Eventhough I don't always agree with hazza/dia about beckmala, I have to agree that at some situations he doesn't look willing to take the necessary actions, and giving over-value to some individuals's opinion.
For example, everyone went for fixed crates on the previous threads other than 2 players, but somehow, ground is being sought in order to not to implement this change. It possibly could make some people think they are being ignored.
Beta Aztecs Discussion
Re: Beta Aztecs Discussion
It's predictable for you to feel that way, given my lack of interest in interacting with you, resulting from your antisocial behavior. In reality, I asked almost 20 players, and am continuing to ask the entire community, now. Your problem is the same as usual: You're concerned only with yourself. You don't have to spend a lot of time; you just have to do a better job at arguing:[Armag] diarouga wrote:I think Hazza has a point, you might listen to people but we really feel like you ignore us.
You take a lot of time to answer (can't blame you for that though), and you ask us to prove why a change is bad while you should be the one trying to prove why it is good. You don't really change your opinion about your changes even when most people are against it.
Furthermore, I'm not a big fan of your patch process. You implemented 50 changes without asking anyone and now we have to spend a lot of time trying to argue against 25 changes. It's very time consuming for us and I guess that's why Hazza and Somppu think that this is a waste of time.
You also have a weird EP philosophy which is probably not shared by the community. I'm quite sure that the community doesn't want the chinese changes, and so far everybody is against buffing 5 coyotes to 6 coyotes, it's just standardizing. Still, you're being quite stubborn and you don't want to revert it.
Finally, I'm disappointed to see that you don't want to implement fixed crates when 60% of the community supports it, while you're defending extremely unpopular changes.
With GS the EP wasn't a dictatorship at all and often it felt like he would consider the top players' and the community's opinion before his.
Speaking of the Aztecs changes, as a good example; I have been making extensive and solid points as to why they are good. You have simply failed to refute them, whether you can't or don't want to. Try presenting a more convincing argument than "I dislike this change for no logical reason"" or "this change is bad but I can't tell you why", and your opinion might seem more convincing. You should be thankful that I don't change my logical opinion based on only popularity – it takes logical reasoning for that to happen. Like I have said many times, already, though, if a particular change proves especially unpopular, I will consider reverting it, based on that fact alone – I just refuse to do it the instant two people say "bad change". Again: How can you say that I won't make any updates to the beta when the fucking thing hasn't even been out for a week—who's being unreasonable!? Judge me when you have something to judge. Your accusations are as nonsensical as they are premature; which is very.
Buffing 5 Coyotes is standardizing – the good kind, which increases options without detracting from unique features. I even said, just above, that I'm open to reverting it, though, so as usual you are being biased, ignorant and manipulative – including everyone being against a change, just because you are. Not everyone is quite so obsessed with spewing their opinion.
The reason why I don't want to implement fixed crates when the community is split 55/45 on the issue, is that it's extremely fundamental and intrusive, removing a signum of the game. Comparing it to a small change that improves options and viability is ridiculous. It is a radical change that's perfectly controversial. I defend anything, based on my logical opinion, regardless of how I ultimately act. Anything else would be idiotic and preposterous. For one thing, you are ignoring the fact that I am personally strongly in favor of fixing crates, yet I wont do it, because it would be inconsiderate and irresponsible.
I won't tell you again: please stop making accusational off-topic posts full of malicious lies. Try to express arguments over only subjective opinions, and play-testing more, and speculating less. Contribute something of substance, instead of overwhelming with a lack of it.
As for Cuckoo: He thinks this is a waste of time, because of you (and a few other posters). As for Hazza, he is objectively behaving like a child. I miss Cuckoo, because he contributes to the discussion. Thankfully, he has expressed his interest in continuing to discuss with me, privately!
-
[Armag] diarouga - Ninja
- Posts: 12710
- Joined: Feb 26, 2015
- ESO: diarouga
- Location: France
Re: Beta Aztecs Discussion
There's nothing to play test honestly.
You only made small changes so it's not like I can play a game and prove that I won thanks to +1 coyote or +2 attack. I'm complaining about the design.
Anyway, saying that changing 5 coyotes to 6 coyotes is good because it gives more option is not really an argument. I took the 5 uhlan shipment as an example previously but I could take other examples. If we want all the shipments to be equally viable, we should consider the following changes :
-700f changed to 800f because nobody sends 700f before 700w. That way, we'd give more options to the nilla civs !
