Beta V3

User avatar
New Zealand zoom
Gendarme
Posts: 9314
Joined: Apr 26, 2015
ESO: Funnu
Location: New_Sweland

Beta V3

Post by zoom »

After much discussing, reading and reflecting, I expect to release the anticipated next update to the beta, soon. I figured I'd create this thread, for sharing the current draft with everyone:

General
Treasure changes
– Before Colonial Age, rescued warriors (treasure rewards) now do 1/4 damage to heroes and villagers
– Outlaw Rifleman (treasure guardian) range and line of sight decreased from 18 and 20 to 15 and 17, respectively
– Pirate (treasure guardian) hitpoints decreased from 600 to 400
– 100c dynamic (“random”) starting crate spawn removed (does not impact the 100f+100c spawn)
– Starting Town Center building placement minimum range no longer applies to Trading Posts
– Native Embassy now available to Chinese, Indians, and Japanese
– British Allies hitpoints bonus decreased from 10% to 5%
– Fortress Age councils and politicians (not wonders), except for "The Exiled Prince" and "The Messenger" research points decreased from 110 to 105
– "2 Flatland Castles", "2 Hill Castles" and "3 Mountain Castles" shipments decreased to 1, 1, and 2 Castles, respectively (descriptions and names updated accordingly) [revert]
– Halberdier attack decreased from 30 to 28; hand resistance increased from 10% to 20%

Aztecs
– 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]
– Temple of Xipe Totec shipment now also increases Coyote Runner ranged resistance from 10% to 20%
– "9 Macehualtins" shipment increased to 10 Macehualtins [revert]
– "8 Macehualtins" Infinite shipment changed to “9 Macehualtins" [revert]
– Temple of Centeotl shipment now also grants the Macehualtin 1 splash radius (damage cap of 16 added accordingly)
– Arrow Knight speed increased from 3.75 to 4
– Great Temple of Quetzalcoatl Support shipment cost reduced from 2000c to 1500c (Religious Unity shipment adjusted accordingly)
– Skull Knight hitpoints increased from 300 to 320
– Great Temple of Huitzilopochtli shipment cost reduced from 2000c to 1500c (Religious Unity shipment adjusted accordingly)

Chinese
– 100w removed from starting crates; dynamic (“random”) starting crates added
– Keshik hand and ranged attacks decreased from 10 to 8 [revert]
– Iron Flail hand attack decreased from 20 to 19 (damage cap decreased from 40 to 38); hitpoints decreased from 320 to 292 [revert]
– Meteor Hammer attack increased from 25 to 29 [revert]

Dutch
– Envoy train points decreased from 30 to 10
– “Tulip Speculation” shipment increased from +15% to +20% Bank coin trickle

Germans
– Unupgraded Trade Routes now deliver 4/5 the experience points
– 2 Settler Wagons and 1 Settler increased to 3 Settler Wagons [revert]
– Uhlan cost reduced from 60f, 100c to 50f, 100c; hitpoints decreased from 190 to 180 [revert]

Indians
– Brahmin Monk Stomp passive ability moved from Discovery to Colonial Age
– Brahmin Monk Stun ability range increased from 0 to 1
– Ottoman Allies line of sight bonus no longer applies to buildings; "Levy" improvement cost increased from 200xprt to 250xprt
– Rajput hand attack decreased from 20 to 18 [partial revert]

Iroquois
– War Chief hitpoints aura decreased from 15% to 10%
– “Crates of 200 Food, 100 Wood, and 100 Coin” INFINITE shipment decreased to 100f, 100w, 100c [revert]

Japanese
– Yabusame ranged attack decreased from 10 to 9 [partial revert]

Portuguese
– 100c removed from starting crates [revert]
– Berry and hunting gather-rates increased by 5%
– "Besteiros" improvement cost reduced from 2400w to 2000w
– Cassador ranged attack "rate-of-fire" increased (nerfed) from 3.5 to 4.5; ranged attack increased from 20 to 25 [extension]

Russians
– Musketeer batch cost increased from 270f, 90c to 285f, 95c [from -4% cost to +1% cost]

Sioux
– “4 Villagers” shipment added [revert]
– Brand new “5 Villagers” shipment added to Colonial Age removed [revert]
– “Mustangs” shipment increased from 10% to 15%

Spanish
– "Spanish Gold" shipment increased from 250c to 400c per shipment; moved to Fortress Age [revert]
Accordingly projected changes from EP6 through Beta V3, excluding treasures
In the event that anyone is unaware, the notes of the current build (V2) are available here.

Please understand that the beta (including this draft) is subject to further revisions. Prior to its conclusion, I am also expecting to conduct numerous polls, to decide numerous things.

At this time, I am especially wondering:

Whether removing the Puma Spearman "Siege Trooper" tag risks making the Aztec rush impossible to counter, with the "5 Coyote Runners" shipment buff not being particularly relevant to this question.
Whether the Chinese risks being underpowered.
Whether to further nerf Germans, and if so: How.
Whether to instead nerf the Iroquois in a way that also affects the civilization's Colonial Age performance, and if so: How.
Whether to further buff the Sioux.

Thank you all for your continued input!
User avatar
New Zealand zoom
Gendarme
Posts: 9314
Joined: Apr 26, 2015
ESO: Funnu
Location: New_Sweland

Re: Beta V3

Post by zoom »

As you may be aware, by default, every civilization in the game has a certain set of starting crates. Then, every game, one of the following five sets of crates is added to the starting crates of all players (with the previous exception of Chinese, to whom nothing was ever added):

1. 100f
2. 100w
3. 100c
4. 100f+100w
5. 100f+100c

Each "random" set of crates is selected with identical frequency by the game. This set is always identical for all players in a given game.

Given the changes in the OP, these are the resulting differences, for the Chinese:

1. +100f-100w (a nerf)
2. +100w-100w (no-change)
3. +100c-100w
4. +100f+100w-100w (a buff)
5. +100f+100c-100w (arguably a nerf)

Please note that these changes will render the civilization possible to balance in every given game, since its strength now varies with the crate start – as is the case for every other civilization in the game. When considering the impact in cases "1"-"5" above, I suggest you take into account, how the respective crate set affected balance, previously. For example, while "4" is a considerable buff, Chinese used to underperform on this start, due to the fact that every other civilization received an additional 100f, whenever it occured. Using "2" as a benchmark might prove helpful in understanding the outcomes.
:chinese:
Great Britain WickedCossack
Retired Contributor
Posts: 1904
Joined: Feb 11, 2015

Re: Beta V3

Post by WickedCossack »

Just a comment on the following:
– Stagecoach line of sight increased from 0 to 15 for all six expansion civilizations
– Iron Horse line of sight increased from 0 to 15 for all six expansion civilizations

I like the idea to make this consistent between all civs but surely it's better to put all civs down to 0, and not to give all vision?

4 TP's across a map already offer a lot of vision, don't think they need a rng cart that the opposing player can't track scouting any units crossing the route
User avatar
Netherlands edeholland
ESOC Community Team
Donator 01
Posts: 5033
Joined: Feb 11, 2015
ESO: edeholland
GameRanger ID: 4053888
Clan: ESOC

Re: Beta V3

Post by edeholland »

@EAGLEMUT @Kevsoft Is there any chance we can remove the TP icon from the score board? Before going into whether that's preferable (I think most players think it is) I would like to know whether it's technically possible.
User avatar
Italy Garja
Retired Contributor
Donator 02
Posts: 9730
Joined: Feb 11, 2015
ESO: Garja

Re: Beta V3

Post by Garja »

Some of those changes are very flawed in the underlying logic.
I mean why would you need some sort of xp mechanic at all costs (nat TPs). Also let's say you take 4 nat posts which equals to 2 TPs. Is that balanced and desired? To me it sounds both unbalanced (too much xp and in trickle form) and also kinda shit design (competes with TPs when they're supposed to be 2 completely different things).
Also why remove the 100g crates. It's just a crate like the others and it's actually cool because it makes things more colonial oriented. It's not an improvement in terms of balance really. It is going to increase the number of times TP civs get a TP in age1 (which apparently most consider problematic). It is also going to increase the number of times Russia gets the food start vs Japan or Germans or Dutch or w/e civ might struggle vs Russia. Brits will more often get 1 extra house and the 4.10 age up. I mean all those cases are ok but I don't see them being preferable to the point that 100g has to be removed. Asian civ vs FF civ with gold start is arguably better for the asian civ (no TP and in Jap vs Brits it often means 4.30 vs 4.30 age up). I'm sure there are plenty of other situations but you got the point. It's just an arbitrary decision with ass logic.
Image Image Image
User avatar
United States of America n0el
ESOC Business Team
Posts: 7068
Joined: Jul 24, 2015
ESO: jezabob
Clan: 팀 하우스

Re: Beta V3

Post by n0el »

I don’t understand the logic of the minus 100c change at all. Isn’t the argument against fixed crates that it decreases variety? This does that and doesn’t help
Balance at all. In fact it makes the gap between a wood / no wood start even larger.
mad cuz bad
No Flag deleted_user
Ninja
Posts: 14364
Joined: Mar 26, 2015

Re: Beta V3

Post by deleted_user »

I like the change list Zoi, looking much better than previous ones. However I would request removing +100w dynamic crates from all civs if we were to implement fixed crates ( and thats what it meant for ), if we can implement it, I think germany wouldn't need additional nerf once you extend fixed crates for wood start aswell, since 200w start is the biggest reason why germany is unstoppable imo.
Great Britain WickedCossack
Retired Contributor
Posts: 1904
Joined: Feb 11, 2015

Re: Beta V3

  • Quote

Post by WickedCossack »

Can we also limit future patches to like 3-5 changes maximum (excluding reverts.)

This starts to become like age sanc FP version 2 with so many changes that you are playing a different game.

When you limit yourself to so few changes the idea is you end up putting only through the most critical balance issues and have enough control to assess the consequences of the changes.
Great Britain WickedCossack
Retired Contributor
Posts: 1904
Joined: Feb 11, 2015

Re: Beta V3

Post by WickedCossack »

deleted_user wrote:I like the change list Zoi, looking much better than previous ones. However I would request removing +100w dynamic crates from all civs if we were to implement fixed crates ( and thats what it meant for ), if we can implement it, I think germany wouldn't need additional nerf if you can extend fixed crates for wood start aswell, since 200w start is the biggest reason why germany is unstoppable imo.
Also would be a good to get a full change list for the new patch as I'm not sure everyone is aware this is a change list since the first proposed beta, hence isn't actually the full patch change list.

Initial change list: viewtopic.php?f=80&t=17932
User avatar
Netherlands edeholland
ESOC Community Team
Donator 01
Posts: 5033
Joined: Feb 11, 2015
ESO: edeholland
GameRanger ID: 4053888
Clan: ESOC

Re: Beta V3

Post by edeholland »

WickedCossack wrote:
deleted_user wrote:I like the change list Zoi, looking much better than previous ones. However I would request removing +100w dynamic crates from all civs if we were to implement fixed crates ( and thats what it meant for ), if we can implement it, I think germany wouldn't need additional nerf if you can extend fixed crates for wood start aswell, since 200w start is the biggest reason why germany is unstoppable imo.
Also would be a good to get a full change list for the new patch as I'm not sure everyone is aware this is a change list since the first proposed beta, hence isn't actually the full patch change list.

Initial change list: viewtopic.php?f=80&t=17932
This V3 has not been implemented yet which is why there isn't an updated change list yet, I except it will be released when this patch is actually implemented in the beta.
User avatar
United States of America n0el
ESOC Business Team
Posts: 7068
Joined: Jul 24, 2015
ESO: jezabob
Clan: 팀 하우스

Re: Beta V3

Post by n0el »

I think he meant the full V3 changes. Because AFAIK it is these plus the others, not listed.
mad cuz bad
User avatar
New Zealand zoom
Gendarme
Posts: 9314
Joined: Apr 26, 2015
ESO: Funnu
Location: New_Sweland

Re: Beta V3

Post by zoom »

Also added to the OP: In the event that anyone is unaware, the notes of the current build (V2) are available here.

Thank you to Goodspeed for inadvertently giving me the idea!
User avatar
New Zealand zoom
Gendarme
Posts: 9314
Joined: Apr 26, 2015
ESO: Funnu
Location: New_Sweland

Re: Beta V3

Post by zoom »

WickedCossack wrote:Just a comment on the following:
– Stagecoach line of sight increased from 0 to 15 for all six expansion civilizations
– Iron Horse line of sight increased from 0 to 15 for all six expansion civilizations

I like the idea to make this consistent between all civs but surely it's better to put all civs down to 0, and not to give all vision?

4 TP's across a map already offer a lot of vision, don't think they need a rng cart that the opposing player can't track scouting any units crossing the route
For balance purposes, I'm inclined to agree. The problem is that it's removing a feature from the game, which I'd rather not do, unless the alternatives aren't acceptable. Making civilizations consistent without removing anything seems preferable.

I would argue that the key feature, in this regard, is that TWC civilizations have all sockets scouted, by default. I think it's only punitive and silly that the effect of identical trade route upgrades varies between original and expansion civilizations.

I don't know that it's warranted, but one option is limiting line of sight to the Iron Horse, removing it from the Stagecoach. That would at least preserve the feature, to an extent, and buff the former, relative to the latter.

If players consider it a significant balance issue, we should consider options.
User avatar
New Zealand zoom
Gendarme
Posts: 9314
Joined: Apr 26, 2015
ESO: Funnu
Location: New_Sweland

Re: Beta V3

Post by zoom »

Garja wrote:Some of those changes are very flawed in the underlying logic.
I mean why would you need some sort of xp mechanic at all costs (nat TPs). Also let's say you take 4 nat posts which equals to 2 TPs. Is that balanced and desired? To me it sounds both unbalanced (too much xp and in trickle form) and also kinda shit design (competes with TPs when they're supposed to be 2 completely different things).
Also why remove the 100g crates. It's just a crate like the others and it's actually cool because it makes things more colonial oriented. It's not an improvement in terms of balance really. It is going to increase the number of times TP civs get a TP in age1 (which apparently most consider problematic). It is also going to increase the number of times Russia gets the food start vs Japan or Germans or Dutch or w/e civ might struggle vs Russia. Brits will more often get 1 extra house and the 4.10 age up. I mean all those cases are ok but I don't see them being preferable to the point that 100g has to be removed. Asian civ vs FF civ with gold start is arguably better for the asian civ (no TP and in Jap vs Brits it often means 4.30 vs 4.30 age up). I'm sure there are plenty of other situations but you got the point. It's just an arbitrary decision with ass logic.
You wouldn't; I just think it would help inter-civilization balance on 0tp maps, and incentivize minor native use, without significant drawbacks. It seems worthwhile to try.

The reasons I am suggesting to remove the 100c start, is that it's the greatest outlier, in terms of inter-civilization balance, and that it doesn't seem to add meaningful variety (that 100f or 100f+100c) already doesn't offer. I think it's a sound compromise between fixed and random crate starts. Athough balance would suffer (particularly for Dutch), I'm happy to keep the 100c start, if players prefer. Compromise is such a dirty word! The essential thing is that Chinese is no longer necessarily unbalanced.
User avatar
New Zealand zoom
Gendarme
Posts: 9314
Joined: Apr 26, 2015
ESO: Funnu
Location: New_Sweland

Re: Beta V3

Post by zoom »

n0el wrote:I don’t understand the logic of the minus 100c change at all. Isn’t the argument against fixed crates that it decreases variety? This does that and doesn’t help
Balance at all. In fact it makes the gap between a wood / no wood start even larger.
Actually, it would help balance, since coin is perfectly useful for some civilizations, and less so for others, with Dutch being the most extreme case. It also wouldn't remove variety, other than the nominal value of starting crates. 100f and 100f+100c starts would remain. Please see my above post, too.

I don't see how it makes the gap between starts even larger—or perhaps, what you mean by that.
User avatar
Italy Garja
Retired Contributor
Donator 02
Posts: 9730
Joined: Feb 11, 2015
ESO: Garja

Re: Beta V3

Post by Garja »

zoom wrote:
Garja wrote:Some of those changes are very flawed in the underlying logic.
I mean why would you need some sort of xp mechanic at all costs (nat TPs). Also let's say you take 4 nat posts which equals to 2 TPs. Is that balanced and desired? To me it sounds both unbalanced (too much xp and in trickle form) and also kinda shit design (competes with TPs when they're supposed to be 2 completely different things).
Also why remove the 100g crates. It's just a crate like the others and it's actually cool because it makes things more colonial oriented. It's not an improvement in terms of balance really. It is going to increase the number of times TP civs get a TP in age1 (which apparently most consider problematic). It is also going to increase the number of times Russia gets the food start vs Japan or Germans or Dutch or w/e civ might struggle vs Russia. Brits will more often get 1 extra house and the 4.10 age up. I mean all those cases are ok but I don't see them being preferable to the point that 100g has to be removed. Asian civ vs FF civ with gold start is arguably better for the asian civ (no TP and in Jap vs Brits it often means 4.30 vs 4.30 age up). I'm sure there are plenty of other situations but you got the point. It's just an arbitrary decision with ass logic.
You wouldn't; I just think it would help inter-civilization balance on 0tp maps, and incentivize minor native use, without significant drawbacks. It seems worthwhile to try.

The reasons I am suggesting to remove the 100c start, is that it's the greatest outlier, in terms of inter-civilization balance, and that it doesn't seem to add meaningful variety (that 100f or 100f+100c) already doesn't offer. I think it's a sound compromise between fixed and random crate starts. Athough balance would suffer (particularly for Dutch), I'm happy to keep the 100c start, if players prefer. Compromise is such a dirty word! The essential thing is that Chinese is no longer necessarily unbalanced.
Both those assesments are wrong tho.
Image Image Image
User avatar
New Zealand zoom
Gendarme
Posts: 9314
Joined: Apr 26, 2015
ESO: Funnu
Location: New_Sweland

Re: Beta V3

Post by zoom »

deleted_user wrote:I like the change list Zoi, looking much better than previous ones. However I would request removing +100w dynamic crates from all civs if we were to implement fixed crates ( and thats what it meant for ), if we can implement it, I think germany wouldn't need additional nerf once you extend fixed crates for wood start aswell, since 200w start is the biggest reason why germany is unstoppable imo.
That wouldn't solve anything, though, unless you also remove 100f+100w, at which point you're removing the option to build a starting TP, completely. It makes more sense to me, to nerf Germans, or Discovery TPs, then.
User avatar
United States of America n0el
ESOC Business Team
Posts: 7068
Joined: Jul 24, 2015
ESO: jezabob
Clan: 팀 하우스

Re: Beta V3

Post by n0el »

zoom wrote: I don't see how it makes the gap between starts even larger—or perhaps, what you mean by that.
Well, lets take a euro civ for example. on a wood start, you can TP (strongest), you could, on a coin start, go market (second strongest), and now that's gone, so you end on the weakest option (none). The market start for most civs is basically eliminated, except on maps where you know you can reliably get good enough treasures to ensure it times correctly.
mad cuz bad
User avatar
United States of America Cometk
Retired Contributor
Posts: 7257
Joined: Feb 15, 2015
Location: California

Re: Beta V3

Post by Cometk »

n0el wrote:
zoom wrote: I don't see how it makes the gap between starts even larger—or perhaps, what you mean by that.
Well, lets take a euro civ for example. on a wood start, you can TP (strongest), you could, on a coin start, go market (second strongest), and now that's gone, so you end on the weakest option (none). The market start for most civs is basically eliminated, except on maps where you know you can reliably get good enough treasures to ensure it times correctly.
well there is still the +100f, +100c crate start, so instead of the chance of getting a coin crate being 2/5, it's now 1/4. not quite eliminated
Image
User avatar
United States of America n0el
ESOC Business Team
Posts: 7068
Joined: Jul 24, 2015
ESO: jezabob
Clan: 팀 하우스

Re: Beta V3

Post by n0el »

Okay I guess I misunderstood the change. It’s only coin alone being removed, I’m fine with it then.
mad cuz bad
User avatar
Italy Garja
Retired Contributor
Donator 02
Posts: 9730
Joined: Feb 11, 2015
ESO: Garja

Re: Beta V3

Post by Garja »

It's a crap change. It does reduce variety and does not improve inter-civ balance. There are so many combinations of crates and MUs that gold crate certainly favors balance in some of them (I already pointed out few examples). In general whenever change is made to an otherwise mirror crate solution (the current one) it's going to be relatively worse for balance.
If anything, one could argue for completely remove any extra crate (including China one) and leave only the base crate which at least follow a consistent and not arbitrary criterium.
Image Image Image
User avatar
New Zealand zoom
Gendarme
Posts: 9314
Joined: Apr 26, 2015
ESO: Funnu
Location: New_Sweland

Re: Beta V3

Post by zoom »

WickedCossack wrote:Can we also limit future patches to like 3-5 changes maximum (excluding reverts.)

This starts to become like age sanc FP version 2 with so many changes that you are playing a different game.

When you limit yourself to so few changes the idea is you end up putting only through the most critical balance issues and have enough control to assess the consequences of the changes.
Depending on future feedback and results, that's entirely possible. Although less essential (and more risky) than the limited scope of EP7, for example, I think it would be worthwhile to improve the viability of council, politician and wonder options, in another release. I'm definitely willing to limit future updates, further.

As reflected by this update, I agree that changes of significant risk to inter-civilization balance must be limited. I don't think that many of the changes in the beta are likely to adversely and significantly affect inter-civilization balance – especially not with the suggested changes. Speaking of which, I also wonder if you realize that many of the changes in the current V3 draft are reverting previous beta changes.

I largely agree with you. I simply disagree that buffing or nerfing a few civilizations, relative to others, is the only priority. At this point, more significant issues remain unaddressed. Continuing to ignore them were both foolish and irresponsible. I think a minor compromise on the part of those who are averse to change is both justified and reasonable. It's worth an attempt. Keeping a greater perspective, the changes are actually rather limited.
User avatar
New Zealand zoom
Gendarme
Posts: 9314
Joined: Apr 26, 2015
ESO: Funnu
Location: New_Sweland

Re: Beta V3

Post by zoom »

zoom wrote:
WickedCossack wrote:Just a comment on the following:
– Stagecoach line of sight increased from 0 to 15 for all six expansion civilizations
– Iron Horse line of sight increased from 0 to 15 for all six expansion civilizations

I like the idea to make this consistent between all civs but surely it's better to put all civs down to 0, and not to give all vision?

4 TP's across a map already offer a lot of vision, don't think they need a rng cart that the opposing player can't track scouting any units crossing the route
For balance purposes, I'm inclined to agree. The problem is that it's removing a feature from the game, which I'd rather not do, unless the alternatives aren't acceptable. Making civilizations consistent without removing anything seems preferable.

I would argue that the key feature, in this regard, is that TWC civilizations have all sockets scouted, by default. I think it's only punitive and silly that the effect of identical trade route upgrades varies between original and expansion civilizations.

I don't know that it's warranted, but one option is limiting line of sight to the Iron Horse, removing it from the Stagecoach. That would at least preserve the feature, to an extent, and buff the former, relative to the latter.

If players consider it a significant balance issue, we should consider options.
According to Eaglemut, expansion civilizations missing Stagecoach and Iron Horse line of sight is most likely a developer oversight. I, for one, am shocked!
User avatar
Canada Mitoe
Advanced Theory Craftsman
Posts: 5488
Joined: Aug 23, 2015
ESO: Mitoe
GameRanger ID: 346407

Re: Beta V3

Post by Mitoe »

@zoom does this change list include all of the changes that will be included in V3, or will other changes in V2 be added onto this list when the list is updated?

Garja wrote:Also why remove the 100g crates. It's just a crate like the others and it's actually cool because it makes things more colonial oriented. It's not an improvement in terms of balance really. It is going to increase the number of times TP civs get a TP in age1 (which apparently most consider problematic). It is also going to increase the number of times Russia gets the food start vs Japan or Germans or Dutch or w/e civ might struggle vs Russia. Brits will more often get 1 extra house and the 4.10 age up. I mean all those cases are ok but I don't see them being preferable to the point that 100g has to be removed. Asian civ vs FF civ with gold start is arguably better for the asian civ (no TP and in Jap vs Brits it often means 4.30 vs 4.30 age up). I'm sure there are plenty of other situations but you got the point. It's just an arbitrary decision with ass logic.
To be perfectly honest everything you said here makes fixed crates sound really appealing. Why are you against that again?
– Starting Town Center building placement minimum range no longer applies to Trading Posts
Not sure how I feel about this. I would say this is a mostly unnecessary change, and I'm not convinced it's even preferable to the current system.
– Unique minor native alliances now grant a trickle of 0.6xp per second, while they last
I don't know how I feel about this either. I'll take it just because non-TP maps really need some kind of xp income at this point, I guess.
– 100w removed from starting crates; dynamic (“random”) starting crates added
– Village cost reduced from 200w to 180w (bounties adjusted accordingly)
Meh...
– Envoy train points decreased from 30 to 10
Seems unecessary, IMO. If anything make the change smaller. Perhaps 30 to 25 or 20?
– Musketeer batch cost increased from 270f, 90c to 285f, 95c [from -4% cost to +1% cost]
Just let it have the decimal, it's not a big deal, really.
Sioux
– “4 Villagers” shipment added [revert]
– Brand new “5 Villagers” shipment added to Colonial Age removed [revert]
– “Mustangs” shipment increased from 10% to 15%
Does this mean teepees are remaining the same?
– Berry and hunting gather-rates increased by 5%
Must we? Surely there's better ways of balancing the civ.

Whether to further nerf Germans, and if so: How.
Is the 13 Jaeger > 12 Jaeger change listed in V2 still going through? That should probably be included. This plus the additional 5 seconds on fast age seems like a reasonable starting point.
Whether to further buff the Sioux.
I'm confused. If teepees are not being changed than they're OP. I will wait to hear confirmation of whether or not the V3 change list is missing changes from the V2 change list.


Other notes:
Can we please include the Japanese deck "bug fix" as a balance change? It's arguably the largest balance change in this whole list at a competitive level--not to mention that it's debatable whether or not it even is a "bug." If anything it should probably be reverted, to be honest.
User avatar
Italy Garja
Retired Contributor
Donator 02
Posts: 9730
Joined: Feb 11, 2015
ESO: Garja

Re: Beta V3

Post by Garja »

Mitoe wrote:
Garja wrote:Also why remove the 100g crates. It's just a crate like the others and it's actually cool because it makes things more colonial oriented. It's not an improvement in terms of balance really. It is going to increase the number of times TP civs get a TP in age1 (which apparently most consider problematic). It is also going to increase the number of times Russia gets the food start vs Japan or Germans or Dutch or w/e civ might struggle vs Russia. Brits will more often get 1 extra house and the 4.10 age up. I mean all those cases are ok but I don't see them being preferable to the point that 100g has to be removed. Asian civ vs FF civ with gold start is arguably better for the asian civ (no TP and in Jap vs Brits it often means 4.30 vs 4.30 age up). I'm sure there are plenty of other situations but you got the point. It's just an arbitrary decision with ass logic.
To be perfectly honest everything you said here makes fixed crates sound really appealing. Why are you against that again?
How does it make appealing? I'm just saying that no crate combination should be preferred.
I think I'm kinda done discussing ths beta for now anyway. Lot of changes are simply bad. I'll just try to veto them when it comes to the actual patch.
Image Image Image

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Which top 10 players do you wish to see listed?

All-time

Active last two weeks

Active last month

Supremacy

Treaty

Official

ESOC Patch

Treaty Patch

1v1 Elo

2v2 Elo

3v3 Elo

Power Rating

Which streams do you wish to see listed?

Twitch

Age of Empires III

Age of Empires IV