EP 7.0.x Beta [RELEASED-LIVE]
Re: EP 7.0.x Beta [2019-08-26]
You do realize that being easy or hard is just the beginner's mindset, after playing for some time you do feel comfortable with any civ you play, just the difference in mechanics. Being harder or easier is just a myth.
#trainableSpahi
- Riotcoke
- Retired Contributor
- Posts: 4088
- Joined: May 7, 2019
- ESO: Riotcoke
- Location: Dorsetshire
- Clan: UwU
Re: EP 7.0.x Beta [2019-08-26]
aqwer wrote:You do realize that being easy or hard is just the beginner's mindset, after playing for some time you do feel comfortable with any civ you play, just the difference in mechanics. Being harder or easier is just a myth.
No it isn't, Otto is just an easy civ, meanwhile Brit is a hard civ, just give up mate.
twitch.tv/stangoesdeepTV
- [Armag] diarouga
- Ninja
- Posts: 12710
- Joined: Feb 26, 2015
- ESO: diarouga
- Location: France
Re: EP 7.0.x Beta [2019-08-26]
aqwer wrote:You do realize that being easy or hard is just the beginner's mindset, after playing for some time you do feel comfortable with any civ you play, just the difference in mechanics. Being harder or easier is just a myth.
No, it's not.
With some civs (Japan, brit for example), you need to scout what your opponent is doing, and then adapt else you die. You also need to have a good macro to spend all your resources as well as a decent micro.
With Otto or Russia, you dictate the pace of the game, you do the same BO every time and your opponent has to adapt. Furthermore, it's easy to macro/micro with these civs.
Re: EP 7.0.x Beta [2019-08-26]
[Armag] diarouga wrote:aqwer wrote:You do realize that being easy or hard is just the beginner's mindset, after playing for some time you do feel comfortable with any civ you play, just the difference in mechanics. Being harder or easier is just a myth.
No, it's not.
With some civs (Japan, brit for example), you need to scout what your opponent is doing, and then adapt else you die. You also need to have a good macro to spend all your resources as well as a decent micro.
With Otto or Russia, you dictate the pace of the game, you do the same BO every time and your opponent has to adapt. Furthermore, it's easy to macro/micro with these civs.
So it comes to that you want to boom freely with Brit/Jap and also wanted to go about it unchallenged so that your Superior units and eco doesn't have any match for Otto/Rus to beat?
#trainableSpahi
Re: EP 7.0.x Beta [2019-08-15]
Riotcoke wrote:aqwer wrote:Show hidden quotes
Very interesting thought and example. So if Germany is "hard" , why there is so much voices to nerf them? Shouldn't be the hard civs to play also be strong to be more " rewarding", as quoted by previous NWC winner.
Because Germany isn't hard in comparison to other civs, it's just that otto is painfully easy.
So, if they are "easy" according to you then they should get raped by every civ? If that is the point then why not remove the civ altogether.
#trainableSpahi
- Riotcoke
- Retired Contributor
- Posts: 4088
- Joined: May 7, 2019
- ESO: Riotcoke
- Location: Dorsetshire
- Clan: UwU
Re: EP 7.0.x Beta [2019-08-15]
aqwer wrote:Riotcoke wrote:Show hidden quotes
Because Germany isn't hard in comparison to other civs, it's just that otto is painfully easy.
So, if they are "easy" according to you then they should get raped by every civ? If that is the point then why not remove the civ altogether.
No, they're in a good spot at the moment.
twitch.tv/stangoesdeepTV
-
- ESOC Pro Team
- Posts: 1116
- Joined: Jan 25, 2019
- Location: Wales (new, south)
Re: EP 7.0.x Beta [2019-08-26]
It's kinda sad in recent weekend tournaments how Brit has been absent just because they can be hard counter-picked by India or Russia doing the same shit every single game.
- gamevideo113
- Howdah
- Posts: 1899
- Joined: Apr 26, 2017
- ESO: gamevideo113
Re: EP 7.0.x Beta [2019-08-26]
Brits have been dominant in previous versions of EP at least, but there are lots of other civs that have always been played very rarely. Anyway i agree with diarouga, playing harder civs should be potentially more rewarding, but that means we should also try to make easier civ a bit harder/more thoughtful and less bot.
India isn't particularly easy, but with the CF nerf it should be in a reasonable spot. If it's still too strong we can just revert the house buff and the civ should be ok. Brits can make cannons against them, a musk-longbow-cannon comp should do fine vs gurkha-sepoy.
Russia is a bit more tricky. Imo 285f vills that train in 45 seconds, while reverting the rusket buff, should be a healthy change for the civ. The rush would be more or less delayed and the 17v age up would be a lot better.
Otto is kinda easy by design, i'm not sure that we can do much about it without just changing it altogether. It has already recieved tons of buffs that promote eco play, but the spirit of the civ is still aggressive. At least they have a lot of build orders, so they are probably less bot than other civs. The problem is that at this point basically everything otto has was already nerfed, so i don't know what could be done about them. Jans, abus, mams have all been nerfed. I guess the abus range might be a problem in age3, but that involves a small amount of ottoman games.
India isn't particularly easy, but with the CF nerf it should be in a reasonable spot. If it's still too strong we can just revert the house buff and the civ should be ok. Brits can make cannons against them, a musk-longbow-cannon comp should do fine vs gurkha-sepoy.
Russia is a bit more tricky. Imo 285f vills that train in 45 seconds, while reverting the rusket buff, should be a healthy change for the civ. The rush would be more or less delayed and the 17v age up would be a lot better.
Otto is kinda easy by design, i'm not sure that we can do much about it without just changing it altogether. It has already recieved tons of buffs that promote eco play, but the spirit of the civ is still aggressive. At least they have a lot of build orders, so they are probably less bot than other civs. The problem is that at this point basically everything otto has was already nerfed, so i don't know what could be done about them. Jans, abus, mams have all been nerfed. I guess the abus range might be a problem in age3, but that involves a small amount of ottoman games.
[Some people aspire to be pr30+, some people aspire to have fun, and some people aspire to play 3v3 Deccan.] - vividlyplain - 2019
Who (nationality) rape ?
stupid logic. noob players can say op?
toxic, Insult, Racism ?
stupid logic. noob players can say op?
toxic, Insult, Racism ?
-
- ESOC Pro Team
- Posts: 1116
- Joined: Jan 25, 2019
- Location: Wales (new, south)
Re: EP 7.0.x Beta [2019-08-26]
gamevideo113 wrote:India isn't particularly easy
Relative to what? In all their agressive matchups they just make sepoys and z-move, and for their handful of defensive matchups their options for holding pressure are ridiculously good (3 sets of minutemen + Agra + taking forever to chew through in-base resources + trickles that can't be idled + age 2 skirm/goon).
I guess their macro is a bit harder than some civs but using so much wood is a blessing more than a curse.
- gamevideo113
- Howdah
- Posts: 1899
- Joined: Apr 26, 2017
- ESO: gamevideo113
Re: EP 7.0.x Beta [2019-08-26]
Kawapasaka wrote:gamevideo113 wrote:India isn't particularly easy
Relative to what? In all their agressive matchups they just make sepoys and z-move, and for their handful of defensive matchups their options for holding pressure are ridiculously good (3 sets of minutemen + Agra + taking forever to chew through in-base resources + trickles that can't be idled + age 2 skirm/goon).
I guess their macro is a bit harder than some civs but using so much wood is a blessing more than a curse.
The civ is probably a bit too dominant in dictating the pace of the game, but as you say their macro is definitely more complicated than other civs. Compared to otto, which has easy macro and easy strategy decision, they aren't as simple to use. Anyway as i said i would be on board with an india nerf since the civ is just overall average or strong in basically any situation (water, tp, non tp etc.) and sepoy z-moving is kind of frustrating to deal with.
[Some people aspire to be pr30+, some people aspire to have fun, and some people aspire to play 3v3 Deccan.] - vividlyplain - 2019
Who (nationality) rape ?
stupid logic. noob players can say op?
toxic, Insult, Racism ?
stupid logic. noob players can say op?
toxic, Insult, Racism ?
-
- Musketeer
- Posts: 78
- Joined: Jul 20, 2019
- ESO: MIstress_Shy
Re: EP 7.0.x Beta [2019-08-26]
whay should India Macro be more complicated then other civs?
- edeholland
- ESOC Community Team
- Posts: 5033
- Joined: Feb 11, 2015
- ESO: edeholland
- GameRanger ID: 4053888
- Clan: ESOC
Re: EP 7.0.x Beta [2019-08-26]
It's more complicated because you always have 3 resources to manage (except if you go Rajput/native rush, I suppose).juhjuh wrote:whay should India Macro be more complicated then other civs?
- [Armag] diarouga
- Ninja
- Posts: 12710
- Joined: Feb 26, 2015
- ESO: diarouga
- Location: France
Re: EP 7.0.x Beta [2019-08-26]
Yea and you have to manage your wood.
If you think about it, most civs (especially nilla civs) don't have to manage their wood, they just send 700w and build houses from it and never gather wood.
If you think about it, most civs (especially nilla civs) don't have to manage their wood, they just send 700w and build houses from it and never gather wood.
Re: EP 7.0.x Beta [2019-08-26]
India’s macro is mostly complicated in the early game because you have to spend your resources very precisely; do you need units? Market upgrades? Stable? Consulate?
Spending resources on any of these things delays the others early on.
Later in the game India doesn’t have super difficult macro aside from the risk of stacking too much wood.
Spending resources on any of these things delays the others early on.
Later in the game India doesn’t have super difficult macro aside from the risk of stacking too much wood.
- [Armag] diarouga
- Ninja
- Posts: 12710
- Joined: Feb 26, 2015
- ESO: diarouga
- Location: France
Re: EP 7.0.x Beta [2019-08-26]
Yea in late game you can stack 1k wood if you don't pay attention. In early game it's rather hard to get a 5 sepoy batch if you greed.
Re: EP 7.0.x Beta [2019-08-15]
I insist on keeping the notes technically correct (I.E not listing bug fixes as balance changes). It's definitely practically a balance change, though – as are most bug fixes!Mitoe wrote:I have a big problem with how some "bug fixes" are listed.- Other players can no longer see if "2x" shipments have been sent, via deck inspection.
This change, for example, is such an impactful change. It's arguably not even a bug. It should be listed as a balance change. This was the same problem I had with the very first iteration of EP where the age 4 Japanese Shogunate was changed to granted 600xp instead of 1600xp and was listed as a bug fixes. Changes this large are balance changes regardless of whether or not they are truly bugs.
A lot of the other bug fixes I have other problems with (not because I think they affect balance all that much), but will go into more detail about them later since I don't really have time right now.
If a change is correcting an obviously unintended effect, it is a bug fix. This is literally and only a technicality. Whether a change impacts balance has nothing to do with whether it's a bug fix, but must be considered when determining if a bug fix should be made, and if it should be compensated for. The definition of the term doesn't make for an interesting debate. On that note, speaking of the Japanese double-shipment bug discussion: It is mere technicality. The practicality is whether it's desirable. It might make for a more interesting argument. If I ever see a convincing argument as to why it weren't a bug, I'm happy to support relabelling it. Until then, I'll trust Eaglemut to better determine that matter, than I could.
Putting particularly impactful bug fixes in bold might be an option. What does everyone think of that?
About this post's content, I don't have much to add. Still, I wonder: Do you think -15% banner-army cost is too strong? I suppose that, in the late game, it's better than +5% all gather rates (military expenditures increasing, as the game goes on). 10% would effectively be the same as the bugged state, for Colonial Age banner-armies, and a buff to Fortress Age ones. That might be enough, to put it in a decent place. I expect the Consulate to be rebalanced, in a future patch, regardless.Mitoe wrote:The question isn't about whether or not it is a bug, it's about how much it impacts the game. Yes, the majority of bug fixes affect balance, but the change for most of them is very small, almost unnoticeable.
However stuff on the level of the Japanese deck checking and the 1000 less exp on the Shogunate are so impactful to the point that they actually change the way you have to play the game, and therefore should be listed as a balance change, IMO.- "Old Ways" shipment now decreases the cost of Founder big button tech by 50%, instead of greatly increasing its cost in error.
This bug fix, for example, definitely does affect the game, but it also doesn't change the way anyone will play. If it did, then the priority should be to list it as a balance change.
Onto a slightly different topic, I find these changes to be pretty strange:- Comanche Trade Language now affects Wonder costs.
This isn't a big deal, and really I don't care much whether or not it stays in the game, but why was it determined to be a bug that this tech didn't affect wonder cost? If we're considering wonders a tech, why aren't we considering European and TWC age up politicians/chiefs as technologies?- German Consulate passive effect changed to -15% banner-army cost; this fixes a bug where German Consulate would cause trained banner-armies to "refund" resources to the player, due to the armies having negative costs.
I understand that the negative costs thing was a bug, but overall I think this should be more of a balance change because it does make the German consulate better to the point that it may be used more frequently.- Changdao cover mode attack standardized to deal half the damage of regular attack.
This one I'm kinda on the fence about. I don't think it's going to change the way anyone played, but I think it's probably impactful enough that it should be listed as a balance change. Really I wouldn't be that upset if it remained under bug fixes, though, because I'm pretty sure most people didn't even know this was a thing.
Re: EP 7.0.x Beta [2019-08-15]
Because wonders are both buildings and technologies, being age-ups.umeu wrote:EAGLEMUT wrote:Mitoe wrote:If we're considering wonders a tech, why aren't we considering European and TWC age up politicians/chiefs as technologies?
We are; the tech has always affected Euro/TWC age-ups, which is why it was considered a bug that only TAD wonder age-ups are unaffected on RE.I understand that the negative costs thing was a bug, but overall I think this should be more of a balance change because it does make the German consulate better to the point that it may be used more frequently.
On this one I agree it is technically both a bugfix and a balance change, since we have altered the effects to something different than originally intended, in order to fix the bug. Same thing with the Old Ways fix or disciple aura fix for example. I dislike the idea of duplicating a change note in both sections, but these types of changes could really fit in either. Right now they're in bugfixes just because the primary reason of changing those effects was fixing the bug, rather than affecting balance (which isn't a super strong argument).
it's not a bug. politicians are techs, wonders are buildings. politicians aren't affected by building discounts, so why would wonders be affected by tech discounts? this seems really unfair.
Re: EP 7.0.x Beta [2019-08-15]
dansil92 wrote:Meteor Hammer attack decreased from 29 to 25
OOFUdasi Chakram "Heavy Infantry" unit-tag removed
This I like a lot. That shipment for india just got a lot more useable
charlemango wrote:Let's see how nerfing China's most iconic unit goes over with the crowd
Lukas_L99 wrote:I don’t like these banner army changes at all...
Why even change them..?
First, thank you for your patience! For the past couple of weeks, I've made other priorities than visiting ESOC. What time I have spent working on the project, I've used to ensure the release of an update addressing a few critical issues. If you somehow don't, already, please rest assured that the beta will see additional updates, in the near future. Thankfully, there's little hurry, beyond this one! On the subject of thankfulness: Thank you to everyone who provided feedback – of any kind – and to Eaglemut and Kevsoft for their outstanding work!Kaiserklein wrote:Thanks a lot for fixing the bug on the french version of the ep launcherMitoe wrote:- Comanche Trade Language now affects Wonder costs.
This isn't a big deal, and really I don't care much whether or not it stays in the game, but why was it determined to be a bug that this tech didn't affect wonder cost? If we're considering wonders a tech, why aren't we considering European and TWC age up politicians/chiefs as technologies?
Yeah right, I mean asian wonders are already "buildings", so you can get a discount with for example the port consulate or the cree tech, which makes sense. So I don't really understand this change, though ultimately it doesn't really matter.Lukas_L99 wrote:I don’t like these banner army changes at all...
Why even change them..?
Yeah these chinese changes are gonna be a disaster. Just too impactful and too random.
Admittedly, for inter-civilization balance purposes, alone, it isn't clear whether the Iron Flail–Meteor Hammer shuffle is warranted. Along with the changes to the Black Flag banner-army itself, however, it helps minimize the risks with said banner-army, and helps intra-civilization balance, to boot: It is a nerf to the Black Flag banner-army, and a buff to the Imperial banner-army (both of which are inherently situational, the latter more so to the point of current practical irrelevancy). On top of that, it is a slight nerf to Meteor Hammer unit shipments, and a slight buff to Iron Flail unit shipments, which will be a minor nerf to early Fortress Age builds. The disparity between the strength of the two heavy cavalry units is too extreme, as manifested by the aforementioned circumstances.
For details on the actual banner-army changes, and more, please read this post.
With the above in mind, I'd love to know if there is a convincing argument against changing them; especially given the nerfs to them (I expect to revert the Keshik Attack buff, soon, too). Please keep in mind that I am yet to properly update myself on the threads in the beta forum, and feel free to redirect me to posts, there, if the case has already been made. Either way, I will get to it, soon.
Re: EP 7.0.x Beta [2019-08-26]
Please let me know in what way you think they are misguided. It were especially helpful if you have a logical argument. Please first see this post, though.ListlessSalmon wrote:Ty to kevsoft and eaglemut for their work on this!
The start of walking back the misguided aztec shipment changes is promising. Even more crazy (and needless) China changes is not.
Crazy Chinese changes!? Please see my above post, then elaborate.
Re: EP 7.0.x Beta [2019-08-26]
I would suggest balancing mercenary shipments with their price adjustments.
For example You get 6 hackapelles which worth 1800 gold then it should cost 800 gold.
With this its much easier to balance mercenary shipments. All you need to do modifie the base unit cost and update shipments accordingly.
For example You get 6 hackapelles which worth 1800 gold then it should cost 800 gold.
With this its much easier to balance mercenary shipments. All you need to do modifie the base unit cost and update shipments accordingly.
Re: EP 7.0.x Beta [2019-08-26]
Disregarding the fact that Chinese Colonial Age strength wasn't at all changed, with the recent update, the best way to do that is for you to test it! Still, here goes:dansil92 wrote:China top colonial civ now, change my mind
Modest buffs to two underpowered units is unlikely to turn Chinese – one of the worst Colonial Age civilizations – into the top one. However, it might make the units viable. Although it has nothing to do with Colonial Age, the same applies to the Reforms reform: If the shipment isn't even considered viable with vastly better units, what makes you think it would be overpowered with the Mongolian army? Like I mentioned, above, I plan to revert the Keshik attack buff, though. Testing has convinced me that the unit is too strong, with Reforms, on the current beta, and that there is a risk of it being overbuffed, in Colonial Age, as well; with other slight buffs to itself, the Steppe Rider, and the changes to the Mongolian banner-army. The attack buff revert would nerf the fully-upgraded Keshik from 27.3 to 21.84 attack. For these reasons, it makes good sense, to me.
Thank you for pointing out the Chakram oversight, too!
Re: EP 7.0.x Beta [2019-08-26]
Will poll it.gamevideo113 wrote:pecelot wrote:Spanish Gold should be 400 coin really
And in the fortress age! I'm not a fan of colonial spanish gold.
- scarm
- Howdah
- Posts: 1439
- Joined: Dec 7, 2018
- ESO: Malebranche
Re: EP 7.0.x Beta [2019-08-26]
Just generally speaking without any judgement by me: People in the beta forums have made points as for why they think those changes are not good. The problem in the communication seems to be, that you are expecting arguments as to why they are bad changes balance-wise, while the players are arguing against the thesis above that in the logical hierarchy: That more intra-civ-balance is desirable in the first place, which you seemingly are assuming from the get-go, while some of the posters in that forum disagree. This leads to both parties being frustrated by the lack of understanding of ones position, since you aren't really discussing the same common thesis.
I apologize if i misinterpreted anyones intentions or arguments, just wanted to share my perception of why the discussion regarding the beta seems a bit fruitless.
I apologize if i misinterpreted anyones intentions or arguments, just wanted to share my perception of why the discussion regarding the beta seems a bit fruitless.
Re: EP 7.0.x Beta [2019-08-26]
I cant understand how any of this is standardizing. The Meteor Hammer is, and will remain an exceptionally cool unit (its range wasn't nerfed, mind you). Please see this post, too!RefluxSemantic wrote:I just can't understand why china has to be totally standardized. Isn't the iffyness of banner armies not always giving you what you want one of the defining characteristiscs of china? I also have no idea why you'd want to mess with the meteor and flail stats? It seemed pretty much fine and I always thought meteor hammers were an exceptionally cool unit.
Still, if it's unpopular, I don't mind reverting that particular change, later.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests