Germany lordraphael
Jaeger
EWTDonator 01
Posts: 2026

07 May 2018, 22:07

ye im not sure why they overpop for russia wasnt implemented. Its a minor change which just makes their play a tiny bit smoother. like a few seconds faster musk/ stre in a rush or an easier time when defending.
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
New Zealand zoom
Gendarme
Posts: 7563
ESO: Funnu
Location: Ramadanistan

07 May 2018, 22:13

That would be yet another alternative, although I'm uncertain as to whether it's doable.
User avatar
Italy Garja
ESOC Maps Team
Donator 02
Posts: 5950
ESO: Garja

07 May 2018, 22:21

I'm not sure but there might be a problem with the fact that Russia trains both in batches from BH and singularly from the stable.
It would be interesting to see if China can overpop with artillery from castle for reference.
Great Britain Hazza54321
Jaeger
Posts: 4433

07 May 2018, 22:44

they cant
Diarouga: How exactly am I arrogant
User avatar
Czech Republic EAGLEMUT
ESOC Dev Team
Donator 04
Posts: 2532
ESO: EAGLEMUT
Location: [WPact]

07 May 2018, 22:47

Yeah, it is not an option you toggle globally for the civ. It is rather how the specific unit in a specific building is designed to train.
Image
momuuu wrote:theres no way eaglemut is truly a top player
User avatar
Czech Republic EAGLEMUT
ESOC Dev Team
Donator 04
Posts: 2532
ESO: EAGLEMUT
Location: [WPact]

07 May 2018, 23:12

Image

EP 5.0.0.0 Beta2 [2018-05-08]
changelog since EP 5.0.0.0 Beta1

ESOC Patch
- EP: bank XP bounties recalculated to 140/280.
- EP: added +4 LOS to Travois builder in order to allow dock placement.
User avatar
United States of America musketeer925
ESOC Dev Team
Donator 01
Posts: 1683
ESO: musketeer925
GameRanger Id: 451878

07 May 2018, 23:25

Garja wrote:also ugly from design point (5 pop relates to the 250w cost, 10 pop is the same the value of a house which is 100w).


Why does the extra cost on a blockhouse vs. a barracks have to correspond to the per-pop cost of a house? Does being an outpost contribute nothing to the added cost of a blockhouse?
Belgium stanleywinston
Skirmisher
Donator 01
Posts: 151
ESO: Stanley_Winston
Location: Belgium

07 May 2018, 23:32

Lets give Russian Musket 125 HP up from 120, and tve civ is fixed ;)
User avatar
Italy Garja
ESOC Maps Team
Donator 02
Posts: 5950
ESO: Garja

07 May 2018, 23:40

musketeer925 wrote:
Garja wrote:also ugly from design point (5 pop relates to the 250w cost, 10 pop is the same the value of a house which is 100w).


Why does the extra cost on a blockhouse vs. a barracks have to correspond to the per-pop cost of a house? Does being an outpost contribute nothing to the added cost of a blockhouse?

Of course it does and indeed it is an extra advantage on the same cost. I don't think 10pop and outpost for 250w is good for balance. Besides still is as good as a house which is not super straight from design pov.
User avatar
New Zealand zoom
Gendarme
Posts: 7563
ESO: Funnu
Location: Ramadanistan

07 May 2018, 23:47

Garja wrote:
Goodspeed wrote:Thing is 255f vills is a very small change. If it took that little to push Russia over the edge, then they must already be competitive. Or, at least, competitive enough to not receive a buff considering other civs got nerfed.
Notice that the only real buff here is Iro, and that is because they have been a very rare sight in tournaments for a long time now. Russia is simply not on the same level of irrelevance. They are often picked and their win rate is high, despite their alleged weakness. They also have it going for them that they are strong on a good number of (lower resource/non-TP) maps, so they can be a little weaker and we will still see them played.

But I'm not ruling out a buff in the future. We just barely decided against it this time around.

Well, this is sort of popularity approach. There is no prove that Russia was over the edge just like there is no proof that Iro are weak. In fact Iro are probably slightly better than Russia at the moment (maybe besides the direct MU idk, needs more testing).
The fact that they're not played a lot shouldn't mean jack shit. That's totally up to players' preference. With that said, the buff they received is really just a placebo. 400f 200w 200g is hardly usable in any circumstance even with a good imagination. It won't replace any of 600w 5v or 600g in any sorto fo build (colo or FF) and it's inferior in pracical terms to any unit shipment. And then as a 7th choice or so in colonial you just send an upgrade or in any case want the slot saved for an upgrade in case you need it.

zoom wrote:I wonder how small of a change +5 Blockhouse population is. I'd guess about half as big as -15f Settler batch cost.

Trifling from a balance point (will have max 2 BHs in 15 min of 1v1 game) and also ugly from design point (5 pop relates to the 250w cost, 10 pop is the same the value of a house which is 100w).
I think you are dead wrong.

1. This is not a popularity approach; apparently it is believed that Russians are better than Iroquois, partly based on data and partly on observations.
2. I believe the buffed resource shipment will see use aplenty.
3. I think the blockhouse buff would be slight from a balance point-of-view, and that it would be beautiful from a design point; enhancing a pre-existing feature neatly. Your obsession with house cost I find irrelevant to the case and quite ridiculous, frankly. I think either this change or over-popping for Blockhouse batches is good.
User avatar
France bwinner1
Lancer
Posts: 546
ESO: bwinner

08 May 2018, 00:33

I would be happy if you buff russia because I play them a lot, but honnestly there is really no need.
When you are talking with an idiot, he may be doing the same
User avatar
Italy Garja
ESOC Maps Team
Donator 02
Posts: 5950
ESO: Garja

08 May 2018, 00:36

1) Data and observations, oh come on. 255f change lasted like 1 tourney round and was never anything special. Such quick conclusion out of nothing.
Besides I was refering to Iro, because they're fine at the moment and buffing them until people abuse them is not a good approach. Basing changes on percentage of use is more about popularity than anything else.
2) I don't think so at all. I've been playing iro since forever on EP and unfortunately I don't see any build in which they fit in. Asides from specific builds, my reasoning above explains exactly why they won't see use.
3) Ye it enhances an existing feature that is clearly correlated to the bh cost so can't be changed at will like this. Not from a design pov at least. Overpopping is both more useful and also consistent with the only other civ which train in batches. It is potentially risky on a very specific rush build.

I do agree that Russia probably doesn't need a buff. At least not at the very moment. And Ironically the reaosn is that none is playing them with new builds so we can't tell how good they are.
User avatar
United States of America Darwin_
Howdah
Posts: 1295
ESO: Anonymous_01
Location: United States

08 May 2018, 02:26

I like the german change. It might be cool to do away with the teepee gathering aura and buff the HP and attack auras.
Cometk wrote:hi i'm cometk welcome to jackass
No Flag umeu
Gendarme
Posts: 8195

08 May 2018, 05:26

Just revert iro to re crates. The wood crate nerf is just bad for no tp maps. Or even better, remove all wood crates except the sometimes extra woodcrate, and give iro 2 travois. Then when other civs can tp, they can choose to also tp or upgrade in farm. The standard non wood crate opening would be house + farm (dropping farm asap for xp. Scouting with house until needed for pop.) this also remedies the oft heard claim that iro eco is bad cuz no steeltraps. but i also see options such as dropping house and dock, and shipping 300w to train 4 fishing boats. But even saving travois for a warhut stable opening might be an option (for example 100w random start, chop 25w, open farm, save 1 travois to use as stable in age2).

This would make iro way more competitive, increase their strat options, without having them always tp and be too strong. On top it uses one of their unique civ traits to balance the civ. Win win ??? = win??? Ive made this case so many times already... But MEH. Nobody listens to reason apparantly.
User avatar
France [Armag] diarouga
Gendarme
Posts: 6831
Location: France

08 May 2018, 06:03

Iro are not bad at all on TP maps currently, this would make them op again (basically RE iro).
That's what GS and me means when we say that you can't balance some civs on both TP and no TP maps.
Atm they're fine on TP maps, but unplayable on no TP maps. Well, your change would make them playable on no TP maps but imba on TP maps, that's not our definition of balance.
No Flag umeu
Gendarme
Posts: 8195

08 May 2018, 06:12

Imo what i propose balances them for both tp and ntp, and even gives options for water. Why would starting farm make them imba on tp maps? Youve never even tried it out. Im quite sure it would make iro fine on both map types instead op/fine on one and shit on other or whatever combo.

Also sioux changes were so useless because ppl who dont play sioux ever started saying they lost mus cause no eco. Even though sioux on re lost mus cause they couldnt deal with rushes or water. Late multi layer walling was also a problem, but not just for sioux. Ep already fixed that. The teepee buff was good, but the eco addon unnecessary. And thats just an example of many unnecessary changes ep has made.
User avatar
France [Armag] diarouga
Gendarme
Posts: 6831
Location: France

08 May 2018, 06:13

Farming wouldn't make them imba on TP maps. Age 1 TP would however.
No Flag umeu
Gendarme
Posts: 8195

08 May 2018, 06:17

[Armag] diarouga wrote:Farming wouldn't make them imba on TP maps. Age 1 TP would however.


They wouldnt just have age1 tp tho. Atm if they have extra wood crate, theyre like re iro on 200w start, yet still not considered as effective because of better maps and buffs to other civs.

With my change, iro would never get a free tp, and would only be able to get a tp if its 100w start AND they chop 100w.

So how would that make them op compared to how they are now (which is fine as you say for tp, but shot for ntp)z
User avatar
Italy gamevideo113
Lancer
Posts: 647
ESO: gamevideo113

08 May 2018, 06:52

100w start + TP + farm = basically 2 shipments in age1 (3 vills+3 boats), or fast age up with 4 kanya and probably another shipment to quickly follow up. RE iro again?
Eat pasta, run fasta :love:
No Flag umeu
Gendarme
Posts: 8195

08 May 2018, 07:00

Not at all, because 1) you will have to chop the wood. Which means 16 or possibly even 17v age. 2) You will miss first and possibly 2nd pass on tp. So not even close to re iro, where iro on 300w start could get tp and farm if they chopped 25w. Which i often didnt even do cause fast stable was often more useful.
User avatar
Italy gamevideo113
Lancer
Posts: 647
ESO: gamevideo113

08 May 2018, 07:26

Well, idk. Your suggestion is surely interesting but iro isn't even that bad in the first place. They might underperform on non-TP maps but it's the same for french/ger/ports/etc, so i don't think it's an issue that necessarily needs to be solved
Eat pasta, run fasta :love:
User avatar
Italy gamevideo113
Lancer
Posts: 647
ESO: gamevideo113

08 May 2018, 08:07

If anything i'd buff 600w/g to 700. The buffed mixed crates are a bit awkward because iro can't use gold in colonial well. Maybe it could be used in a FF build? I'll test a bit today
Eat pasta, run fasta :love:
No Flag umeu
Gendarme
Posts: 8195

08 May 2018, 09:27

gamevideo113 wrote:Well, idk. Your suggestion is surely interesting but iro isn't even that bad in the first place. They might underperform on non-TP maps but it's the same for french/ger/ports/etc, so i don't think it's an issue that necessarily needs to be solved


They don't underperform on no tp, they are terrible, as diarouga said it. Ports and fre are totally fine on no tp maps, and ger indeed underperforms, which could be fixed by an xbow buff. If that doesnt work, it's possible to check out different changes.

It's funny that everyone who says it cant be balanced on both maptypes refuses to consider any changes that possibly achieve that. Ofc, that way your bias will confirm reality.
User avatar
France [Armag] diarouga
Gendarme
Posts: 6831
Location: France

08 May 2018, 09:37

Yea they're literally unplayable on no TP maps.
This extra travois could, and I say could because honestly it wouldn't even be enough, make them viable on no TP maps, however they'd simply be too good on TP maps.
They're already viable on TP maps after all, this would either mean that they'd get a huge eco buff with the farm upgrades, or an extra rax/stable in colonial and probably become op.

We'll consider that though, but to be honest with you, the only reason why we have to refuse so many suggestions without even trying them, is because there's simply no more EP testing team, and such a change would have to be added without any testing, and thus unbalance the game for a while.
User avatar
New Zealand zoom
Gendarme
Posts: 7563
ESO: Funnu
Location: Ramadanistan

08 May 2018, 10:04

umeu wrote:
gamevideo113 wrote:Well, idk. Your suggestion is surely interesting but iro isn't even that bad in the first place. They might underperform on non-TP maps but it's the same for french/ger/ports/etc, so i don't think it's an issue that necessarily needs to be solved


They don't underperform on no tp, they are terrible, as diarouga said it. Ports and fre are totally fine on no tp maps, and ger indeed underperforms, which could be fixed by an xbow buff. If that doesnt work, it's possible to check out different changes.

It's funny that everyone who says it cant be balanced on both maptypes refuses to consider any changes that possibly achieve that. Ofc, that way your bias will confirm reality.
I think it can't be balanced on multiple map-types and I certainly don't refuse to consider changes that improve balance on all map-types. It is simply the case that the extent to which you can achieve balance on multiple map-types is, in general, limited. One who cannot understand these limitations, I think, is being biased.

Forum Info

Return to “ESOC Patch Discussion”



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest