ESOC Patch Update & Tournament Information
Re: ESOC Patch Update & Tournament Information
In this game you cant really make new strategies cause of the civ unbalance.
You cant fight with spain vs japan in age 2 for example cause 12 minute mark spain has 13k res japan has 19k. Its just a difference that makes it imposibble.
You cant fight with spain vs japan in age 2 for example cause 12 minute mark spain has 13k res japan has 19k. Its just a difference that makes it imposibble.
Re: ESOC Patch Update & Tournament Information
That is true in some cases and to some extent, but far from all and fully.
Re: ESOC Patch Update & Tournament Information
I havent said full game is unbalanced but very far from balanced to be clear...
-
- Pro Player
- Posts: 8050
- Joined: May 4, 2015
- ESO: PrinceofBabu
Re: ESOC Patch Update & Tournament Information
Spadel is a babe
-
- Pro Player
- Posts: 8050
- Joined: May 4, 2015
- ESO: PrinceofBabu
Re: ESOC Patch Update & Tournament Information
Spadel is a babe
Re: ESOC Patch Update & Tournament Information
I am not talking about balance. If you read my last post again, you might find that I'm referring to your claim that "in this game you cant really make new strategies cause of the civ unbalance." Regardless of the state of inter-civilization balance, the extent to which this is true is limited. In my opinion, a more correct claim would be "in this game you sometimes can't make new strategies because of balance – particularly intra-civilization balance."Dsy wrote:I havent said full game is unbalanced but very far from balanced to be clear...
Re: ESOC Patch Update & Tournament Information
ESOC Patch 2.0 or "How @Goodspeed
Now that it's been a little while since the changes were finalized and released, I have suggestions for some of the changes we did make:
1. The removal of Native Scout snare is a non-essential change that, while hardly bad for either balance or gameplay, is made even less essential by the nerfs to the Dragoon and the French. In order to better adhere to the "minimum change – maximum balance" policy of the patch, we should consider reverting this change.
2. While the decrease in Dragoon ranged resistance similarly may not be strictly conforming to that same policy, it is more essential in its own right. However, not only is it the case that decreasing the ranged resistance of the Dragoon alone creates an exception – which some understandably take exception to – and that applying the change to other light cavalry units would be, at least in terms of definitions, a slippery slope we must not descend. Indeed, it is also the case that altering the attack, hitpoints or resistance of the Dragoon (or any other unit) yields complex and inconsistent results, the exact implications of which cannot be predicted or even determined, and should be avoided as long as there is an acceptable alternative. For these reasons, we should consider replacing this change with a slight Dragoon cost increase.
3. If it were to be determined that the decrease in Bank cost renders Dutch unacceptably overpowered, we should consider changing the cost decrease from 50w to 50f.
4. According to "2" above, the decrease in Uhlan hitpoints should be avoided as long as there is an acceptable alternative. To that end, we should consider replacing this change with a slight Uhlan cost increase.
5. If it were to be determined that the reduction of the effect of "Genitours" is insufficiently great and that this home-city shipment is still broken, we should consider nerfing it further.
Additional suggestions unrelated to changes implemented in 2.0 to follow.
Ruined the Game Part 2.0"Goodspeed wrote:notification
Now that it's been a little while since the changes were finalized and released, I have suggestions for some of the changes we did make:
1. The removal of Native Scout snare is a non-essential change that, while hardly bad for either balance or gameplay, is made even less essential by the nerfs to the Dragoon and the French. In order to better adhere to the "minimum change – maximum balance" policy of the patch, we should consider reverting this change.
2. While the decrease in Dragoon ranged resistance similarly may not be strictly conforming to that same policy, it is more essential in its own right. However, not only is it the case that decreasing the ranged resistance of the Dragoon alone creates an exception – which some understandably take exception to – and that applying the change to other light cavalry units would be, at least in terms of definitions, a slippery slope we must not descend. Indeed, it is also the case that altering the attack, hitpoints or resistance of the Dragoon (or any other unit) yields complex and inconsistent results, the exact implications of which cannot be predicted or even determined, and should be avoided as long as there is an acceptable alternative. For these reasons, we should consider replacing this change with a slight Dragoon cost increase.
3. If it were to be determined that the decrease in Bank cost renders Dutch unacceptably overpowered, we should consider changing the cost decrease from 50w to 50f.
4. According to "2" above, the decrease in Uhlan hitpoints should be avoided as long as there is an acceptable alternative. To that end, we should consider replacing this change with a slight Uhlan cost increase.
5. If it were to be determined that the reduction of the effect of "Genitours" is insufficiently great and that this home-city shipment is still broken, we should consider nerfing it further.
Additional suggestions unrelated to changes implemented in 2.0 to follow.
Re: ESOC Patch Update & Tournament Information
holy guacamole
nerds just play the damn game none of you are even good enough for the balance changes to make tht much of a difference lol
nerds just play the damn game none of you are even good enough for the balance changes to make tht much of a difference lol
Re: ESOC Patch Update & Tournament Information
Not sure if troll or what, but it's a soundy NO for all 5 points. 5th makes sense but why bother now that you wanted -1 instead of -2.
This.
iNcog wrote:holy guacamole
nerds just play the damn game none of you are even good enough for the balance changes to make tht much of a difference lol
This.
-
- Jaeger
- Posts: 3680
- Joined: Feb 21, 2015
Re: ESOC Patch Update & Tournament Information
I agree with zoom on all these points.
Re: ESOC Patch Update & Tournament Information
Some changes (old han, goon range, even goon RR) seem like attempts to satisfy team players, yet seem halfassed/hardly effective to the point where they hurt 1v1 more than they help team I believe.
At least nerf cuirs if you want to fix team. And reducing training time isnt a fix.
At least nerf cuirs if you want to fix team. And reducing training time isnt a fix.
Re: ESOC Patch Update & Tournament Information
Thank you replying to my post.Garja wrote:Not sure if troll or what, but it's a soundy NO for all 5 points. 5th makes sense but why bother now that you wanted -1 instead of -2.iNcog wrote:holy guacamole
nerds just play the damn game none of you are even good enough for the balance changes to make tht much of a difference lol
This.
I am not sure whether you understand me, considering you are "not sure if troll [sic] or what, but it's a soundy [sic] NO for all 5 points."
As for point "5," what makes you say that I wanted "-1 instead of -2" range for Genitours? Whatever the case, it is not correct. As for your question, the reason I now bother with making this suggestion is the assumption that more updates will be released in the future, attempting to improve the product. It is the same reason I ever bother with making any suggestion for the patch. Am I to understand this is a faulty assumption?
I would appreciate it if you please try reading the post again and consider the logic I am basing my suggestions on, then let me know why you think points "1-4" don't make sense. N.B that points "3" and "5" are both conditional.
Re: ESOC Patch Update & Tournament Information
While more testing is certainly great, it has absolutely no bearing on the validity of the points I made in my post – nor does anyone's skill. Apparently you did not realize this.iNcog wrote:holy guacamole
nerds just play the damn game none of you are even good enough for the balance changes to make tht much of a difference lol
Re: ESOC Patch Update & Tournament Information
i could also say "yer overthinkin' it"
Re: ESOC Patch Update & Tournament Information
All the above changes are fine no need to change. Dragoon RR is fine, but should have been extended to all goon type units. Again your fault in the first place. Genitours is also fine. A more complex change is hardly worth it. In general this slow process of adjustment is just too expensive in term of effort and time.
Also, in any case, it is too early to speak about next changes.
Also, in any case, it is too early to speak about next changes.
Re: ESOC Patch Update & Tournament Information
1. I made an effort to clearly explain, using logical arguments, why certain changes chosen for 2.0 are in fact not "fine." On top of that, as I tried to explain in my last post, points "3" and "5" are conditional.Garja wrote:All the above changes are fine no need to change. Dragoon RR is fine, but should have been extended to all goon type units. Again your fault in the first place. Genitours is also fine. A more complex change is hardly worth it. In general this slow process of adjustment is just too expensive in term of effort and time.
Also, in any case, it is too early to speak about next changes.
2. Whether all light cavalry should have its resistance decreased is a matter of opinion, so saying that it's anyone's "fault" is idiotic to begin with – particularly in this case as I personally do not think all light cavalry should, and attempted to highlight the extreme difficulties of defining the changes if it did. What you then mean by "again" I have no idea.
3. Instead of ignoring both my arguments and their respective logic, please read and actually think about what my five points are saying before you reply with things that don't have anything to do it. For example, I never said that Genitours needs further changes (or more complex ones) – I said that if it is at some point agreed that Genitours is not "fine" we should consider nerfing it further, in some way. I am saying (or was trying to at least) a completely different thing than what you seem to think I am.
4. It's never too early to speak about what changes we should consider, and present observations with logical reasoning. Discussion is always fine as long as it's constructive and at least somewhat intelligent.
Re: ESOC Patch Update & Tournament Information
1) native scout change is almost a bug fix. (Almost, because it's voluntarily threated as a real unit, totally ignoring the balance principle of "no 2 snaring units" in discovery age). Given that sometimes it has a huge impact on games (because players nowadays proactively exploit it) it is a more than essential change.
It honestly has little to nothing to do with nerfing French.
2) Goon ranged resistance nerf is not a way to nerf the dragoon or the civs with dragoons. It is a change added in the first place because dragoons don't die hard enough to ranged units like skirmishers, sometimes breaking even or powerplaying those units (which we assumed undesired).
In that sense, the units subject to this change are not a matter of opinion, but rather of coherence. All goon-type units should have the same treatment if this raises balance issues (which is the real thing subject of opinion).
As for the alternative generic nerf of increasing the unit cost, it sounds totally inadeguate to me. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to demolish the unit in that way. The cost nerf is something you expect for OP broekn units like yumi, sepoy, BR, etc. Not for bland european units.
3) Yes, if Dutch is proven OP then yes the change must be tweaked. But so far the civ seem just fine and players seem happy with that. To me you're being paranoid here.
4) Ulhan cost increase would have the opposite effect of what is desired, because it doesn't fix the real problem with the German semi ff but raises problems for when you want to actually produce unit (which cost have never been considered cheap).
5) Nothing particularly wrong with this, except that I pushed for nerfing it harder and you didn't want to. This playing safe approach causes more harm than benefits as it annoys both players and devs (that have to work on the same thing twice).
I hope you are satisfied with this reply. I didn't ignore your points with my previous post. I just find your motivations wrong in the first place so I jumped straight to the conclusion that changes are fine (which they are so far).
On top of that these considerations are premature. Not only because the patch have been barely tested (it has been out for like what, two weeks?) but also because continuous discussion on balance discourage people to actually play and enjoy the current patch. Let things settle down before raising the balance concern again.
It honestly has little to nothing to do with nerfing French.
2) Goon ranged resistance nerf is not a way to nerf the dragoon or the civs with dragoons. It is a change added in the first place because dragoons don't die hard enough to ranged units like skirmishers, sometimes breaking even or powerplaying those units (which we assumed undesired).
In that sense, the units subject to this change are not a matter of opinion, but rather of coherence. All goon-type units should have the same treatment if this raises balance issues (which is the real thing subject of opinion).
As for the alternative generic nerf of increasing the unit cost, it sounds totally inadeguate to me. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to demolish the unit in that way. The cost nerf is something you expect for OP broekn units like yumi, sepoy, BR, etc. Not for bland european units.
3) Yes, if Dutch is proven OP then yes the change must be tweaked. But so far the civ seem just fine and players seem happy with that. To me you're being paranoid here.
4) Ulhan cost increase would have the opposite effect of what is desired, because it doesn't fix the real problem with the German semi ff but raises problems for when you want to actually produce unit (which cost have never been considered cheap).
5) Nothing particularly wrong with this, except that I pushed for nerfing it harder and you didn't want to. This playing safe approach causes more harm than benefits as it annoys both players and devs (that have to work on the same thing twice).
I hope you are satisfied with this reply. I didn't ignore your points with my previous post. I just find your motivations wrong in the first place so I jumped straight to the conclusion that changes are fine (which they are so far).
On top of that these considerations are premature. Not only because the patch have been barely tested (it has been out for like what, two weeks?) but also because continuous discussion on balance discourage people to actually play and enjoy the current patch. Let things settle down before raising the balance concern again.
Re: ESOC Patch Update & Tournament Information
Garja wrote:1) native scout change is almost a bug fix. (Almost, because it's voluntarily threated as a real unit, totally ignoring the balance principle of "no 2 snaring units" in discovery age). Given that sometimes it has a huge impact on games (because players nowadays proactively exploit it) it is a more than essential change.
It honestly has little to nothing to do with nerfing French.
I find it a bit sad that this change is aimed at discovery age balance, but also affects the native civs' Advanced Scouts card, which was rarely used to begin with and this change nerfs it even further into the ground. Maybe the card could now be modified to give scouts their snare back when it's sent? I assume this side-effect for native civs was not intended.
-
- Pro Player
- Posts: 8050
- Joined: May 4, 2015
- ESO: PrinceofBabu
Re: ESOC Patch Update & Tournament Information
Garja wrote:1) native scout change is almost a bug fix. (Almost, because it's voluntarily threated as a real unit, totally ignoring the balance principle of "no 2 snaring units" in discovery age). Given that sometimes it has a huge impact on games (because players nowadays proactively exploit it) it is a more than essential change.
It honestly has little to nothing to do with nerfing French.
2) Goon ranged resistance nerf is not a way to nerf the dragoon or the civs with dragoons. It is a change added in the first place because dragoons don't die hard enough to ranged units like skirmishers, sometimes breaking even or powerplaying those units (which we assumed undesired).
In that sense, the units subject to this change are not a matter of opinion, but rather of coherence. All goon-type units should have the same treatment if this raises balance issues (which is the real thing subject of opinion).
As for the alternative generic nerf of increasing the unit cost, it sounds totally inadeguate to me. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to demolish the unit in that way. The cost nerf is something you expect for OP broekn units like yumi, sepoy, BR, etc. Not for bland european units.
3) Yes, if Dutch is proven OP then yes the change must be tweaked. But so far the civ seem just fine and players seem happy with that. To me you're being paranoid here.
4) Ulhan cost increase would have the opposite effect of what is desired, because it doesn't fix the real problem with the German semi ff but raises problems for when you want to actually produce unit (which cost have never been considered cheap).
5) Nothing particularly wrong with this, except that I pushed for nerfing it harder and you didn't want to. This playing safe approach causes more harm than benefits as it annoys both players and devs (that have to work on the same thing twice).
I hope you are satisfied with this reply. I didn't ignore your points with my previous post. I just find your motivations wrong in the first place so I jumped straight to the conclusion that changes are fine (which they are so far).
On top of that these considerations are premature. Not only because the patch have been barely tested (it has been out for like what, two weeks?) but also because continuous discussion on balance discourage people to actually play and enjoy the current patch. Let things settle down before raising the balance concern again.
This.
-
- Pro Player
- Posts: 10282
- Joined: Jun 6, 2015
- Location: Paris
- GameRanger ID: 5529322
Re: ESOC Patch Update & Tournament Information
We really need to nerf germany in another way. The uhlans hp nerf is just terrible. It has a much bigger impact than what you could expect from such a small nerf, because a huge amount of units need 1 less hit in melee to kill them : goons, cossacks, hussars, russian musks... Consider this : a huss needs 5 hits to kill a rusket, a uhlan needs 5 too. But a rusket needs 11 hits to kill a huss while it needs only 6 to kill a uhlan. Wtf ? Also uhlans now cost-effectively lose in a straight up fight to huss and even cossacks, while at the same time being worse than those against all ranged units (because of low hp so they get kited). In the end uhlans are rather useless, you can't really use them to block enemy cav anymore, which means germany is even weaker vs cav. In colonial it's even worse, uhlan was the only good unit germany had, now ger only has bad colo units.
Why nerf a unit that wasn't too good ? It basically means you nerf the civ at every single stage of the game, including those where it didn't need a nerf (namely colonial age and late game). Also in team germany is real garbage because your rely on uhlans even more, and you fight huss and goons even more often.
Why not remove a few uhlans from key shipments instead ?
Why nerf a unit that wasn't too good ? It basically means you nerf the civ at every single stage of the game, including those where it didn't need a nerf (namely colonial age and late game). Also in team germany is real garbage because your rely on uhlans even more, and you fight huss and goons even more often.
Why not remove a few uhlans from key shipments instead ?
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 ..
Re: ESOC Patch Update & Tournament Information
Can we make german houses cost 120w? This will slow down the semi ff, make it easier to counter with colo, and maybe encourage palantinate settlements.
To buff colonial, can we make the cards 9 xbow and 6 uhlan?
To buff colonial, can we make the cards 9 xbow and 6 uhlan?
last time i cryed was because i stood on Lego
-
- Pro Player
- Posts: 10282
- Joined: Jun 6, 2015
- Location: Paris
- GameRanger ID: 5529322
Re: ESOC Patch Update & Tournament Information
120w would also hugely nerf age 1, meaning that you have to chop extra wood when you ealry market and early tp, making it even slower (no need for that really) and even on 100w start if you just make a house you would have to chop 20w... It would also be an awkward change because you wouldn't be able to settle a neat build by sending 700w for example. And it would also nerf colonial age, which sucks.
Not sure about the military shipments, probs unnecessary. 8 bows + 2 uhlans is already a good shipment. 6 uhlans might be really strong.
I think we just need to sightly nerf age 3 shipments.
Not sure about the military shipments, probs unnecessary. 8 bows + 2 uhlans is already a good shipment. 6 uhlans might be really strong.
I think we just need to sightly nerf age 3 shipments.
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 ..
Re: ESOC Patch Update & Tournament Information
zoom wrote:ESOC Patch 2.0 or "How @GoodspeedRuined the Game Part 2.0"Goodspeed wrote:notification
Now that it's been a little while since the changes were finalized and released, I have suggestions for some of the changes we did make:
1. The removal of Native Scout snare is a non-essential change that, while hardly bad for either balance or gameplay, is made even less essential by the nerfs to the Dragoon and the French. In order to better adhere to the "minimum change – maximum balance" policy of the patch, we should consider reverting this change.
2. While the decrease in Dragoon ranged resistance similarly may not be strictly conforming to that same policy, it is more essential in its own right. However, not only is it the case that decreasing the ranged resistance of the Dragoon alone creates an exception – which some understandably take exception to – and that applying the change to other light cavalry units would be, at least in terms of definitions, a slippery slope we must not descend. Indeed, it is also the case that altering the attack, hitpoints or resistance of the Dragoon (or any other unit) yields complex and inconsistent results, the exact implications of which cannot be predicted or even determined, and should be avoided as long as there is an acceptable alternative. For these reasons, we should consider replacing this change with a slight Dragoon cost increase.
3. If it were to be determined that the decrease in Bank cost renders Dutch unacceptably overpowered, we should consider changing the cost decrease from 50w to 50f.
4. According to "2" above, the decrease in Uhlan hitpoints should be avoided as long as there is an acceptable alternative. To that end, we should consider replacing this change with a slight Uhlan cost increase.
5. If it were to be determined that the reduction of the effect of "Genitours" is insufficiently great and that this home-city shipment is still broken, we should consider nerfing it further.
Additional suggestions unrelated to changes implemented in 2.0 to follow.
1. Native scout snare is annoying and it was good change
2. Dragoon RR was ok change, i would rather nerf their multiplier vs vills. Maybe you could change back their rr then. (Btw they are not only one light cavalry ingame how some of you mention)
3. Bank cost rechange sounds ok
4. Uhlan change is totally fine how it is. With silly cost change their ff would be too strong.
5. Goons shouldnt go further than range of 14 btw. I would replace it with combat stats.
Re: ESOC Patch Update & Tournament Information
ESOC should make the following steps:
-Seperated increased wall cost with 3k hp (look how azzy fi and kynesie style op)
-Water naval rebalance
-Further civ balance
-Seperated increased wall cost with 3k hp (look how azzy fi and kynesie style op)
-Water naval rebalance
-Further civ balance
Re: ESOC Patch Update & Tournament Information
I would have nerfed Uhlan attack instead of HP, I think I pushed for that but this is from the time when I was still staff and that was ages ago.
I can't remember the exact discussion.
I can't remember the exact discussion.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests