Choose the option that best reflects your opinion on the mentioned changes

The changes are (near) perfect
19
30%
The changes are the right idea, but I think the numbers should be tweaked (reply with how they should be tweaked)
5
8%
I am okay with these changes but I have a different idea on how to change water that I think is even better (reply with your idea)
2
3%
I agree with the fishing boat changes, but disagree with the war ship changes (reply with why)
7
11%
I disagree with the fishing boat changes, but agree with the war ship changes (reply with why)
4
6%
I disagree with the changes and I have a different idea on how to change water that I think is better (reply with your idea)
2
3%
I don't think we should change water at all
6
10%
I think we should try to balance water through maps alone
11
17%
I would uninstall the patch if these changes were implemented
7
11%
 
Total votes: 63

User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 7737

15 Aug 2017, 21:30

WickedCossack wrote:Let me get this straight .... water isn't viable and the fix is ... nerf warships, nerf schooners (42 > 40) & buff culverins ?

I guess that one single water game from the last tournament was too much for some people.

I voted for the maps option.
You are randomly forgetting about the (very impactful) fishing boat buff. A 200w TC is pretty good.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 7737

15 Aug 2017, 21:31

Garja wrote:Basically there is nothing wrong in fishing boom. The controversial thing is when camping on water becomes too abusive. That kinda kills the game. Fish boom per se is both not OP and practically counterable.
Agreed. How would you go about fixing this?
Great Britain WickedCossack
Retired Contributor
Posts: 1729

15 Aug 2017, 21:43

Goodspeed wrote:
WickedCossack wrote:Let me get this straight .... water isn't viable and the fix is ... nerf warships, nerf schooners (42 > 40) & buff culverins ?

I guess that one single water game from the last tournament was too much for some people.

I voted for the maps option.
You are randomly forgetting about the (very impactful) fishing boat buff. A 200w TC is pretty good.


A "very impactful" buff that's completely wiped out by the overlapping schooners nerf? Or is the idea to make a schooner play irrelevant? I mean it's already irrelevant on any non-indonesia map but even more irrelevant I guess.
Germany lordraphael
Jaeger
EWTNWC LAN SilverDonator 01
Posts: 2306

15 Aug 2017, 21:44

id make the culv cost decrease even if water wouldnt be an issue, their only purpose is to kill cannons ( if no ws) and its silly that they cost as much as falcs while they only have one use.
breeze wrote:they cant even guess how much f***ing piece of stupid retarded they look they are trying to give lesson to people who are over pr35 and know the best mu. im pretty sure that we need a page that only pr30+ post and then we could have a nice discussins.
No Flag Imperial Noob
Lancer
Posts: 596
Location: dormant

15 Aug 2017, 21:54

pecelot wrote:
Imperial Noob wrote:Nerf canoe limit pls. They are fast, no-pop-rodent gatherers with ability to hide in nests. They only lack an emote spam hotkey.

They're expensive terrible gatherers, though :!:


Floor is ok, ceiling is not.
User avatar
Italy Garja
ESOC Maps Team
Donator 02
Posts: 7650
ESO: Garja

15 Aug 2017, 22:25

Goodspeed wrote:
Garja wrote:Basically there is nothing wrong in fishing boom. The controversial thing is when camping on water becomes too abusive. That kinda kills the game. Fish boom per se is both not OP and practically counterable.
Agreed. How would you go about fixing this?

lordraphael wrote:id make the culv cost decrease even if water wouldnt be an issue, their only purpose is to kill cannons ( if no ws) and its silly that they cost as much as falcs while they only have one use.

Some of the proposed changes are ok. Culv change seems legit even for just land purposes. Culvs are freakin useless besides killing other artillery.
If not the cost, maybe the range could be increased by 2. Multiplier seems ok and I'd rather not make culvs the ultimate ships killer while keeping the other artillery as clearly inferior to warships.
To be perfectly honest warhips and artillery already trade even for cost except for two cases: broadside attack and offshore support card. The problem here is that artillery don't have proper ups to match those two things. I suppose the AA card for the anti ship tech is kind of the answer. Maybe players should just start incorporating that in vs water MUs (I do that btw).
Towers and other buildings also become progressively less strong vs upgraded ships while in fact the natural answer to buildings from sea are already galleons and monitors (in age2 buildings > warships since there is no artillery either).

