do an FI strat in return and beat you.
No Flag RefluxSemantic
Howdah
Posts: 1878

12 Jan 2020, 17:39

Goodspeed wrote:
RefluxSemantic wrote:If you're not interested in discussing something in full detail, then also don't throw some jabs at people that are willing to put in effort. It's pretty low.
I'm curious. What jab do you think I threw? My reply to comet was just illustrating important differences between simply a guard upgrade and OHR, which are that you can mass them for cheap before upgrading and have some very high value unit shipments.

I explained the same thing I just did a few times already. If you could actually respond to that, because I've adressed this before. That would be nice.
No Flag RefluxSemantic
Howdah
Posts: 1878

12 Jan 2020, 17:40

Also, in all Old Hans OPness, it never dominates any part of the competitive scene. Very curious indeed.
User avatar
Canada dansil92
ESOC Maps Team
Posts: 918
ESO: dansil92

12 Jan 2020, 17:52

If you could not call me a scrub that would be great. I'm pr20 because i havent played a rated game in like 6 months on my main account, thanks, i just had a kid. It doesnt take a pr50 player to know ohr is overpowered, even conscripts know its op. You stand alone. Adding both hp and attack to a unit is more than double. You cant seem to understand this but if i have a unit and an equal unit with equal attack but double hp, that unit is twice as strong. If i have double hp AND double attack, it is somewhere between 3 or 4 times as strong, and thats why your calculations are consistently inconsistent with real gameplay, among other failed assumptions such as attack per vs or whatever. Kaiserklein put it simply? That metric is irrelevant.
User avatar
Canada dansil92
ESOC Maps Team
Posts: 918
ESO: dansil92

12 Jan 2020, 17:53

But please we all would love another five paragraph rebuttal toward literally every player to ever use or face RE ohr
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
EPL Reigning Champs
Posts: 9022

12 Jan 2020, 18:51

RefluxSemantic wrote:
Goodspeed wrote:
RefluxSemantic wrote:If you're not interested in discussing something in full detail, then also don't throw some jabs at people that are willing to put in effort. It's pretty low.
I'm curious. What jab do you think I threw? My reply to comet was just illustrating important differences between simply a guard upgrade and OHR, which are that you can mass them for cheap before upgrading and have some very high value unit shipments.
I explained the same thing I just did a few times already. If you could actually respond to that, because I've adressed this before. That would be nice.
I'm not gonna reread all your posts to decipher what you mean here. What do you want me to answer, specifically?
No Flag RefluxSemantic
Howdah
Posts: 1878

12 Jan 2020, 21:56

dansil92 wrote:If you could not call me a scrub that would be great. I'm pr20 because i havent played a rated game in like 6 months on my main account, thanks, i just had a kid. It doesnt take a pr50 player to know ohr is overpowered, even conscripts know its op. You stand alone. Adding both hp and attack to a unit is more than double. You cant seem to understand this but if i have a unit and an equal unit with equal attack but double hp, that unit is twice as strong. If i have double hp AND double attack, it is somewhere between 3 or 4 times as strong, and thats why your calculations are consistently inconsistent with real gameplay, among other failed assumptions such as attack per vs or whatever. Kaiserklein put it simply? That metric is irrelevant.

Sorry for treating you the way you treat me, scrub. For your record, I've finished top32 in tournaments. It's said it's come to this, but I just feel like I have to point out that your understanding of the game doesn't even come close to mine. I know what OHR is like, I've probably faced it and played with it many more times than you have and at a higher level. I'm at least a decent player that's actually applying some critical thinking, doing some actual tests, running some numbers, backed up by actual understanding of the game - which quite frankly you have none of.

PS: Doubling hp and attack doesn't come close to making a unit 3 or 4 times as strong. Just do the thought experiment yourself, even in the optimal scenario it's ~2.5 times as good. Also, Old Han Reforms doesn't double hp and attack, it increases it by 67%.
No Flag RefluxSemantic
Howdah
Posts: 1878

12 Jan 2020, 22:00

Goodspeed wrote:
RefluxSemantic wrote:
Show hidden quotes
I explained the same thing I just did a few times already. If you could actually respond to that, because I've adressed this before. That would be nice.
I'm not gonna reread all your posts to decipher what you mean here. What do you want me to answer, specifically?

First, do you admit that Old Han Reforms units are not actually OP in the long term?

Secondly, read this post (https://eso-community.net/viewtopic.php ... 44#p411707) and then I'd be interested in hearing if you would agree that this shows that, while old han reforms is a pretty good shipment, it's nowhere near broken and especially not an auto win button, assuming that it doesn't actually make old han units OP in the long term (which both tests and maths prove).
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
EPL Reigning Champs
Posts: 9022

12 Jan 2020, 22:25

RefluxSemantic wrote:
Goodspeed wrote:
Show hidden quotes
I'm not gonna reread all your posts to decipher what you mean here. What do you want me to answer, specifically?
First, do you admit that Old Han Reforms units are not actually OP in the long term?
I never disagreed with that. Like I said, the fact that treaty players tend not to use old han in late game pretty clearly shows that FU old han isn't better than FU alternatives.
Secondly, read this post (https://eso-community.net/viewtopic.php ... 44#p411707) and then I'd be interested in hearing if you would agree that this shows that, while old han reforms is a pretty good shipment, it's nowhere near broken and especially not an auto win button, assuming that it doesn't actually make old han units OP in the long term (which both tests and maths prove).
I don't agree that it shows that.

Forum Info

Return to “News”



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest