Less Limited Post-Winter Balance Adjustments (EP8)

[Mitoe]

@[Armag] diarouga You are being very unfair to Zoi. In my opinion, EP7 is better and more balanced than EP6 overall (which was done by Zoi as well, by the way).

I think ideally people would be a little more helpful to patch creators when it comes to answering their questions about a change and engaging in constructive discussion. I have listened to community feedback for years concerning the uhlan change and no one once has been able to offer a complete and convincing case for why it's bad. Even now, when I ask whether uhlan viability is currently a problem in the shape of "how many uhlans are being trained today?", people don't answer, so I remain unconvinced.
Lucky for you, Zoi is in charge now. But Zoi tends to be reasonable, and the uhlan change just happens to be reasonable.

I actually agree with you about the Uhlan change. I do not understand the thought process of people who want to revert this change for other much more elaborate changes, especially considering that Germany is likely balanced right now. To me it feels like people just want to be able to smash every fight with Germans, which is why they were overpowered in the first place.

However, I struggle to think of many--if any--other changes where people are as irrational as this one.

Assuming you're right and Zoi knows what makes a solid EP better than me, he still doesn't know what makes a solid EP than all the top players.

I would still disagree. I think you need someone who isn't invested, someone with a helicopter view of the project, and someone who knows a thing or two about game design. Top players understand the game very well, and their input is valuable, but if you leave balancing up to them you end up with a patch without a vision, and a whole lot of standardization.

Sorry, but where is your evidence for this? No one aside from Zoi and yourself have had the opportunity to even try. Top players are not truly as resistant to uniqueness or changes as they might seem to you. I, for one, am all for buffing the unviable stuff into situational stuff; however I think Zoi often takes this a step too far (overbuffing) or goes for very strange changes in order to achieve this when there are much simpler ones available. This is what eats at players more than anything else.

I understand that a lot of players can be pretty emotional when it comes to responding to certain changes, but I think it's really unfair to paint everyone with the same brush and say definitively that no one other than Zoi would be able to make a decent patch.


Ultimately, do I think Zoi is bad for the patch? No, not at all. Do I think he's the best person for the patch? Probably not.

I just don't really like his approach very much and from discussing changes with him and other top players over the last couple of patches I can say that I found communicating with him a bit frustrating because I felt like he was overly dismissive of mine and other's opinions.

[WickedCossack]

Agree with @Mitoe & GS re Germany change. Maybe it's not the style of play everyone wants but I think it's generally agreed Germany is balanced-ish with this uhlan HP nerf. Even if you don't like the specific change I don't think anyone here is saying its unbalanced right? It's a style thing. Heck I wanted 250wd germany TP for so long but I'd rather not risk a finely tuned Germany right now by blowing the current change out the water then having Germans dominate or suck for a few months because the new change is wrong. Let's just focus on the current issues ...

Looking at the recent poll https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... edit#gid=0 Brit is top civ and Sioux is bottom civ hence I present to you my extensive patch notes for EP8!:

Brits: Manors 135wd -> 140wd
Sioux: 4vil shipment -> 5 vils

[gamevideo113]

@deleted_user6
Im ok wirh trainable spahi. 1000 food each and available in imperial sounds fair considering how stupid Otto already is doesnt it (;
Ps. Pls also give india trainable urumi and iro trainable gendarmes!!1!!111!!!

Give iro trainable forest prowlers!
Oh, wait...

[Plantinator]

Give germany guaranteed Jäger and br at Saloon because its their civ identity to have strong mercs!

[Le Hussard sur le toit]

Actually a design change I would really like is to be able to know which merc are available in the saloon before building it (don't know if it is technically possible though).

[n0el]

Actually a design change I would really like is to be able to know which merc are available in the saloon before building it (don't know if it is technically possible though).

Agreed. Would be nice to make this map dependent if possible.

[Plantinator]

I actually like the mechanic that its random every game but would it be possible to add the Information what u get when the map is loading?
Edit: or maybe make one Spot map dependant and the other one random maybe?

[iNcog]

Mitoe posting the most neutral post ITT since Constantinople was taken. I don't mean to suck up to Mitoe and I'm a flamer so what I say matters little; but Mitoe is quite seriously one of the most level-headed people in the community and I appreciate the shit out of him every time he posts.

Edit: Credit to Wickedcossack too.

On a more serious note there is definitely some common ground to be found here so Zoom should adjust things a bit in one direction and the French lobby in the opposite direction and I'm certain we will come together on something that is amazing for all of us. EP is already 95% fucking amazing, the last 5% is the hardest to get. It's a logarithm!

[Le Hussard sur le toit]

Actually a design change I would really like is to be able to know which merc are available in the saloon before building it (don't know if it is technically possible though).

Agreed. Would be nice to make this map dependent if possible.

Either make it map dependent, make it random but the info is given while the game is loading or make it semi-random (get two in age 3, one of which is guaranteed to be usable (highlanders, jaegers, swedish fusi, blackriders...) and the other is random, then get one in age 4).

[EAGLEMUT]

Actually a design change I would really like is to be able to know which merc are available in the saloon before building it (don't know if it is technically possible though).

Agreed. Would be nice to make this map dependent if possible.

You mean like a certain map which has static mercs? Certainly possible on a technical level.

[Le Hussard sur le toit]

You mean like a certain map which has static mercs? Certainly possible on a technical level.

I mean is it possible to still get random merc, but to display what will be available either during the loading time or as a mouseover in the UI. I like the fact that merc are random, but having to invest 200 wood to discover that the available merc are useless is dumb.

[EAGLEMUT]

Not possible during loading time. Possible to show somewhere in-game like obs UI does it.

[Plantinator]

Not possible during loading time. Possible to show somewhere in-game like obs UI does it.

I would rly apreciate it if u could implement that into future Patches (:

[Le Hussard sur le toit]

Not possible during loading time. Possible to show somewhere in-game like obs UI does it.

I think then that it would be a nice quality of life change that would not affect balance at all (since it would not change the actual strength of the merc build).

[Kaiserklein]

It just defeats the purpose of mercs being random. Also this is a balance change and not to be taken lightly. Among other things, it's a nerf to twc civs since they can't access mercs, and a buff to germany

[RefluxSemantic]

I vote for removing zoi from the patch team and starting over from ep4.0ish with actual top players taking the lead. I want a patch that represents the average opinion of diarouga + kaiser + hazza I think.

[deleted_user]

I don't.

[Le Hussard sur le toit]

It just defeats the purpose of mercs being random. Also this is a balance change and not to be taken lightly. Among other things, it's a nerf to twc civs since they can't access mercs, and a buff to germany

You probably knows better as you are much stronger than me but it seems to me that it does not really change the viability of the merc build, it just means you will not get into the case where you commit to a merc build and then discover you are screwed because the saloon only train lansquenets. I guess it gives the option to play a standard BO and add in a few mercs later on if you are short on food and the merc are op jaegers or highlanders ?

[bobabu]

@[Armag] diarouga You are being very unfair to Zoi. In my opinion, EP7 is better and more balanced than EP6 overall (which was done by Zoi as well, by the way).

I think ideally people would be a little more helpful to patch creators when it comes to answering their questions about a change and engaging in constructive discussion. I have listened to community feedback for years concerning the uhlan change and no one once has been able to offer a complete and convincing case for why it's bad. Even now, when I ask whether uhlan viability is currently a problem in the shape of "how many uhlans are being trained today?", people don't answer, so I remain unconvinced.
Lucky for you, Zoi is in charge now. But Zoi tends to be reasonable, and the uhlan change just happens to be reasonable.

I actually agree with you about the Uhlan change. I do not understand the thought process of people who want to revert this change for other much more elaborate changes, especially considering that Germany is likely balanced right now. To me it feels like people just want to be able to smash every fight with Germans, which is why they were overpowered in the first place.

However, I struggle to think of many--if any--other changes where people are as irrational as this one.

Assuming you're right and Zoi knows what makes a solid EP better than me, he still doesn't know what makes a solid EP than all the top players.

I would still disagree. I think you need someone who isn't invested, someone with a helicopter view of the project, and someone who knows a thing or two about game design. Top players understand the game very well, and their input is valuable, but if you leave balancing up to them you end up with a patch without a vision, and a whole lot of standardization.

Sorry, but where is your evidence for this? No one aside from Zoi and yourself have had the opportunity to even try. Top players are not truly as resistant to uniqueness or changes as they might seem to you. I, for one, am all for buffing the unviable stuff into situational stuff; however I think Zoi often takes this a step too far (overbuffing) or goes for very strange changes in order to achieve this when there are much simpler ones available. This is what eats at players more than anything else.

I understand that a lot of players can be pretty emotional when it comes to responding to certain changes, but I think it's really unfair to paint everyone with the same brush and say definitively that no one other than Zoi would be able to make a decent patch.


Ultimately, do I think Zoi is bad for the patch? No, not at all. Do I think he's the best person for the patch? Probably not.

I just don't really like his approach very much and from discussing changes with him and other top players over the last couple of patches I can say that I found communicating with him a bit frustrating because I felt like he was overly dismissive of mine and other's opinions.

You have to ask yourself why so many people are pissed at the uhlan change. You don't see the bigger picture. Balance isn't even the major issue here. People would go berserk if you would weaken gendarmes, mahout, or any unit unique to a civ. People want the unique unit to be at least strong enough to kill a standard unit or have another bonus. It's simply frustrating when you are limited to go to the fortress with Germany because there's no other viable gameplan. Germany was never overpowered in colonial even before the uhlan change. They were, however, overpowered in the fortress. The only logical change would be to weaken the fortress and not their colonial and in doing so giving them more options. Now playing Germany is simply boring because you can't play aggressive. Going fortress is the only path to victory.

[Mitoe]

You have to ask yourself why so many people are pissed at the uhlan change. You don't see the bigger picture. Balance isn't even the major issue here. People would go berserk if you would weaken gendarmes, mahout, or any unit unique to a civ. People want the unique unit to be at least strong enough to kill a standard unit or have another bonus. It's simply frustrating when you are limited to go to the fortress with Germany because there's no other viable gameplan. Germany was never overpowered in colonial even before the uhlan change. They were, however, overpowered in the fortress. The only logical change would be to weaken the fortress and not their colonial and in doing so giving them more options. Now playing Germany is simply boring because you can't play aggressive. Going fortress is the only path to victory.

I understand that but the alternatives people are suggesting are so much worse as far as harming Germany's identity goes.

[deleted_user]

Just ran some maths on the Russia villager change (train time reduced from 53 seconds to 50 seconds). Let me know if I'm wrong:

ASSUMPTIONS:
1) all res calculated in terms of food gathering, no upgrades (0.84 f/s)
2) can train first batch at 0:01 game time
3) no idle time except for the 90 colonial age up
4) constant vill production

Game Time: 19.0 minutes | +1335 resources gathered
Game Time: 16.5 minutes | +950 resources gathered
Game Time: 14.0 minutes | +635 resources gathered
Game Time: 11.5 minutes | +385 resources gathered
Game Time: 09.0 minutes | +200 resources gathered
Game Time: 06.5 minutes | +90 resources gathered
90 SECOND AGE UP
Game Time: 02.5 minutes | +45 resources gathered

ancillary maths

(n=1; to 3) Sum [ (3 vills) * (0.84 food/sec) * (3 sec) * (n) ] = +45
~~Age Up Time Null~~
(n=1; to 18) Sum [ (3 vills) * (0.84 food/sec) * (3 sec) * (n) ] = +1293

1290 + 45 = +1335

Age 1: (3 batches) * (50 sec/batch) + (90 second age up time) = 240 seconds = 4 minutes
Age 2: (18 batches) * (50 sec/batch) = 900 seconds = 15 minutes

At 19 minutes Old Russia is at least one entire batch behind.

Age 1: (3 batches) * (53 sec/batch) + (90 second age up time) = 4.15 minutes
Age 2: (17 batches) * (53 sec/batch) = 901 seconds = 15 minutes

So in theory Russia earns 50f in age 1 and can age 9 seconds earlier, and earns an extra musketeer batch at 12 minutes. And the change continues to benefit them quadratically. Russia already scales quite, quite well. This seems too strong @zoom . It would also disproportionally affect team balance where Russia is already top tier.

[Goodspeed]

Assuming you're right and Zoi knows what makes a solid EP better than me, he still doesn't know what makes a solid EP than all the top players.

I would still disagree. I think you need someone who isn't invested, someone with a helicopter view of the project, and someone who knows a thing or two about game design. Top players understand the game very well, and their input is valuable, but if you leave balancing up to them you end up with a patch without a vision, and a whole lot of standardization.

Sorry, but where is your evidence for this?

My many years of working with him and with top players on EP, and the history of other patches (primarly ASFP). Players tend to favor standardizing changes, and don't tend to care as much about design issues because they've long accepted them as truths of life. Particularly worrying is that they are inclined to make changes that encourage playstyles that are already prevalent in the meta without much of a second thought. Also, top players tend to want to play the game rather than spend many hours discussing and polling changes. I think people underestimate how much work it is. Zoi is the only one who showed me over the years that he is able and willing to make the necessary time investment. He also has a ton of experience with the project at this point, which I consider to be important because it means he's invested and understands choices made early on.

Beyond all that, there are many problems you run into when you have people make something together rather than have someone with a vision take responsibility and use others' input as necessary (which Zoi does, believe it or not). In R&D projects, combining the collective knowledge and ideas of many is not a trivial task. Why? It's a pretty complicated subject and it would take me too much time to write a post even scratching the surface. Suffice to say I don't think it would work very well here.

And to clarify (also @Kaiserklein), I don't mean to say that Zoi knows balance better than top players combined. He needs player input, and uses it. Rather I think that with his understanding of game design, experience with the project, lack of bias, strict quality control and willingness to invest a large amount of time into it I think he's in a unique position to create a good patch. Sometimes that means making changes that people aren't particularly excited about.

I just don't really like his approach very much and from discussing changes with him and other top players over the last couple of patches I can say that I found communicating with him a bit frustrating because I felt like he was overly dismissive of mine and other's opinions.

He's not perfect and you won't hear me say so. I think particularly in discussing changes he has some things to improve on. He understandably wants to get to the bottom of things, which can be time consuming for all parties involved and can ultimately inhibit fruitful discussion because people "give up". But even if he seems dismissive of opinions where people simply state "I don't like this change" and never elaborate, please know he still takes it into account.

I understand that a lot of players can be pretty emotional when it comes to responding to certain changes, but I think it's really unfair to paint everyone with the same brush and say definitively that no one other than Zoi would be able to make a decent patch.

I never said that. I do think he's the best man for the job, though. And my point here was more that a team of top players would not be a good way to go about it.

[Mitoe]

ASFP was a different time and I really don't think you should apply many of the same characteristics of those players to current players. People are much more open minded about the game now than in the past.

The most standard/conservative player here is probably diarouga, and he played pretty unorthodox builds during NWC.

[bobabu]

The opinion of one person is mostly worse than the opinion of a crowd if you can create the necessary environment. The combined knowledge of a civ is far better than a single one.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisdom_of_the_crowd

[Guigs]

Looking at the recent poll https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... edit#gid=0 Brit is top civ and Sioux is bottom civ hence I present to you my extensive patch notes for EP8!:

Brits: Manors 135wd -> 140wd
Sioux: 4vil shipment -> 5 vils

How did you pull that one ??