-7 cows in age 2 changed to 20 cows in age 2 because we never see that shipment, and people might send 20 cows as their first colonial shipment with a livestock pen. That would create so many interesting options ! Don't worry btw, you can play test it, and if you prove me that it's too strong, I'll nerf it !
- 10 pikes in age 3 changed to 15 pikes
- 10 bows in age 3 changed to 15 bows
- Infantry HP changed from 15% to 20% because we never see that shipment and we want it to become more viable.
- Advanced mills now also gives 300w
- Distributivism grants 1.7 wood/sec because people always send 3v instead of it.
- Colbertism gives 2 food/sec. That way, you can either send 3v or colbertism !
I could go on forever and suggest to change every single shipment in the game to make them all equally viable, but I think you got my point. We don't want all the shipments to be equally viable.
It's quite ironic that you're claiming I am egoist while you changed the EP philosophy because it makes the game more interesting for you, without caring about the others.
You only made small changes so it's not like I can play a game and prove that I won thanks to +1 coyote or +2 attack. I'm complaining about the design.
Anyway, saying that changing 5 coyotes to 6 coyotes is good because it gives more option is not really an argument. I took the 5 uhlan shipment as an example previously but I could take other examples. If we want all the shipments to be equally viable, we should consider the following changes :
-700f changed to 800f because nobody sends 700f before 700w. That way, we'd give more options to the nilla civs !
-7 cows in age 2 changed to 20 cows in age 2 because we never see that shipment, and people might send 20 cows as their first colonial shipment with a livestock pen. That would create so many interesting options ! Don't worry btw, you can play test it, and if you prove me that it's too strong, I'll nerf it !
- 10 pikes in age 3 changed to 15 pikes
- 10 bows in age 3 changed to 15 bows
- Infantry HP changed from 15% to 20% because we never see that shipment and we want it to become more viable.
- Advanced mills now also gives 300w
- Distributivism grants 1.7 wood/sec because people always send 3v instead of it.
- Colbertism gives 2 food/sec. That way, you can either send 3v or colbertism !
I could go on forever and suggest to change every single shipment in the game to make them all equally viable, but I think you got my point. We don't want all the shipments to be equally viable.
It's quite ironic that you're claiming I am egoist while you changed the EP philosophy because it makes the game more interesting for you, without caring about the others.
Re: Beta Aztecs Discussion
Aztec mirrors in recent years indicate otherwise. What makes you think the Puma Spearman counters light infantry effectively enough?Garja wrote:zoom wrote:It is the Pikeman multiplier. Regardless, the relevant part is that it's a problem.Show hidden quotes
I agree that there is a slight risk in buffing both 5 Coyote Runners, and the unit itself, but the former is a relatively bad shipment, and the latter is a small buff. One option is to nerf the Macehualtin shipments, without buffing the Coyote one; that would help achieving the result, too. It would be a nerf, though, unless you also removed Puma Spearman siege trooper tag.
I see no reason to buff Arrow Knight speed, too. It seems fine at 3.75 already, without a limber mode.
I see no reason to compensate for a moderate ERK nerf, with the unit being so strong.
I see no reason that the Jaguar Prowl Knight would go from failing to counter both cavalry and heavy infantry, to overpowered, with a 1/9 attack and 1/23 hitpoints buff.
I agree that removing the siege trooper tag from the Puma Spearman is potentially problematic.
The Skull Knight is a relatively terrible unique unit, in every other sense than that it's auto-improving. I'd rather not standardize it, on top of which a speed buff would be more significant.
Macehualtin temple shipment range is an option. I like both alternatives. I see no reason to change the Coyote Runner temple shipment, though. In general, I think you exaggerate things.
Other than that, I haven't anything to add to what I've already said, ITT. Slightly buffing the civilization seems desirable, given the general consensus.
Puma failing to counter coyotemen has never been a problem.
2 attack is not even a small buff, objectively.
The reason to buff the arrow knight speed is because it's not viable with such low speed with the rest of the Aztec army having, at worst, 4.5 speed. Euro artillery has 4 speed. No limber mode is the advantage of being an infantry unit (which still has a long setup animation anyway). There are also drawbacks for being an infantry unit.
The reason to compensate for ERK nerf is that RI units already have a specific multiplier ERK which accounts the fact that the unit is so strong. In fact the unit is "so strong" mostly for it's dps and not his supposed immunity to other units (in fact ERK tend to take damage from basically everything).
JPK does fine at what is supposed to do. Again, I hate to repeat myself, but you have no clue with such statements.
Skull knight is a rather great unique unit in every other sense but speed. High HP, high attakc, area damage.
A buff of simply 1/9 attack is small to moderate, in my book.
Do you think a +0.25 Arrow Knight speed buff would be worth making? I don't at alll think it would be bad, but I'm not convinced it's meaningful, especially with the population cost buff (relating to something that is more punitive to the unit, than its speed). I'm happy to poll it, during the beta.
I'm well aware of multipliers against the Eagle Runner Knight. It doesn't seem to fully account for the unit's strength, which is evidently too great, overall. I've never thought the unit particularly immune to damage. It's simply a means of making countering it a little more manageable, and options to the unit a little more viable.
The Jaguar Prowl Knight does a fine job at countering the dreaded Pikeman. Unfortunately, it never sees use, beyond the big buttons. Again, you tell me I'm clueless, while demonstrating your cluelessness:
The Skull Knight is literally a significantly worse Doppelsoldner that auto-upgrades. It has lower speed (which is a massive deal for such a unit), lower siege attack per cost, lower attack per cost, the same hitpoints per cost, and cannot be trained at all (let alone from the start of the game). If you ever reach the Industrial Age, and really want to, you can spend resources dancing for it! At least it inadvertently scales, when you ship improvements for more useful units!
Re: Beta Aztecs Discussion
At this time, based on collective feedback, I think that a more limited scope, with a greater focus on essential balance changes, is a good idea. Thus, I am currently considering making the following changes:
– "Heal Dance" no longer affects the incapacitated ("dead") War Chief
- Coyote Runner hand attack decreased from 20 to 18 [revert]
– “5 Coyote Runners” shipment increased to 6 Coyote Runners
- "Coyote Combat" shipment increased from +20% Coyote Runner hitpoints and +4% Coyote Runner speed to +20% Coyote Runner hitpoints and +10% Coyote Runner speed [revert]
- "9 Macehualtins" shipment increased to 10 Macehualtins [revert]
– "8 Macehualtins" Infinite shipment changed to “9 Macehualtins" [revert]
– Puma Spearman "Siege Trooper" tag removed
– Skull Knight hitpoints increased from 300 to 320
In general, removing Puma Spearman "Siege Trooper" tag makes sense, because of how units with a bonus against the tag (the Minuteman, Irregular and Warrior, respectively) vary a great deal, between civilizations (making it at best difficult to balance). It seems worth testing.
– "Heal Dance" no longer affects the incapacitated ("dead") War Chief
- Coyote Runner hand attack decreased from 20 to 18 [revert]
– “5 Coyote Runners” shipment increased to 6 Coyote Runners
- "Coyote Combat" shipment increased from +20% Coyote Runner hitpoints and +4% Coyote Runner speed to +20% Coyote Runner hitpoints and +10% Coyote Runner speed [revert]
- "9 Macehualtins" shipment increased to 10 Macehualtins [revert]
– "8 Macehualtins" Infinite shipment changed to “9 Macehualtins" [revert]
– Puma Spearman "Siege Trooper" tag removed
– Skull Knight hitpoints increased from 300 to 320
In general, removing Puma Spearman "Siege Trooper" tag makes sense, because of how units with a bonus against the tag (the Minuteman, Irregular and Warrior, respectively) vary a great deal, between civilizations (making it at best difficult to balance). It seems worth testing.
-
[Armag] diarouga
- Ninja
- Posts: 12710
- Joined: Feb 26, 2015
- ESO: diarouga
- Location: France
Re: Beta Aztecs Discussion
Sounds better but where is the buff?
Because of the heal dance nerf, FF/fi are no longer viable.
6 coyotes is not very relevant, on top of being bad design wise.
So the only buff is puma siege tag removed? Aztec is still the worst civ.
Because of the heal dance nerf, FF/fi are no longer viable.
6 coyotes is not very relevant, on top of being bad design wise.
So the only buff is puma siege tag removed? Aztec is still the worst civ.
Re: Beta Aztecs Discussion
zoom wrote:Aztec mirrors in recent years indicate otherwise. What makes you think the Puma Spearman counters light infantry effectively enough?Garja wrote:Show hidden quotes
Puma failing to counter coyotemen has never been a problem.
2 attack is not even a small buff, objectively.
The reason to buff the arrow knight speed is because it's not viable with such low speed with the rest of the Aztec army having, at worst, 4.5 speed. Euro artillery has 4 speed. No limber mode is the advantage of being an infantry unit (which still has a long setup animation anyway). There are also drawbacks for being an infantry unit.
The reason to compensate for ERK nerf is that RI units already have a specific multiplier ERK which accounts the fact that the unit is so strong. In fact the unit is "so strong" mostly for it's dps and not his supposed immunity to other units (in fact ERK tend to take damage from basically everything).
JPK does fine at what is supposed to do. Again, I hate to repeat myself, but you have no clue with such statements.
Skull knight is a rather great unique unit in every other sense but speed. High HP, high attakc, area damage.
A buff of simply 1/9 attack is small to moderate, in my book.
Do you think a +0.25 Arrow Knight speed buff would be worth making? I don't at alll think it would be bad, but I'm not convinced it's meaningful, especially with the population cost buff (relating to something that is more punitive to the unit, than its speed). I'm happy to poll it, during the beta.
I'm well aware of multipliers against the Eagle Runner Knight. It doesn't seem to fully account for the unit's strength, which is evidently too great, overall. I've never thought the unit particularly immune to damage. It's simply a means of making countering it a little more manageable, and options to the unit a little more viable.
The Jaguar Prowl Knight does a fine job at countering the dreaded Pikeman. Unfortunately, it never sees use, beyond the big buttons. Again, you tell me I'm clueless, while demonstrating your cluelessness:
The Skull Knight is literally a significantly worse Doppelsoldner that auto-upgrades. It has lower speed (which is a massive deal for such a unit), lower siege attack per cost, lower attack per cost, the same hitpoints per cost, and cannot be trained at all (let alone from the start of the game). If you ever reach the Industrial Age, and really want to, you can spend resources dancing for it! At least it inadvertently scales, when you ship improvements for more useful units!
Aztec mirror are coyote first and then add puma with 600g and 6 puma. Or at least that is the ideal way. Regardless of the most efficient build puma are included at some point to counter coyo. As for your question it is simply personal experience and the fact you can test it yourself in the scenario editor.
1/9 is more than 10% which cannot be considerated small. Even more so if the unit profile is high attack like coyotemen. +2 meelee base damage is simply not a small buff. It equal to +4 ranged damage just to get an idea. Ashigarus back then were nerfed by 2 ranged points and now they're considered a bad unit early on. Rodoleros have -2 base damage compared to Nilla and they're considered much worse. The entity of the change is simply not neglectable. And the logic of it is not the best. As said it's high attack profile unit and the base damage scales with the war dance possibly going out of control.
Yes the AK speed buff is abosuletely relevant because together with the pop buff it means you can employ it as a long range infantry unit against other units and not just artillery or buildings.
Well we will see how ERK perform with less rr AND a dedicated multiplier.
JPK, once massed and upgraded can even challenge skirms. Their base HP and attack is so high that even without stealth, once they connect they just work as cav (actually better stats per cost than cav). Surely they get countered by skirms but if there is a mix of any other unit (coincidentially the WC is there with the speed card) then skirms are likely toasted.
A double buff like the one you propose just means that the unit is simply overhelming when it reaches all 3 upgrades.
Skull knights auto up which is evidently a big deal and they have 3 viable upgrade cards (because they're shared with other premium units). It's relatively easier to get a one time mass of skull knigths than dopps and the unit doesn't deplete any resource so it can be trained an infinite number of times, if the player so chooses. The stat to cost argument is not ideal in this case for these reasons.
Clearly it's not an OP unit overall, or it would be used more. But it's not weak either. When skulls connect they destroy anything ALREADY, so you can't buff their base stats more claiming that the unit needs to perform better in that sense.
If the intention is simpy to make the unit more competitive just then increase the speed, with the obvious drawback that the unit will in fact be really scary at that point. Best solution imo is just to make it train a bif faster since 9.2 seconds (the fastest it can get with saturated firepit) still equals to 45 seconds per batch of 5.
Re: Beta Aztecs Discussion
zoom wrote:At this time, based on collective feedback, I think that a more limited scope, with a greater focus on essential balance changes, is a good idea. Thus, I am currently considering making the following changes:
– "Heal Dance" no longer affects the incapacitated ("dead") War Chief ok
- Coyote Runner hand attack decreased from 20 to 18 [revert] ok
– “5 Coyote Runners” shipment increased to 6 Coyote Runners ok
- "Coyote Combat" shipment increased from +20% Coyote Runner hitpoints and +4% Coyote Runner speed to +20% Coyote Runner hitpoints and +10% Coyote Runner speed [revert] with 6.5 base speed, the 4% option might be better
- "9 Macehualtins" shipment increased to 10 Macehualtins [revert] I think this nerf was right because it nerfs the rush which is the only way to justify any other change
– "8 Macehualtins" Infinite shipment changed to “9 Macehualtins" [revert] infinite is a bad idea but the card should be nerfed
– Puma Spearman "Siege Trooper" tag removed without compensation this is not a good change
– Skull Knight hitpoints increased from 300 to 320 see the post above
In general, removing Puma Spearman "Siege Trooper" tag makes sense, because of how units with a bonus against the tag (the Minuteman, Irregular and Warrior, respectively) vary a great deal, between civilizations (making it at best difficult to balance). It seems worth testing. surely we can test that, but I can tell from experience that the same scenarios you're gonna test are those were the change will be proven wrong (rush scenarios).
In fact, buffing the coyote shipment and removing the siege tag is just going to buff Aztec rush which is exactly what you want to nerf.
Re: Beta Aztecs Discussion
Here’s a few thought starters on my mind:
-Aztec colonial is weird because the Mace is the only unit that does pretty well in its class but requires HI to be effective. As a result coyotes have to get made but they aren’t that strong of a unit in isolation.
-Getting to fortress isn’t easy and isn’t rewarded aside from the explorer thing. You have to build a slow building noble hut and then get out ERK which need to be combined with maces or coyotes.
Could both be solved by an age2 noble hut option that trains colonial ERK? You could then build a noble hut in transition for fortress play and it might not even destroy colonial because it’s expensive to build.
-Aztec colonial is weird because the Mace is the only unit that does pretty well in its class but requires HI to be effective. As a result coyotes have to get made but they aren’t that strong of a unit in isolation.
-Getting to fortress isn’t easy and isn’t rewarded aside from the explorer thing. You have to build a slow building noble hut and then get out ERK which need to be combined with maces or coyotes.
Could both be solved by an age2 noble hut option that trains colonial ERK? You could then build a noble hut in transition for fortress play and it might not even destroy colonial because it’s expensive to build.
-
[Armag] diarouga
- Ninja
- Posts: 12710
- Joined: Feb 26, 2015
- ESO: diarouga
- Location: France
Re: Beta Aztecs Discussion
Noble hut in colonial makes sense. After all, you can build warhut and blockhouses in age 1 although you cannot train units, so why not do the same with the noble hut ?
Colonial ERK would change the civ way too much however, I don't like it.
Colonial ERK would change the civ way too much however, I don't like it.
Re: Beta Aztecs Discussion
Could allow jags or investigate some modifications for the colonial ERK to make it viable.
My thought was it would be similar to other civs who use pikes as a stop gap. You could still use 6 pumas or train 5-10 of them because adding a second expensive production facility is an investment.
Might also freshen up the stale over reliance on coyote that Aztec have in colonial.
My thought was it would be similar to other civs who use pikes as a stop gap. You could still use 6 pumas or train 5-10 of them because adding a second expensive production facility is an investment.
Might also freshen up the stale over reliance on coyote that Aztec have in colonial.
-
[Armag] diarouga
- Ninja
- Posts: 12710
- Joined: Feb 26, 2015
- ESO: diarouga
- Location: France
Re: Beta Aztecs Discussion
I see the point and it makes some sense, because the issue with Aztec right now is that the civ has a bad eco, can't go age 3 and has a rather poor age 2 all things considered. However, I think that it would change the game too much and I'd rather go for more standard buffs (coyote attack, remove the puma siege tag etc).
Re: Beta Aztecs Discussion
Moving the nobles hut to II is a good change imo. Only downside is the inevitable "another semi-FF civ reeeee" complaints.
Could combine it with jaguar buffs and enabling that unit in colonial. Would be nice if it was relevant and it might help against the complaints.
Wouldn't move ERK to colonial though. I see no reason to give Azzy an age2 goon.
Could combine it with jaguar buffs and enabling that unit in colonial. Would be nice if it was relevant and it might help against the complaints.
Wouldn't move ERK to colonial though. I see no reason to give Azzy an age2 goon.
Re: Beta Aztecs Discussion
Both jpk and erk in colonial are kinda imba. It's a huge change I would avoid that.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest