ESOCommunity

Sweden doesn't even seem that strong to complain about.

I should dig the thread from De release, where me and some players immediately said swe was op because of torps, and like 3 pr40 players came to shut us up "its not strong, their units are shit, eco is useless" (remember torps gathered even more back then, and caros were stronger lol).

now can we please nerf this to oblivion? could be +70w cost do torps, whatever. if noone uses swe anymore would be a favor for the game.

Sweden is just a rumour.

starts playing sweden > gain +200 elo > get matched with higher level players > naturally starts losing > omg guys, sweden is not even that good. I lose every game with them.

its everything we hated about japan but worse

iron_turtle wrote:starts playing sweden > gain +200 elo > get matched with higher level players > naturally starts losing > omg guys, sweden is not even that good. I lose every game with them.

Honestly this might be why they're not nerfed. We know the devs use win rate and Swe win rate probably isn't abnormally high because it inflates elo to the point that Sweden players are constantly playing vs better opponents, but on equal footing. Kind of like in the GC we saw plenty of Sweden losses but it was often due to a skill gap rather than the civ actually being balanced.

PatrickLFC wrote:

iron_turtle wrote:starts playing sweden > gain +200 elo > get matched with higher level players > naturally starts losing > omg guys, sweden is not even that good. I lose every game with them.

Honestly this might be why they're not nerfed. We know the devs use win rate and Swe win rate probably isn't abnormally high because it inflates elo to the point that Sweden players are constantly playing vs better opponents, but on equal footing. Kind of like in the GC we saw plenty of Sweden losses but it was often due to a skill gap rather than the civ actually being balanced.

These "climbs" still have an impact on the win-percentage. Say someone plays 100 games w/ sweden, first 10 all wins, then 50/50 after that. Sweden's win rate for this player is 55%, which is not negligible. And then after people climb and then try a different civ they lose which negatively impacts other civs' win-percentage relative to Sweden. Of course I can't see the numbers, but I'm sure Sweden's overperformance is tangible. Think the real reason they haven't been nerfed is due to a combination of the global championship and the next DLC being on the horizon.

yes when the next civs are so blatantly overpowered as well, swedens OP power level will be our only hope

Dolphincup wrote:the next DLC being on the horizon.

What is the current conjecture on the release of said DLC? Does anyone know roughly when it will happen?

PatrickLFC wrote:

iron_turtle wrote:starts playing sweden > gain +200 elo > get matched with higher level players > naturally starts losing > omg guys, sweden is not even that good. I lose every game with them.

Honestly this might be why they're not nerfed. We know the devs use win rate and Swe win rate probably isn't abnormally high because it inflates elo to the point that Sweden players are constantly playing vs better opponents, but on equal footing. Kind of like in the GC we saw plenty of Sweden losses but it was often due to a skill gap rather than the civ actually being balanced.

I can't imagine the devs look purely at win rate. That would be extremely stupid.

Winrates will always be relatively consistent across the entire playerbase because of how matchmaking moderates the players who are matched against each other. If civ X suddenly gets a nerf, an X player who had ~1650 elo before the nerf with a ~50% winrate becomes an X player with ~1600 elo and a ~50% winrate. Automated, rating-based matchmaking means almost the entire playerbase will always have the same winrate, almost completely regardless of balance. Using winrates across a playerbase with automated matchmaking as evidence makes literally no sense.

lemmings121 wrote:I should dig the thread from De release, where me and some players immediately said swe was op because of torps, and like 3 pr40 players came to shut us up "its not strong, their units are shit, eco is useless" (remember torps gathered even more back then, and caros were stronger lol).

now can we please nerf this to oblivion? could be +70w cost do torps, whatever. if noone uses swe anymore would be a favor for the game.

It just takes time to find the optimal BOs as a community. After that we can see the true strength of the civ.

If equally skilled player X with 10 games with Sweden plays versus player Y with 1000 france games. Obviously Y should win every single game. Especially if you cant copy BOs from other players.

somp wrote:

lemmings121 wrote:I should dig the thread from De release, where me and some players immediately said swe was op because of torps, and like 3 pr40 players came to shut us up "its not strong, their units are shit, eco is useless" (remember torps gathered even more back then, and caros were stronger lol).

now can we please nerf this to oblivion? could be +70w cost do torps, whatever. if noone uses swe anymore would be a favor for the game.

It just takes time to find the optimal BOs as a community. After that we can see the true strength of the civ.

If equally skilled player X with 10 games with Sweden plays versus player Y with 1000 france games. Obviously Y should win every single game. Especially if you cant copy BOs from other players.

yeah but when you see a civ with 110w houses gathering for 3v each, should be obvious to any competent player that eventually op build orders will be found

anyway, no point arguing about the past, since now everyone agrees in a problem and it might get nerfed.

I can't imagine the devs look purely at win rate. That would be extremely stupid.

tbh, all the patches till now don't give any evidence to the contrary. (random aztec nerfs)

I still think torps should only spawn a berry bush and gather it at the same speed a villager does. Blueberry spawns an extra bush with more food. Blackberry does the same but even more food. Get rid of the 15 elk card.

InaLeto wrote:im done... iam thinking about skipping sweds in qs, even if i know how to beat them with (ok good winrate), i have enough

OK, I am an average player (1100 ELO, max) but I love the game, have played since "Vanilla" and play it several times a week. I am not fussed about winning and losing, TBH. I just enjoy the challenge of each match. I really do. If I lose, it's NBD, I just say "gg", maybe have a chat with the opponent and move on to the next game.

For three weeks as Japan, Lakota, France, or Russia I have resigned immediately upon getting a QS game vs. Sweden. It was just pointless to play them. Leather cannons, Caroleans sprinting into melee, burnt torps rebuilt quickly, aging up with no fuss...what is this garbage?

At my ELO, I believe 1/3 of all players are playing Sweden. So I was auto-resigning about 1/3 of the games. Lately as China, supposedly a good "counter civ" to Swedes, I have gone ahead and played (about six) Sweden matches. And lost every...single...one.

Maybe I am just an idiot. But I have a 50/50 win rate overall so maybe, just maybe, it is this broken civ?

I am done playing QS until this civ is fixed. Maybe I'll play some casual team games or treaty or ffa or deathmatch or anything else, but ranked games are over for me.

I'm amazed it has come to this.

-Henry__Knox

dansil92 wrote:its everything we hated about japan but worse

Imagine if Japan got (weak) Commerce Age flaming arrows and if Ashis had special charge/melee. It would be beyond broken.

That's Sweden (I know you know, Dansil...I'm just venting).

To be fair sweden units are nothing special until industrial. Maybe the 15 range carolean in age3 but they lack other units.
It is just torps which gather way too many resources.

Garja wrote:To be fair sweden units are nothing special until industrial. Maybe the 15 range carolean in age3 but they lack other units.
It is just torps which gather way too many resources.

Agree. But how do you deal with leathers/caroleans that huddle up in a mass in Age II? Many civs have almost no Age II units that can take down leathers with ranged fire, so you have to go into melee which of course the caroleans clean up.

it's the same thing as jan abus which used to be hard to counter, but in fact because the units are so expensive and take so much to mass, a generic age2 combo does just fine. At some point leathers will be hard to counter ofc which is the perk of having artillery in age2. But at that point the other civ either ages or start to use mobility to harass vills/torps around the map.

2 LC seem a very good shipment.

We saw all the players in the tournament play the Swe mirror
Even some players prefer swe rather than mainciv
Swe is de worst mistake

I feel like replacing 2LC with 8 bow and taking away the Exiled Prince would even things out a lot more.

Force them to play age II like Brit and it's easier to punish.