What I know about the current EP team

[gibson]

Well the game will never be balanced, balanced and 14 unique civs are kinda mutually exclusive

Without extreme standardizing that is.

Which means there wont be 14 unique civs, hence the mutual exclusivity

[momuuu]

Show hidden quotes

@Diarouga
I get you, if i were a competitive player i would not like an unbalanced patch what i try to show why zoi wants a "wtf" patch(also goodspeed probably) You kinda agree meta change is ok for the sake of interest in a certain balance level. So interest is also important. Now it comes to point how much of 'balance' and 'wtf' you desire in the patch, which is totaly subjective. I think middle ground is possible -like Kaiser said he talked with zoi etc.- with many people satisfied and few people dissapointed.

It's not that easy.
You know, when you play a civilisation and it's impossible to win some MUs with it, it's not fun at all. As Jerom pointed out, the EP might well become the next patch in aoe3:DE, so we want something close to the RE, but with better balance.
Tbh if half of the community doesn't like the EP, I don't think it's going to become the official patch.

Anyway, the changes don't matter that much (though they're very bad), what matters is that there is no EP team, and that Zoi has the final word on the change list.

We don’t want something close to the RE. If EP becomes the official DE patch, now is the time to make the game attractive to new players and people coming back. If we make it an enhanced RE patch it’s a disaster from the start.

Whats so bad about RE?

There's 30% of the game (politicians, units, cards, treasures, natives, etc...) that are worthless.

Imagine adding 100 useless cards to the game, for example 100 res crates. That wouldn't make the game worse, because the game would just be the same. What you said doesn't really imply that anything is bad about RE. It's not really an argument, in the sense that your statement is just an empty fact that literally doesn't say anything.

I'll be sad if this is the sort of logic that the esoc maffia will use to ruin aoe3 forever.

RE, while poorly balanced, hits somewhat of a sweet spot in terms of game design. There are meaningful decisions and generally there is a lot of variety between civs and playstyles. EP tried to balance mostly, and did a good job at it, but also tried to redesign the game and did a bad job at it. They destroyed variety of civs and playstyles and that's sad. And now you're running around saying RE is bad without ever providing any logic. I can feel it, you guys ruining aoe3DE with some poorly thought out decisions. Hurray for nr10 I suppose..

[Mitoe]

EP tried to balance mostly, and did a good job at it, but also tried to redesign the game and did a bad job at it. They destroyed variety of civs and playstyles and that's sad. And now you're running around saying RE is bad without ever providing any logic. I can feel it, you guys ruining aoe3DE with some poorly thought out decisions. Hurray for nr10 I suppose..

Can you give an example of how EP tried to redesign the game and failed? This seems like a very subjective opinion. Are you not also saying that EP is bad without providing any "logic" behind it?

[Garja]

sioux

[momuuu]

I rest my case

[momuuu]

EP tried to balance mostly, and did a good job at it, but also tried to redesign the game and did a bad job at it. They destroyed variety of civs and playstyles and that's sad. And now you're running around saying RE is bad without ever providing any logic. I can feel it, you guys ruining aoe3DE with some poorly thought out decisions. Hurray for nr10 I suppose..

Can you give an example of how EP tried to redesign the game and failed? This seems like a very subjective opinion. Are you not also saying that EP is bad without providing any "logic" behind it?

They destroyed variety of civs and playstyles and that's sad.

Sioux, Otto, Sepoy nerf + india eco boost, attempts to redesign spain into an eco civ, removing japan's ability to actually FI, removing China's FI potential, removing Port FI potential. I have generally disliked all design oriented choices because ultimately I feel like most of those ended up making all civs feel very similair.

[princeofkabul]

500w tcs

[n0el]

Jerom, are you arguing against EP changes or against adding more variety. At this point I am completely lost.

[Cometk]

@momuuu saying that a sepoy nerf and house buff ruined india’s civ is identity is so incomprehensibly wrong that it leaves me flabbergasted

[momuuu]

@momuuu saying that a sepoy nerf and house buff ruined india’s civ is identity is so incomprehensibly wrong that it leaves me flabbergasted

I didnt say that though.

[momuuu]

Jerom, are you arguing against EP changes or against adding more variety. At this point I am completely lost.

Why do you have to argue against something?

[Mitoe]

EP tried to balance mostly, and did a good job at it, but also tried to redesign the game and did a bad job at it. They destroyed variety of civs and playstyles and that's sad. And now you're running around saying RE is bad without ever providing any logic. I can feel it, you guys ruining aoe3DE with some poorly thought out decisions. Hurray for nr10 I suppose..

Can you give an example of how EP tried to redesign the game and failed? This seems like a very subjective opinion. Are you not also saying that EP is bad without providing any "logic" behind it?

They destroyed variety of civs and playstyles and that's sad.

Sioux, Otto, Sepoy nerf + india eco boost, attempts to redesign spain into an eco civ, removing japan's ability to actually FI, removing China's FI potential, removing Port FI potential. I have generally disliked all design oriented choices because ultimately I feel like most of those ended up making all civs feel very similair.

Some of these are just balance changes, not really redesigns.

Sioux I can understand. I don't think that the Teepee change was overly successful, but it was a good effort. Overall I don't think it worked as intended. Maybe the numbers are just wrong or maybe Sioux needs a redo. But you have to understand, that Sioux is an extreme case when it comes to balance. On RE you can oftentimes just pure bow rider and win, that obviously needed fixing. After the BR nerfs the general consensus was that Sioux was not that great of a civilization given the new higher-resource maps and that sort of thing. I think Sioux is one of the harder civs to balance in general.

Otto I don't think really feels all that different from RE. People say they're weak or they don't feel like Otto, but the truth is that they can do the same thing on EP as on RE and still be successful. I think they're actually quite good, to be honest. Seems like the most controversial change here is the abus change, cause a lot of people don't like the feel of 3.5 ROF and claim that it makes the unit trash. I disagree with this, I think the unit is quite good still, but I can see why people would be unhappy about this particular change. Don't know that it could really be labelled a major design change though.

India... lol. They didn't really change all that much. Their all in is weaker, big deal. People still do it, people still make Sepoy. India's identity hasn't changed.

China FI and sometimes Japan FI was just autowin. You shouldn't be able to just win for free off of sending Old Han Reforms. I don't think that's debatable.

Portuguese had pretty significant early and mid game buffs: they were considered a pretty poor civilization all around because there wasn't much you could do before Industrial. The nerfs to Jinetes were necessary given how dominant that unit already was and how much easier Portugal's Colonial/Fortress is now.

[zoom]

I haven't read the OP. Nor do I intend to do so. However, I want to share some thoughts on my personal role and certain criticism of it, with everyone.

Considering that I just recently began active work on the patch, so far only having facilitated well-received improvements to the map-pool, the criticism of me – in this specific case – varies between understandable (given the lack of available information) to unreasonable (given certain young men struggling to come to terms with personal issues and reality).

Please judge me on the merits of my performance, instead of on flawed-at-best assumptions about it, or about what are essentially non-factors. There should be a beta out this week. It'll be a good place to start!

[WickedCossack]

Some of these are just balance changes, not really redesigns.

Sioux I can understand. I don't think that the Teepee change was overly successful, but it was a good effort. Overall I don't think it worked as intended. Maybe the numbers are just wrong or maybe Sioux needs a redo. But you have to understand, that Sioux is an extreme case when it comes to balance. On RE you can oftentimes just pure bow rider and win, that obviously needed fixing. After the BR nerfs the general consensus was that Sioux was not that great of a civilization given the new higher-resource maps and that sort of thing. I think Sioux is one of the harder civs to balance in general.

Otto I don't think really feels all that different from RE. People say they're weak or they don't feel like Otto, but the truth is that they can do the same thing on EP as on RE and still be successful. I think they're actually quite good, to be honest. Seems like the most controversial change here is the abus change, cause a lot of people don't like the feel of 3.5 ROF and claim that it makes the unit trash. I disagree with this, I think the unit is quite good still, but I can see why people would be unhappy about this particular change. Don't know that it could really be labelled a major design change though.

India... lol. They didn't really change all that much. Their all in is weaker, big deal. People still do it, people still make Sepoy. India's identity hasn't changed.

China FI and sometimes Japan FI was just autowin. You shouldn't be able to just win for free off of sending Old Han Reforms. I don't think that's debatable.

Portuguese had pretty significant early and mid game buffs: they were considered a pretty poor civilization all around because there wasn't much you could do before Industrial. The nerfs to Jinetes were necessary given how dominant that unit already was and how much easier Portugal's Colonial/Fortress is now.

Mostly agree. I'd say India changed a lot for me though. Karni semi FF's and Agra semi FF's are a lot stronger and ofc slow sepoy is way weaker so my strats are 90% different between patches. I don't mind what type of playstyle people prefer and I think a lot of people like the new India style (though it is also strong) but I would certainly argue they did change a lot.

I mean if people are still doing any sort of Sepoy aggression then yea it didn't change for them but then they ain't going to get much done, I have tried it a few times and it just seems 100% inferior to eco plays with microable units. Maybe sepoy still have a place in team games where you can't abuse micro as much where big armies of units just clash together and you can't do jack apart from watch the fight.

Ports plays the same, just they're actually competitive which is nice.

Sioux is always going to be awkward.

Ottos there's more possibilities so that's nice.

Old han reforms 100% needed a nerf.

Japan still annoying as hell, so guess that's the same!

[Garja]

Teepees were a good effort the first time they have been implemented. Keeping eco teepees when everyone wanted them reverted was more like a good joke.

[Goodspeed]

@[Armag] diarouga Of course you're free to disagree with the approach, the changes, and whatever else. In turn I disagree with your approach. To make a difference, you should try to find compromises and work with people rather than against them. If you really think someone will still listen to you after you flame them and tell them they are incompetent, you are one entitled son of a bitch.

The patch is with Zoi now. At least give him a chance. Give your feedback, but do it constructively and try to find compromises. You might eventually convince people your way is better. And if not, so be it, but at least through compromises you got them to budge a little bit. What you're doing now only gets you farther from your goal.

And if Zoi ever quits, and you've been an active and constructive part of the process the whole time, people might consider you for his replacement. They definitely won't do that if you continue to show how elusive adulthood is to you. I may have even considered you as my replacement if you had shown an ability to work with people..

[[Armag] diarouga]

@[Armag] diarouga Of course you're free to disagree with the approach, the changes, and whatever else. In turn I disagree with your approach. To make a difference, you should try to find compromises and work with people rather than against them.

Lol, I'm not trying to find a compromise with a captain who wants to implement 80 dumb changes.

If you really think someone will still listen to you after you flame them and tell them they are incompetent, you are one entitled son of a bitch.

I don't want Zoi to listen to me. I just don't give a damn shit about his opinion. If he agrees with me or wants to have my opinion about the game, that's fine, but I'm not going to try to convince a guy who wants to impose 80 shit changes.

The patch is with Zoi now. At least give him a chance.

I did give him a chance, and after I saw his patch notes he lost his chance.

Give your feedback, but do it constructively and try to find compromises. You might eventually convince people your way is better.

My way is better, and I'm going to convince people that it's better (I've already convinced many people that my way is much better actually). Tbh any reasonable people will see that the Zoi Patch is a huge failure.

And if not, so be it, but at least through compromises you got them to budge a little bit. What you're doing now only gets you farther from your goal.

No. I'm not an EP leader dick sucker. If I have to choose between telling the community why the Zoi patch is shit, or accepting 80 dumb changes while giving my opinion to a random captain guy, I know which choice I'l make.

And if Zoi ever quits, and you've been an active and constructive part of the process the whole time, people might consider you for his replacement. They definitely won't do that if you continue to show how elusive adulthood is to you. I may have even considered you as my replacement if you had shown an ability to work with people..
Too bad for the EP you picked a captain instead
Anyway, it's well known that ESOC is nespostistic. You picked Zoi because he's a close friend to you, not because he's any competent.

You're quite pathetic by the way. It's sad people don't realise that, but you just used me when you needed me because nobody was supporting your changes, and you needed high level players to test and prove your points, and when you don't need me anymore, you just get rid of me.

[Challe]

jezuz wheres the popcorn

[Hazza54321]

jezuz wheres the popcorn

@jesus3

[Mitoe]

@Diarouga why do you always gotta resort to personal attacks man? This is why no one ever wants to take you seriously.

[Kaiserklein]

My way is better, and I'm going to convince people that it's better (I've already convinced many people that my way is much better actually). Tbh any reasonable people will see that the Zoi Patch is a huge failure.

Looking at this thread, it seems to me like you're not convincing a lot of people, rather making a fool of yourself

[gh0st]

@[Armag] diarouga Of course you're free to disagree with the approach, the changes, and whatever else. In turn I disagree with your approach. To make a difference, you should try to find compromises and work with people rather than against them.

Lol, I'm not trying to find a compromise with a captain who wants to implement 80 dumb changes.

If you really think someone will still listen to you after you flame them and tell them they are incompetent, you are one entitled son of a bitch.

I don't want Zoi to listen to me. I just don't give a damn shit about his opinion. If he agrees with me or wants to have my opinion about the game, that's fine, but I'm not going to try to convince a guy who wants to impose 80 shit changes.

The patch is with Zoi now. At least give him a chance.

I did give him a chance, and after I saw his patch notes he lost his chance.

Give your feedback, but do it constructively and try to find compromises. You might eventually convince people your way is better.

My way is better, and I'm going to convince people that it's better (I've already convinced many people that my way is much better actually). Tbh any reasonable people will see that the Zoi Patch is a huge failure.

And if not, so be it, but at least through compromises you got them to budge a little bit. What you're doing now only gets you farther from your goal.

No. I'm not an EP leader dick sucker. If I have to choose between telling the community why the Zoi patch is shit, or accepting 80 dumb changes while giving my opinion to a random captain guy, I know which choice I'l make.

And if Zoi ever quits, and you've been an active and constructive part of the process the whole time, people might consider you for his replacement. They definitely won't do that if you continue to show how elusive adulthood is to you. I may have even considered you as my replacement if you had shown an ability to work with people..
Too bad for the EP you picked a captain instead
Anyway, it's well known that ESOC is nespostistic. You picked Zoi because he's a close friend to you, not because he's any competent.

You're quite pathetic by the way. It's sad people don't realise that, but you just used me when you needed me because nobody was supporting your changes, and you needed high level players to test and prove your points, and when you don't need me anymore, you just get rid of me.

You just proved Gs's point with your reply. I think most people can see now why its so hard to work with you. I really hope you grow up someday!

[Cometk]

Show hidden quotes

@Diarouga
I get you, if i were a competitive player i would not like an unbalanced patch what i try to show why zoi wants a "wtf" patch(also goodspeed probably) You kinda agree meta change is ok for the sake of interest in a certain balance level. So interest is also important. Now it comes to point how much of 'balance' and 'wtf' you desire in the patch, which is totaly subjective. I think middle ground is possible -like Kaiser said he talked with zoi etc.- with many people satisfied and few people dissapointed.

It's not that easy.
You know, when you play a civilisation and it's impossible to win some MUs with it, it's not fun at all. As Jerom pointed out, the EP might well become the next patch in aoe3:DE, so we want something close to the RE, but with better balance.
Tbh if half of the community doesn't like the EP, I don't think it's going to become the official patch.

Anyway, the changes don't matter that much (though they're very bad), what matters is that there is no EP team, and that Zoi has the final word on the change list.

We don’t want something close to the RE. If EP becomes the official DE patch, now is the time to make the game attractive to new players and people coming back. If we make it an enhanced RE patch it’s a disaster from the start.

Whats so bad about RE?

There's 30% of the game (politicians, units, cards, treasures, natives, etc...) that are worthless.

Imagine adding 100 useless cards to the game, for example 100 res crates. That wouldn't make the game worse, because the game would just be the same. What you said doesn't really imply that anything is bad about RE. It's not really an argument, in the sense that your statement is just an empty fact that literally doesn't say anything.

[spoiler=no, it's still bad game design][/spoiler]

[Cometk]

@momuuu saying that a sepoy nerf and house buff ruined india’s civ is identity is so incomprehensibly wrong that it leaves me flabbergasted

I didnt say that though.

EP tried to balance mostly, and did a good job at it, but also tried to redesign the game and did a bad job at it. They destroyed variety of civs and playstyles and that's sad.

Can you give an example of how EP tried to redesign the game and failed?

. . . Sepoy nerf + india eco boost . . . I have generally disliked all design oriented choices because ultimately I feel like most of those ended up making all civs feel very similair.

If I misinterpreted you, please explain further so that my understanding is correct.

[gibson]

Diarouga the reason why no one takes you seriously and why no one ever will is not cause you don't understand the game, but because you seemingly don't understand anything else.