Because of no artillery ups (in most cases atleast) a legit change is to tweak artillery multipliers vs ships to make it overall a bit more even.
Another possible change is to tweak the % of warship ups (without exaggerating or those cards become useless).
Maybe just tweak the frigate range because that's the real issue with broadside attack and warship upgrades.
Could alternatively just hit the warship range card since it alters the land vs water dynamic a bit too much (altho that's exactly the purpose of the card).

As for the fish boom I don't think it has any problem at all. It's not OP nor unviable and it does not depends upon RE map or EP map (unless we are talking about water heavy map where water becomes the main factor).
Realistically fish boom from start is something viable with 3-4 civs in maybe 20-30 MUs. And that's also fine since it's not exactly a standard or orthodox strategy in this game. The success of a fish boom also depends on whether the opponent scouts it and/or knows how to counter it. I wouldn't give for granted the last two things.
Fish boom later in the game as an extra mean of booming is perhaps less counterable but way less useful since switching to mills tends to be a strictly superior way of dealing with food shortage. Also late fish boom is not a strategic option anymore vs fast teching civs (ff and semi ff). That is with the current meta/maps.
To solve this last problem there are basically two options:
- either making map with unique layouts where water ends up being a dominant factor (either from start or abusable later on by castling in a corner);
- or reduce (make less accessible) the amount of land res to give an indirect advantage to the water holder.
I prefer the second option since it doesn't lead to crazy ass map layout and funky water play.
User avatar
Kiribati SirCallen
Gendarme
Posts: 8012
ESO: SirCallen
Location: Midwest best west

15 Aug 2017, 22:39

Water makes the game incredibly frustrating. My opinion is infallible. Remove all water from all maps. QED.
and the giving famishes the craving
sweet thames, run softly, til I end my song

The shepherd's staff's tantalus around my neck

let the water
touch the tongue
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 7737

15 Aug 2017, 22:41

WickedCossack wrote:
Goodspeed wrote:
WickedCossack wrote:Let me get this straight .... water isn't viable and the fix is ... nerf warships, nerf schooners (42 > 40) & buff culverins ?

I guess that one single water game from the last tournament was too much for some people.

I voted for the maps option.
You are randomly forgetting about the (very impactful) fishing boat buff. A 200w TC is pretty good.


A "very impactful" buff that's completely wiped out by the overlapping schooners nerf? Or is the idea to make a schooner play irrelevant?
It's meant to give the option for water as an addition to your land eco without forcing you to commit.
User avatar
France Kaiserklein
Gendarme
NWC LAN 4th place
Posts: 7362
Location: Paris
GameRanger ID: 5529322

16 Aug 2017, 00:02

WickedCossack wrote:Let me get this straight .... water isn't viable and the fix is ... nerf warships, nerf schooners (42 > 40) & buff culverins ?

I guess that one single water game from the last tournament was too much for some people.

I voted for the maps option.

Water (in your opinion) not being viable doesn't mean that warships aren't ridiculously strong. We can make water more used by decreasing the overall fishing boats cost, but still nerf ships because they kill their counters.

Btw I think we should remove the fact that ships are able to dodge mortars/rockets shots, because it means they don't counter warships at all.
sirmusket: https://imgur.com/phZoCw6
sirmusket: compare that to ur piece of shit face/height
LoOk_tOm wrote:I have something in particular against Kaisar (GERMANY NOOB mercenary LAMME FOREVER) And the other people (noobs) like suck kaiser ... just this ..
User avatar
Italy Garja
ESOC Maps Team
Donator 02
Posts: 7650
ESO: Garja

16 Aug 2017, 00:20

I'm not even sure artillery is supposed to counter warships. They're pretty much the same. Mortars do counter warships regardless of the projectile.
User avatar
Kiribati SirCallen
Gendarme
Posts: 8012
ESO: SirCallen
Location: Midwest best west

16 Aug 2017, 00:21

Warships can dodge mortars. I've witnessed it multiple times. Pisses me off each and every one.
and the giving famishes the craving
sweet thames, run softly, til I end my song

The shepherd's staff's tantalus around my neck

let the water
touch the tongue
User avatar
France Kaiserklein
Gendarme
NWC LAN 4th place
Posts: 7362
Location: Paris
GameRanger ID: 5529322

16 Aug 2017, 00:37

Garja wrote:I'm not even sure artillery is supposed to counter warships. They're pretty much the same. Mortars do counter warships regardless of the projectile.

Well I think if you check the description of culvs, it says they're good vs ships. Also when you have a multiplier vs something, it usually means you counter it.

About mortars, yeah they counter warships if those don't move between the shots. But if the warship dodges, how do you actually kill it?
And they actually barely counter warships anyway. I think they have only 250 attack before the arsenal upgrade, which is really not insane.
sirmusket: https://imgur.com/phZoCw6
sirmusket: compare that to ur piece of shit face/height
LoOk_tOm wrote:I have something in particular against Kaisar (GERMANY NOOB mercenary LAMME FOREVER) And the other people (noobs) like suck kaiser ... just this ..
User avatar
No Flag thebritish
Jaeger
Posts: 3787

16 Aug 2017, 00:48

Hello.
I think the main problem with water is that it requires a specialized 25 card deck which means if you start going for water you cant adjust your strat to do something different than go for water.

Another problem about the warships vs artillery is that it doesnt have a rock<paper<scissors system. I like the idea of giving a negative multiplier to Caravels, Frigates and its Equivalents for TWC and TAD civs to artillery, but after that has been done water will be completely unviable besides making 16-24 fishing foats and abandoning ship as soon as your opponent makes Warships to destroy your water boom.
Artillery should counter Warships, but there should be a Counter system where Warships can counter Artillery as well(Mortar>Monitor>Culverin>Frigate>Mortar or something similar) so the better player would be able to win in the end.


Now about the Schooners card. That card isn't even that amazing when you look out of the box. Schooners decreases the Fishing ship cost by 60% putting it at 40 wood Per Fishing ship.
In a game where people play the same civs (Player 1 with Schooners and Player 2 without). Both of them will do a water boom off 2 docks.
Player 1 will send Schooners and do 2 dock boom.
Player 2 can instead send 300 wood, which means for Schooners to be worth it more than 300 wood, Player 1 will need to make 300/40=7.5 (8 Fishing ships to be able to save 20 wood compared to Player 2).
But, Player can 2 can skip 300 wood and send 700 wood 600 wood to make Fishing boats instead of Schooners, 700 wood. (We will remove 700 wood because both players are sending it). Now its all about 600 wood vs Schooners. To make Schooners as good as 600 wood, Player 1 needs to make 600/40=15 Fishing boats.
If they do an Average boom of 16 Fishing boats, Player 1 has gained 40 wood from Schooners, but lets say they go for 24 Fishing boats boom.

24 Fishing boats minus 15 Fishing boats eguals to 9 Fishing boats (24-15=9) that cant be Covered by the 600 wood Shipment that Player 2 is sending.
9 Fishing boats multiplied by 40 wood each is 360 wood. 360 Resources seems Amazing for an age 1 card, but if we Compare it to 2 Settler Wagons for Germany (400 Resources) It looks subpar at best.

The real problem about water is Warships vs Culverins where Warships with OffShore Support cant be killed by Culverins if they(The Warships) are Microed.
Another Thing about Warships (Specifically Frigates) is that they have 0.05 Rate of Fire Compared to the 3.00 Rate of Fire of the Culverins.
What this means is that Frigates can shoot 20 times per second, but the issue here is that their animations makes it impossible to guess when they will shoot, so often Battles are Unpredictable (They can shoot from once to 20 times in one second or not even shoot at all).
This post ended up to be bigger than what i expected it to be, so i am gonna stop writing now and let others add to the discussion as well.
krichk wrote: For some reason, you want the world to know that you're brave enough to challenge thebritish
User avatar
Kiribati SirCallen
Gendarme
Posts: 8012
ESO: SirCallen
Location: Midwest best west

16 Aug 2017, 00:49

btb

User was warned for this post
and the giving famishes the craving
sweet thames, run softly, til I end my song

The shepherd's staff's tantalus around my neck

let the water
touch the tongue
India Ashvin
Retired Contributor
Posts: 2065
ESO: Octanium

16 Aug 2017, 06:29

I think water is fine, whenever I see schooners or any water related card in my enemy's deck I build docks of my own start making caravels and start pressuring on both land an water.
Image
User avatar
Italy Garja
ESOC Maps Team
Donator 02
Posts: 7650
ESO: Garja

16 Aug 2017, 08:51

Kaiserklein wrote:
Garja wrote:I'm not even sure artillery is supposed to counter warships. They're pretty much the same. Mortars do counter warships regardless of the projectile.

Well I think if you check the description of culvs, it says they're good vs ships. Also when you have a multiplier vs something, it usually means you counter it.

About mortars, yeah they counter warships if those don't move between the shots. But if the warship dodges, how do you actually kill it?
And they actually barely counter warships anyway. I think they have only 250 attack before the arsenal upgrade, which is really not insane.

Ye but culvs do in fact beat ships rather easy. That is if they dont get outranged or the warship has several ups and culvs has none.
Mortar range is the factor here. I mean you cant micro the warship forever in a macro game, besides you cant do nothing with the boat if it moves all the time.
User avatar
China fei123456
Jaeger
Posts: 2498
ESO: fei123456
Location: Alderaan

16 Aug 2017, 09:12

nerfing warships is good, but the warships should be cheaper then.
they should be used to do water fights, instead of being an offshore fortress to threat the land.
User avatar
Serbia Atomiswave
Lancer
Posts: 794

16 Aug 2017, 09:57

I like the changes overall, especially culv price reduction. It should be cheaper, because it has only one and only use. About warships, range nerfs could prove too drastic in practice, it needs to be thoroughly tested. Schooners change sounds good, with it, all civs can do semi water without problem.
User avatar
France Rikikipu
ESOC Maps Team
Posts: 1589
ESO: p-of
Location: In your base

16 Aug 2017, 10:03

What would be great strategically would be to have the possibility to open with a dock age I.
Then it will bring to the game 3 possible openings if 200w start :
  • TP
  • Market
  • Dock

In order to make it possible you would have to approximately halve dock cost.
Example :

Code: Select all

   1 dock = 100w
+ 1 boat = 70w
=> Total = 170w


This change although at first seems big, but actually you usually don't build more than 2 or 3 docks per game so it will probably just save you not more than 200w in the whole game.

However thanks to this, you give :
  • Another opening possibility, and so another important game decision age 1
  • Maybe a way to counter 200w tp start for no tp civs ?
  • An easier way to go water
No Flag umeu
Gendarme
Posts: 9999

16 Aug 2017, 10:10

there is a big problem with these patch changes, and its the euro centricity of it, both when it comes to the nerfs and buffs. There's a reason why TAD ships had less range than euro ships, see Kynesie's thread for the details about it. And the culverin change only adresses european anti ship issues. Culverins may be too expensive, i'm not totally sure, but there are bigger problems with the anti-ship units of other civs. Arrow knights are too expensive too, or rather, cost too much pop. Siege elephants also have issues, they probably cost too much as well. How will asian schooners be affected? Will anything be done about marathan canoes (theyre the only ship without siege attack).
User avatar
France Kaiserklein
Gendarme
NWC LAN 4th place
Posts: 7362
Location: Paris
GameRanger ID: 5529322

16 Aug 2017, 10:14

Garja wrote:Ye but culvs do in fact beat ships rather easy. That is if they dont get outranged or the warship has several ups and culvs has none.
Mortar range is the factor here. I mean you cant micro the warship forever in a macro game, besides you cant do nothing with the boat if it moves all the time.

Against 35 range frigates with full upgrades, there's just no way to trade efficiently with culvs lol. Even without upgrades, with the frigate's special attack it's not looking that bad of a fight for the frigate.
And well mortar range is nice, but if you don't hit your target it doesn't matter. I've played some games where the guy tried hard and it was impossible to use mortars properly.
sirmusket: https://imgur.com/phZoCw6
sirmusket: compare that to ur piece of shit face/height
LoOk_tOm wrote:I have something in particular against Kaisar (GERMANY NOOB mercenary LAMME FOREVER) And the other people (noobs) like suck kaiser ... just this ..
No Flag umeu
Gendarme
Posts: 9999

16 Aug 2017, 10:19

mortars are slow and while they do take out frigates, they lose to monitors. who just one shot them. problem for the artillery is the los. often they just lack the los to hit the warships, who are ridiculously fast. that would probably fix a great deal as well.
User avatar
Hungary Dsy
Lancer
Posts: 916

16 Aug 2017, 10:32

Yeah monitors are still a problem in this case, they kill all of artillery easily.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 7737

16 Aug 2017, 10:34

umeu wrote:there is a big problem with these patch changes, and its the euro centricity of it, both when it comes to the nerfs and buffs. There's a reason why TAD ships had less range than euro ships, see Kynesie's thread for the details about it. And the culverin change only adresses european anti ship issues. Culverins may be too expensive, i'm not totally sure, but there are bigger problems with the anti-ship units of other civs. Arrow knights are too expensive too, or rather, cost too much pop. Siege elephants also have issues, they probably cost too much as well. How will asian schooners be affected? Will anything be done about marathan canoes (theyre the only ship without siege attack).
That's fair enough. This list was put together quickly, and doesn't contain every change we would implement. We would make sure every civ has solid options to hard counter ships from land, and would nerf every war ship not just the EU ones.
User avatar
Italy Garja
ESOC Maps Team
Donator 02
Posts: 7650
ESO: Garja

16 Aug 2017, 11:55

umeu wrote:there is a big problem with these patch changes, and its the euro centricity of it, both when it comes to the nerfs and buffs. There's a reason why TAD ships had less range than euro ships, see Kynesie's thread for the details about it. And the culverin change only adresses european anti ship issues. Culverins may be too expensive, i'm not totally sure, but there are bigger problems with the anti-ship units of other civs. Arrow knights are too expensive too, or rather, cost too much pop. Siege elephants also have issues, they probably cost too much as well. How will asian schooners be affected? Will anything be done about marathan canoes (theyre the only ship without siege attack).

Ye I agree this changes are euro-centric.
Honestly TAD balance overall is more well thought among asian civs. Schooner card is better, all three civs have same ups for warships, all anthiship artillery is better (siege elephants have shorter range but are more mobile, insta shooting and have way more HP). Also infantry units are stronger and land boom is too so water play becomes quite secondary.
Kaiserklein wrote:
Garja wrote:Ye but culvs do in fact beat ships rather easy. That is if they dont get outranged or the warship has several ups and culvs has none.
Mortar range is the factor here. I mean you cant micro the warship forever in a macro game, besides you cant do nothing with the boat if it moves all the time.

Against 35 range frigates with full upgrades, there's just no way to trade efficiently with culvs lol. Even without upgrades, with the frigate's special attack it's not looking that bad of a fight for the frigate.
And well mortar range is nice, but if you don't hit your target it doesn't matter. I've played some games where the guy tried hard and it was impossible to use mortars properly.

Well, efficience also includes the fact that you can do something else with artillery on land, while warships are only useful near the coast. Generally artillery vs warships occurs when you want to take back water or kill an opponent who castled in the corner. In both cases you should have superior economy due to land control.
Also to be fair, trade monopoly already solves any problem related to these situations.
umeu wrote:mortars are slow and while they do take out frigates, they lose to monitors. who just one shot them. problem for the artillery is the los. often they just lack the los to hit the warships, who are ridiculously fast. that would probably fix a great deal as well.
Dsy wrote:Yeah monitors are still a problem in this case, they kill all of artillery easily.

Monitors (especially now on EP) are terrible at fighting land units, artillery included. They have less attack and less ROF than frigates. Their attack command often bugs (try in scenario editor) and they cost more than frigates. Also they are an age4 units so you should really compare to age4 artillery (which gets 25%/25% up for 500 res). Special attack is a bit abusive but that's it. It already got nerfed.

Forum Info

Return to “ESOC Patch Discussion”



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests