|
Post by {PHX} Alaron on Jun 17, 2013 22:50:47 GMT 1
I don't really think Euro settlers need to be able to build TCs. One possible explanation is that the Euro explorer just isn't as useful compared to Asian monks and Native warchiefs. The warchiefs all provide very useful combat boosts that would be lost in the moments the warchief is gone building a TC or two. Japanese monks are much more useful in combat than Euro explorers, but they also may be building shrines as opposed to TCs half the time; perhaps the developers figured that they'd be too busy building shrines or fighting to build another TC. Indian monks could be healing units. The Chinese monk has cover mode and disciples.
As for halberdiers, I guess I wouldn't be opposed to changing them. However, I think we have to be careful how much we change them because I believe Dutch halbs are already both decent and useful. Despite how much we change them I don't believe the other civs (Ports, Russians, and whoever else even gets them) will ever use them because of muskets.
|
|
|
Post by CotF | Amhaye™ on Jun 18, 2013 19:28:46 GMT 1
My suggestion for brits:
- 5 villager start - Manors 145 wood, but not 5 seconds more build time (doesn't change anything) - Steel traps decreased from to 10% - Remove spice trade - Longbows cost increase to 60 food 45 wood - 700 wood decreased to 600 wood - Increase shipping time for military units
I think this will do the job. I've played several games with them now and they're still too good.
|
|
icourt
AOE III: TAD/TWC
Posts: 88
|
Post by icourt on Jun 18, 2013 19:50:08 GMT 1
Those changes are impossible to make. Why don't we go back to 10 pop manors I don't think british really were imbalanced before 1.2 made that change for no apparent reason.
|
|
|
Post by CotF | Cohenski on Jul 6, 2013 23:01:19 GMT 1
Things we discussed today:
5 RR to 4 RR French vill + 1.5s train time +1 LOS to cav archers, bow riders and comanche +1 attack to bow riders, cav archers, and comanche Janissary multiplier moved to 2.25 Changing the card ruthlessness for aztecs to boost war hut units 25% atk/hp and 10% increase cost for 500 food age 4
Maybe 100g 100f for yabusame Maybe iro mantlets 60% resistance and -20% hp (makes them 20% weaker to hand attack).
|
|
icourt
AOE III: TAD/TWC
Posts: 88
|
Post by icourt on Jul 8, 2013 0:04:42 GMT 1
LOS change doesn't change their effectiveness. It's a range issue. Reason you're seeing LB shoot at like 35 range is because they're able to complete the firing animation before the enemy units are fully out of their range. You're seeing the issue with Archer Cavalry because their range is shorter than Foot Archers by a good amount. This is also why you said Yabasume don't suffer from the same issue.
Yabusame would be too good at that price mixed with Japans other units. If anything the unit just doesn't do enough damage vs cav at it's price. All it's other stats are pretty beast though.
I still think Mantlets are fine. Only civs that would have trouble vs them are age2 China and age2 India... but they could always follow Iros up to age3. Mantlets are sort of their only late game unit mixed with LC. They also have crappy anti cavalry units to top it all off. 5 Mantlets is 1000 res card, and one of Iro's only cost effective age 3 cards.
|
|
|
Post by CotF | Cohenski on Jul 10, 2013 0:38:26 GMT 1
Something I have noticed is that mercenaries seem to be a little misrepresented with score. They give a very small increase in score, and can fool people from that. Can we adjust them to count for more? So that, lets say, stadiots, fusaliers, black riders and manchu count for the same as war wagons, swiss pikes the same as an abus gun, jaegers as much as a dragoon, highlanders as much as a hussar, hackapells as much as a gendarme, mamalukes and elmeti as much as a falconet.
|
|
icourt
AOE III: TAD/TWC
Posts: 88
|
Post by icourt on Jul 10, 2013 3:59:56 GMT 1
Score can't be changed like that. Score is just based off the cost of the unit regardless of how awesome or broken it is. It's total resources divided by 100. You'd need to change the mercs cost (not cost to ship) to increase the score. Highlander is like 200 gold cost wise? That should increase score by 2. If you change the cost of the unit you increase their cost at the saloon, but not the shipment itself.
|
|
|
Post by CotF | Cohenski on Jul 10, 2013 19:41:06 GMT 1
I tested the mercenaries as Germany shipping black riders, jaegers, and hackapells. With all three shipments and my explorer my military score was 9. Then I deleted them, made 9 war wagons, 24 skirms and 17 veteran ulans which gave me a military score of about 90.
Seems mercs count for 10x less than they should. This still impossible to fix?
|
|
icourt
AOE III: TAD/TWC
Posts: 88
|
Post by icourt on Jul 11, 2013 3:53:21 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by CotF | Cohenski on Jul 15, 2013 0:42:41 GMT 1
My reasoning for Aztec changes are as follows:
Skull Knight age two siege nerf: If aztecs get 150+ wood and maybe a little food then suddenly you get a very overpowered skull knight rush which can be unstoppable for certain civs. You build a forward war hut in transition and set the waypoint to it, then get 2 72 siege units + explorer and guardians + full batches of units (thanks to treasures) + powerful shipments with an experience boost to keep shipments coming. This can be unstoppable against certain civs like sioux, russia, iroquois, aztecs (with fast age up).
Late unit boost: Aztecs are extremely weak to cannons. I know you disagree with me Mike. I played ward in a 1v1 the other day and he kept winning battles against my superior forces with 4-6 cannons and musk/hus. I did make arrow knights, but with their very lengthy 1.5s setup animation, the cannons do not start dying soon enough. Culverin on the other hand kill cannons instantly with a shot and have area damage.
Currently I suggested a boost to war hut units, since their hp is low enough that the cannons seem to blast them away before they can do anything about it. Mace are a very, very weak unit late game, and tend to just get in the way and take up pop space which is hard to spare with only 90 to work with. Because of this only 90 pop to work with, their units should be a bit stronger.
Alternatively we could boost arrow knights against cannons. This might make them overpowered as siege units, so maybe we could nerf the siege at the same time. For example, it might work to make arrow knights 1 population, cost 50 food 50 coin, and have siege reduced to 35.
|
|
|
Post by CotF | Cohenski on Jul 23, 2013 22:09:59 GMT 1
Some civs, like dutch, will spawn different total number of crates in some games, whereas China always spawns the same number of crates. This could be seen as an advantage or a disadvantage, but it does change the balance of the early game. I am wondering if it is possible to maybe give China a coin crate if dutch spawns with an extra 100 coin also or something along those lines.
For example: Sometimes dutch start with 7 crates on Sonora and sometimes they start with 8.
Also, I've gotten 100f, 100w, 100c spawns as ports on Sonora, and then also get 200f, 100x, 100c spawns on Sonora. I have gotten the 100f, 100w, 100c spawn disparity on Patagonia also.
This 100 food start for Portuguese really is not good. Ports with 100f will be a bottom tier civ.
|
|
icourt
AOE III: TAD/TWC
Posts: 88
|
Post by icourt on Jul 25, 2013 0:31:41 GMT 1
Top part is impossible to do. Read the crates guide, it's not easy to understand entirely but it's just how the game is. Has been since 2005.
Only thing I could do is fix port crates so they are starting with 200f 100w or something. Other possibility we can try doing is 6 villager start, but they seem all right in my opinion. I don't think they will be a bottom civ they will just be a little more defensive. Let mike test them some more, he's pretty solid on their builds.
|
|
|
Post by PHX Alaron on Jul 25, 2013 1:12:23 GMT 1
Ports seem fine IMO. Even with 100f starts they only have 5-10 seconds of idle TC time before they age. Can't really see how this would turn them into a bottom civ, they still age before most civs with this.
|
|