Netherlands momuuu
Ninja
Posts: 14237
ESO: Jerom_

05 May 2018, 10:29

gibson wrote:Well first off the entire premise is wrong, every civ wants to take a tp. Look at Deccan games. You get an extra 200w start and literally every civ takes a tp. It’s just some civs can’t take a tp early. Dutch for example. Maybe on Florida on a 200w start they could, outside of that it’s just not really viable. However, he mentions that both India and Brit don’t like to take a tp. That’s just wrong. It’s been proven that both those civs are stronger if you take a tp on a wood start. The only reason Aztec doesn’t take a tp is cause the fire pit is the same thing but only costs 100w and Russia can’t take a tp cause it’s not possible to 14 vil with a tp. Many people are even taking a tp with China now in age 2 because it’s just a better way to boom. It’s a better way to boom than every civs unique way of booming, reason being that a tp speeds up every civs boom faster than investing 200w into something else.

I don't know where in my entire post I make the premise that not every civ wants to take a tp. Here's what I did write:
Look at the civs that really dislike not having TPs: France, Germany, Iro, Sioux, Spain and Otto.
Look at some of the civs that dont mind no TP maps; Brits have manors, Dutch have banks, india has the consulate, japan has shrines, Aztecs can sort of do a warrior priest boom instead.
I also think that TPs are just strong in general and really strong buildings with regards to FF play

I'm talking about civs that 'dislike' or 'dont mind' no TP maps. What I'm trying to say here is that some civs are more reliant on trading posts than others. While obviously, as I acknowledge in the last quote, TPs are really strong, it is of course preferable as for example a Dutch player to be facing Germany on a no TP map than on a TP map. That's what I meant with "dont mind", which unfortunately you didn't interpret that way. However, you clearly do misrepresent me by saying "he mentions that both India and Brit don't like to take a tp". Nowhere did I say that, I only said that they 'don't mind' no TP maps.

I also never said that the ways other civs can boom are better than getting a trading post. That was never the point I wanted to make. The point I wanted to make is why some civs can cope better without a trading post than others. I explained that by pointing out that these civs have other economical options while other civs are left without any economical options to make up for the loss of a TP. That's the point I'm trying to make, not that TPs are weak for some civs. Again, I clearly acknowledge that TPs are strong. An age 1 TP is one of the most cost effective things in the game I think when going for an FF and I even say that "TPs are really strong buildings with regards to FF play". I'm just giving an explanation that fits the data well. Basically, if you look at the list of civs that depend a lot on TPs, and the civs that don't really depend on TPs a lot, you simply notice that the civs that depend on TPs don't have other boom options while the civs that don't depend as much on them do have other boom options. I then reasoned that this is no coincidence, that not having other boom options makes you more reliant on the TP. That's what I tried to say, but somehow you didn't really get that unfortunately.
Germany lordraphael
Jaeger
EWTNWC LAN SilverDonator 01
Posts: 2371

05 May 2018, 10:45

I do take a tp as Dutch. Makes you slightly slower at start but better in later on. However if bank cost gets reverted to re it might not be worth it anymore
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.
User avatar
Italy Garja
ESOC Maps Team
Donator 02
Posts: 7921
ESO: Garja

05 May 2018, 11:32

Goodspeed wrote:As Zoi pointed out in the other thread, no amount of balance changes outside of standardizing the living fuck out of all the civs will achieve balance on non-TP as well as TP maps.

This is simply not true.
Eco advantage per se is useless in colonial if you don't convert it. You are not winning by sitting in base and 10 vill advantage doesn't translate to grabbing the map back.
This is to say that if there is a bottom line for unit strenght in colonial which is reasonably close for every civ, then balance can be achieved. Still balance is dynamic and there will be better civs than others on no TP maps, just like the opposite on TP maps.
Also it is worth noting that aggression became weaker also because of diffusion of TPs and not the other way around. On no TP maps aggression pays off more generally because the opponent has to match units by gathering resources for them and not just clicking a button from the homecity.
User avatar
Canada Mitoe
ESOC Media Team
EWTNWC LAN Top 8
Posts: 4318
ESO: Mitoe
GameRanger ID: 346407

05 May 2018, 12:00

Hmm, maybe we should just bring back the Spice Trade meta on non-TP maps.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
EPL Reigning Champs
Posts: 8375

05 May 2018, 12:19

Might actually be a strong way to play for some civs
Netherlands momuuu
Ninja
Posts: 14237
ESO: Jerom_

05 May 2018, 12:25

Mitoe wrote:Hmm, maybe we should just bring back the Spice Trade meta on non-TP maps.

Back in the days when that was meta the maps had a lot of hunts. A lot a lot. I feel like it had more hunts on AS New GP than there are hunts on High plains.
User avatar
Italy Garja
ESOC Maps Team
Donator 02
Posts: 7921
ESO: Garja

05 May 2018, 12:45

Only AS GP had a lot of hunts. Most of other fixed RE maps had same or less hunts than current EP maps.
No-TP maps are away to have colonial skirmishes in an otherwise age up focused meta (not just fortress but also IV, especially if slow aging civs try to go fortress).
Germany richard
Skirmisher
Posts: 182
ESO: KingRichardIIII
Location: Germany

05 May 2018, 12:58

Garja wrote:Only AS GP had a lot of hunts.


Haha, now i know what your definition of "a lot of hunts" is ...
User avatar
France [Armag] diarouga
Gendarme
NWC LAN Gold
Posts: 9961
ESO: diarouga
Location: France

05 May 2018, 13:03

Garja wrote:
Goodspeed wrote:As Zoi pointed out in the other thread, no amount of balance changes outside of standardizing the living fuck out of all the civs will achieve balance on non-TP as well as TP maps.

This is simply not true.
Eco advantage per se is useless in colonial if you don't convert it. You are not winning by sitting in base and 10 vill advantage doesn't translate to grabbing the map back.
This is to say that if there is a bottom line for unit strenght in colonial which is reasonably close for every civ, then balance can be achieved. Still balance is dynamic and there will be better civs than others on no TP maps, just like the opposite on TP maps.
Also it is worth noting that aggression became weaker also because of diffusion of TPs and not the other way around. On no TP maps aggression pays off more generally because the opponent has to match units by gathering resources for them and not just clicking a button from the homecity.

I disagree with this. I think that if we had a no TP map meta, people would boom just enough to make sure the opponent can't get away with an age 3, while having a great late colonial.
Here is the issue by the way, it's all about how strong your late colonial is on no TP maps, while on TP maps, both colonial and age 3 are viable.
United States of America saveyourskill
Skirmisher
Posts: 158

05 May 2018, 14:00

Could balance civs based on non tp maps and nerf tps. What if the tp was unlocked to be built in age 2? That could change a lot but you can still get a tp right after you age, just an idea.
Also I think trade route tps should give xp per second rather than per pass as this will make it more consistent rather than making a tp from the start and missing the pass on a big map so the xp doesn't effect you for a while. While lets say the other guy gets the xp pass and can send 3v right away.
Got Badger Milk?
User avatar
France [Armag] diarouga
Gendarme
NWC LAN Gold
Posts: 9961
ESO: diarouga
Location: France

05 May 2018, 14:12

saveyourskill wrote:Could balance civs based on non tp maps and nerf tps. What if the tp was unlocked to be built in age 2? That could change a lot but you can still get a tp right after you age, just an idea.
Also I think trade route tps should give xp per second rather than per pass as this will make it more consistent rather than making a tp from the start and missing the pass on a big map so the xp doesn't effect you for a while. While lets say the other guy gets the xp pass and can send 3v right away.

Well no, the TP meta is just much more interesting. Just play on the FP 1.2 if you want brainless colonial wars.
User avatar
Italy Garja
ESOC Maps Team
Donator 02
Posts: 7921
ESO: Garja

05 May 2018, 14:26

[Armag] diarouga wrote:I disagree with this. I think that if we had a no TP map meta, people would boom just enough to make sure the opponent can't get away with an age 3, while having a great late colonial.
Here is the issue by the way, it's all about how strong your late colonial is on no TP maps, while on TP maps, both colonial and age 3 are viable.


Ye I agree it's about strong late colonial. I'd say mostly units tho. Eco is something that can vary throughout the game and still an eco advantage without resources to gather from is useless.
The point, however, is that TP civs generally have smoother early game and fast ageup.
Firstly, if they were given decent enough units they could still compete to some extent in late colonial. I mean, Germans late colonial is not even bad aside from not having musketeers. If you ever played Germans extensively on nilla you would know that. The difference with nilla mostly are: xbows are shit, upgrades on TAD are better (that generally helps more colonial civs even tho it's not bad for civs like Fre and Germans) and also, most importantly, TWC and TAD civs have way better units.
Now, among TWC civs I think a civ like German could do totally fine because the gap isn't huge. The problem really is with like Japan and India. With that said tho, Germans can still bow/pike rush or contain Japan and that isn't something to rule out by default. Even at high level play there is still a game to be played with that and certain factors may change the outcome (Bengal only has 2 berries for example so Japan runs out of food 3k sooner than with 2 orchards).
On top of that a xbow buff to 17 attack would make yumi less dominant, and ashi and nagi slightly less annoying. India had sepoy nerfed and together with xbow buff I think there can be a game if Germans manage to hold the map (if India goes for fb agra sepoy I can tell you Germans can time it.

Secondly, those civs can usually sneak an age up where others can't. If the game is in prolonged colonial and there is some stale, it is possible to age up and upgrade units. In that case not having a shipment ready is less of problem because if you have 50+ units already on the field what really matters is the veteran upgrade and not a 2 cannons shipment.

I mean there is certainly some stuff to fix, but it is less than trying to balance the game only on TP maps and trying to gives civs exactly the same chances. Plus it is more consitent because it relies on overall desirable changes like a xbow buff and doesn't require to label no-TP maps as non competitive, removing them from a supposed "Standard map set".
United States of America saveyourskill
Skirmisher
Posts: 158

05 May 2018, 14:27

True with tps civs can do more strategies. But I was saying you could still semi ff or ff with a tp after aging but you will still have more xp to you than a on non tp map for ff civs when you age.
Got Badger Milk?
No Flag deleted_user
Gendarme
Posts: 9997

05 May 2018, 15:01

Garja wrote:
[Armag] diarouga wrote:I disagree with this. I think that if we had a no TP map meta, people would boom just enough to make sure the opponent can't get away with an age 3, while having a great late colonial.
Here is the issue by the way, it's all about how strong your late colonial is on no TP maps, while on TP maps, both colonial and age 3 are viable.


Ye I agree it's about strong late colonial. I'd say mostly units tho. Eco is something that can vary throughout the game and still an eco advantage without resources to gather from is useless.
The point, however, is that TP civs generally have smoother early game and fast ageup. First, if they were given decent enough units they could still compete to some extent in late colonial. I mean, Germans late colonial. If you ever played Germans extensively on nilla you would know that. The difference with nilla mostly are: xbows are shit, upgrades on TAD are better (that generally helps more colonial units even tho it's not bad for civs like Fre and Germans) and also, most importantly, TWC and TAD civs have way better units.
Now, among TWC civs I think a civ like German could do totally fine because the gap isn't huge. The problem really is with like Japan and India. With that said tho, Germans can still bow/pike rush or contain Japan and that isn't something to rule out by default. Even at high level play there is still a game to be played with that and certain factors may change the outcome (Bengal only has 2 berries for example so Japan runs out of food 3k sooner than with 2 orchards).
On top of that a xbow buff to 17 attack would make yumi less dominant, and ashi and nagi slightly less annoying. India had sepoy nerfed and together with xbow buff I think there can be a game if Germans manage to hold the map (if India goes for fb agra sepoy I can tell you Germans can time it.

I mean there is certainly some stuff to fix, but it is less than trying to balance the game only on TP maps and trying to gives civs exactly the same chances. Plus it is more consitent because it relies on overall desirable changes like a xbow buff and doesn't require to label no-TP maps as non competitive, removing them from a supposed "Standard map set".


it's not even true that it's all about late colonial. china can ff on no tp maps, spain could and probably would still ff or at least semi, when I played otto I still did ff on maps like bayou or painted desert from time to time, as sioux I would still semi ff on certain maps, aztec could still do that diarouga ff or even FI, and india could semi ff still on maps with livestock. Japan can still ff on no tp maps, and france can still semi ff if they build a few walls. Ports would be still ok to semi, and dutch as well, semi or even ff. germany semi is kinda fucked but only because of their %10 xp penalty really. That's more a civ related issue than a map related issue.

Forum Info

Return to “ESOC Patch Discussion”



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest