... they literally just did thatwhat is the issue with simply using cost to balance everything? It would be much simpler to just raise the price of OP stuff and lower costs of the weaker stuff. So if you want to nerf walling, raise the price, simple!
hmm, what about the discussions on changing the build time of castles, adjusting the forests in Arabia, changing the hp/armor of walls/houses in Dark Age...need I go on?... they literally just did that
You can't balance just based on just cost, the game is not that simple.what is the issue with simply using cost to balance everything? It would be much simpler to just raise the price of OP stuff and lower costs of the weaker stuff. So if you want to nerf walling, raise the price, simple!
I really don't think this would discourage walling, I think it would encourage it way way way more.I wonder if a way to fix the walling issue would be to reduce the cost of units getting in if you are not walled. Especially in the case of scouts there is maybe a little bit more advantage given to the attacker than there should be because the response options are unreliable and disproportionately taxing. People wall aggressively to keep out scouts because it is extremely unfun if scouts get in. One solution to this would be allowing archers to lead moving targets naturally rather than needing ballistics (ballistics would simply make them and other ranged units more accurate, which is still valuable) and maybe increasing the damage done by arrows against light cavalry units to reflect the susceptibility of unarmored horses to projectiles. This would make it more difficult for the scout player to run slower defense units around because they don't have to get into melee range to threaten anymore. There is obviously a risk that this makes archers op but it seems like this could be mitigated with some careful nerfs like increasing crossbow tech cost and preventing them from reloading if they are engaged in melee.
Archers having ballistics for free means towers and TCs do too. Note that without ballistics I think the accuracy against moving targets should be at least a bit lower than what it currently is.I really don't think this would discourage walling, I think it would encourage it way way way more.
If archers had ballistics for free you need to big wall asap cos otherwise if 3 archers get in your base before you have a skirm you're monumentally ****ed. Whereas scouts you can still small wall and be fine (until the follow-up comes).
Well you can counter micro with micro. Seems fine for me. Also who exactly actually manages to do that consistently? The amount of players that are able to do so while getting raided in their base is extremely small. Not sure if that really is a matter of concern.Hence villager running away can simply place foundations inbetween them and save himself due to long scout attack animation. Back then, with 30 fps and peer to peer connection, it was impossible to do that. I know u can avoid that by manually ordering scout to move forwrad right after attack but that's for micro nerds
I'm playing at 1700-1800. The main issue walls are so cheap, that no one even thinks about staying not walled. It just benefits so much compared to the price. Yes, most likely people wont be full walled first few minutes in feudal if they don't do weird stuff. But after initial like 5 archer vs 5 archer fight or something similar people get full walled right away no matter what they do. Is like no matter you go agressive or defensive it's so good that almost everyone full walling right after getting few troops out. I would say at minute 17 almost everyone are already full walled as in arena not depending on the strategy. And I think it's my main concern, no matter what people do, they get full walled early, which kind of indicates full walling is so powerful that it's no brainer, you just do it everytime.I'm honestly wondering at what levels you are playing that you all have such massive issues with wallers. Personally I'm just a casual player at 1500 elo. Arabia is almost never fully walled at the start of feudal, usually fully walled at mid to late feudal age. Yes, runestones is usually fully walled but even there you can go for early aggression with 2 militia drush, often being able to keep your opponent open, or walled so small archers still remain effective in keeping him off resources.
Seen high level nomad play recently?The decision if something is OP has to be taken based on the highest ELO gameplay. In PRO games forward castles are used rarely as building a forward castle is a very risky business. Unless you have a map control you might end up losing 650 stone plus 5 to 10 villagers. Also Forward castles are good way to punish greedy defensive players which give the map control to the opponent.
I think this is stupid. If something is a problem for 95% of people then it is a problem and just saying "but the pro players" doesn't make the game more fun.The decision if something is OP has to be taken based on the highest ELO gameplay. In PRO games forward castles are used rarely as building a forward castle is a very risky business. Unless you have a map control you might end up losing 650 stone plus 5 to 10 villagers. Also Forward castles are good way to punish greedy defensive players which give the map control to the opponent.
Thats also true, but if its not a problem at pro level then we know for sure that there is a solution to it (just look at what the pros do to counter/prevent it). Of course this wont work for every balancing problem, but this one seems not that bad.I think this is stupid. If something is a problem for 95% of people then it is a problem and just saying "but the pro players" doesn't make the game more fun.
Not neccessarily wrong. But there is limited amount of attention that you can devote to playing. By pushing this micro intensive part of game to extremes you may risk neglecting macro aspect of game. No idea how to express it properly.Well you can counter micro with micro. Seems fine for me.
I didn’t watch or played nomad recently. About the other part of your statement I mean that the meta for pro players is first castle to be defensive especially on Arabia. They go forward castle based on circumstances when full map control is obtained, late game to make opponent to resign or as desperate move when losing to try to stay in the game.Seen high level nomad play recently?
That said, I don't think much, if any change needs to be made to castles, but your statement about castle drops being rare at high level isn't particularly accurate.
True, but arabia is just one map, and not one that any defensive structure / option should be balanced around.I didn’t watch or played nomad recently. About the other part of your statement I mean that the meta for pro players is first castle to be defensive especially on Arabia. They go forward castle based on circumstances when full map control is obtained, late game to make opponent to resign or as desperate move when losing to try to stay in the game.
Well I can see your opinion and everything is ok with whole post, but that sample is bit strange, you did calculation for 3 militias, but took strongest m@a and 4 of them. which makes it 390food and 110 gold investment. Basically half of castle age cost. Could also add that 20 saracen archers can get in easily.I dont think palisades are that OP nowadays. You almost cant use them for a Fast Castle because they go down to man at arms within seconds. If you have have 4 Japanese M@A knocking at your palisade you need to have a villager super close by or there wont even be time to wall behind.
Well I can see your opinion and everything is ok with whole post, but that sample is bit strange, you did calculation for 3 militias, but took strongest m@a and 4 of them. which makes it 390food and 110 gold investment. Basically half of castle age cost. Could also add that 20 saracen archers can get in easily.
So walling in itself can be a risk, and if you manage to wall out an opponents drush, you are getting a small reward for it (spend like 150-200 wood, opponent build early barracks and spend 180 f 60g).
I actually somewhat agree with this. if a ton of lower to mid level players are complaining that something is OP, when in actually there is a relatively simple, strategic way to overcome it, then perhaps it's not truly OP, the players just need to figure out the adjustment. but if it requires some sort of insanely high level micro, or cheesing the game to overcome (like quickwalls, or in the past things like building scanning), then that's a different story.The decision if something is OP has to be taken based on the highest ELO gameplay. In PRO games forward castles are used rarely as building a forward castle is a very risky business. Unless you have a map control you might end up losing 650 stone plus 5 to 10 villagers. Also Forward castles are good way to punish greedy defensive players which give the map control to the opponent.
I used the combined SR/WR method that gets them close to 65% in fact, far above any other civ. It's quite ridiculous.where?