[POLL] Was the tower nerf necessary?

Was the Feudal Watchtower nerf necessary


  • Total voters
    157

United StatesShmolagin

Well-Known Member
Jun 14, 2014
1,396
59
63
Voobly
Thewildestmoose
View profile
Ladder
RM - Team Games
Rating
1755
Wins
47
Losses
31
Streak
9
Forum trolls will never learn:
I've already demonstrated you to be the troll here.

1. Read and understand the post of others before reply
You haven't demonstrated any failure by me in this area.

2. Give counter facts when others are referring to stats.
You have referenced no hard stats yourself, and are stating that I am using facts. Either you don't know English very well or you just admitted that I am the correct one here.
fact definition.PNG


3. Stop deviating the topics and knocking straw men all the time
You are the one setting up strawmen.

Funnily enough, this claim is actually a strawman itself, since you can't actually point to any that I have made.

You called me stupid directly at least twice, and indirectly called me stupid many more times.

You called me uneducated at least twice, once going so far as to state that you could "confirm" this which would be impossible since I am not uneducated.

You repeatedly call me a troll with no demonstration that I am actually being a troll.

You keep saying I have broken logic without actually being able to demonstrate anything I have said to be incorrect.

You keep calling my posts nonsense because you can't prove anything I said to be wrong.

You keep saying I haven't watched enough tournaments even though it's obvious I have watched many more than you.

You keep saying I don't have enough game knowledge even though I have demonstrated myself to be in at least the 90th percentile of Voobly players.

You keep writing fragments instead of sentences that don't make any sense, and when I have pointed this out you either repeat yourself or say I didn't read your post.

Then about "dradding the game long" statement, idk why you would think so, if someone towering you all the way up without being counterattacked, I genuinely think they deserve to win.
I never made any such statement, but that didn't stop you from adding quotes and pretending like I did.

The fact that I put a Chinese flag does not give more credibility to some random dude who failed to read a simple sentence.
I never brought the fact that you were Chinese into this argument and I don't intend to do so.

Also,
I'd appreciate that some players did improved over the years, but this does not prevent you from being troll and annoy others, as happened in any other game communities
I'd appreciate ppl can make some nice and reasonable argument, but that does not justify the fact that their other posts are completely nonsense or off the topic.
Oh look, it's another strawman! You're the one taking this off topic by calling me stupid and ignorant instead of adding meaningful discussion.

I'm genuinely curious about your thoughts on these questions:

1. How many tournament games end up with all in trush? or what are the percentages?
2. By nerfing trush, what are strategies would then become more viable? or what new dynamics/new meta strat can be created?
I've already given my thoughts on both of those questions, but I can repeat myself.

1. I don't know the numbers exactly, but you keep saying that only LotH2 and ECL apply to this discussion, so it should be easy enough for you to check yourself.

2. Every strategy other than trush becomes more viable.
 
Oct 25, 2016
9
5
8
Bad map generation + Crap civ + nerf to a yolo aggresion strat = boring 1v1 matches where 1 civ has a significantly reduced chance to win the game. Wasn't the tower nerf supposed to contribute to civ balance or was it just to appease the noobs who don't know how to defend vs a tower rush? Seems like it was for the latter rather than the former.

(Obviously koreans needed some nerf, but are we going to nerf franks and mongols now because they basically overpower every civ in early feudal except when the other player can wall their base?)
 
Last edited:
Jul 29, 2018
49
65
23
Im sorry LostEmpire, but you lost the forum war. Go home boy
please do not put me on the same level of forum trolls.

after tons of nonsense post the troll only offer this reply to my original post and looks proud of it:
-----------------------------
Q
1. How many tournament games end up with all in trush? or what are the percentages?
2. By nerfing trush, what are strategies would then become more viable? or what new dynamics/new meta strat can be created?

A
1. I don't know the numbers exactly, but you keep saying that only LotH2 and ECL apply to this discussion, so it should be easy enough for you to check yourself.

2. Every strategy other than trush becomes more viable.
-----------------------------
I'm ok with this answer, isn't it clear enough with the result?
would you like to contribute more to the answer/discussion? or you just want me to provide some more offensive stats/language to a 1750 player who can beat viper, watched lots of tournaments, and likes to post in the forum?
 
Last edited:

United StatesShmolagin

Well-Known Member
Jun 14, 2014
1,396
59
63
Voobly
Thewildestmoose
View profile
Ladder
RM - Team Games
Rating
1755
Wins
47
Losses
31
Streak
9
please do not put me on the same level of forum trolls.

after tons of nonsense post the troll only offer this reply to my original post and looks proud of it:
-----------------------------
Q
1. How many tournament games end up with all in trush? or what are the percentages?
2. By nerfing trush, what are strategies would then become more viable? or what new dynamics/new meta strat can be created?

A
1. I don't know the numbers exactly, but you keep saying that only LotH2 and ECL apply to this discussion, so it should be easy enough for you to check yourself.

2. Every strategy other than trush becomes more viable.
-----------------------------
I'm ok with this answer, isn't it clear enough with the result?
would you like to contribute more to the answer/discussion? or you just want me to provide some more offensive stats/language to a 1750 player who can beat viper, watched lots of tournaments, and likes to post in the forum?
Thanks for posting in this thread again, I genuinely laughed out loud.
 
Jul 29, 2018
49
65
23
for anyone really care about viability of strategies, here's the stats from ECL Africa 2v2, not necessarily apply to other situations though

in 11 games, only two games related to t-rush, all by VNS saymyname, one backfired horribly and directly cost them the game (G2), another have little impact and actually make them fell behind(G3)
2 games in team islands end with drop+archer rush, basically because of the map

every other matches everyone go boom + FC and the game then decided by other factors, like castle age unit composition (faster mass, better mobility, civ hard counter) and raw skills of micro and eco, with CL forward castle being the only exception

in all these FC games, all the strategies prior to castle age fail to make any significant impact or punish the strategy of walls and FC, the only exception would be Lyx in G1 to use towers to deny gold and delay the uptime a bit but not game deciding factor.
 

CanadaNuclearPasta

Known Member
Jun 24, 2017
102
138
58
Canada
Voobly
NuclearPasta
View profile
Ladder
RM - Team Games
Rating
1683
Wins
112
Losses
118
Streak
4
here's the stats from ECL Africa 2v2

in 11 games, only two games related to t-rush
Towers have been nerfed specifically for ECL games, as well as Korean's losing their fortification bonus. You don't see many Trushes in team games anyway. This is a poor and skewed selection to get stats from to support your argument.
 

UnknownRayne

Active Member
Jul 6, 2010
349
115
43
Been a while since I watched any recs aside from catching streams, but some fragments (a good deal of fragments actually) of those posts don't make much sense from my experiences in past.

Don't really want to be one of those random guys jumping in, but LostEmpire, you should let it go.
 
Jul 29, 2018
49
65
23
Towers have been nerfed specifically for ECL games, as well as Korean's losing their fortification bonus. You don't see many Trushes in team games anyway. This is a poor and skewed selection to get stats from to support your argument.
anyway

in case you're wondering/really care about the facts

in ECL Europe East 1v1
Out of 20 games of first round, t rush only appeared twice, only dogao vs max G2 on budapest, ACCM vs Viper G2
 
Last edited:
Jul 29, 2018
49
65
23
Been a while since I watched any recs aside from catching streams, but some fragments (a good deal of fragments actually) of those posts don't make much sense from my experiences in past.

Don't really want to be one of those random guys jumping in, but LostEmpire, you should let it go.
thx
I keep coming back because ppl are not referring anything like the win rates/usage when talk about balance, this just makes no sense
balance is subjective, people may like 20/80 aggressive/defensive or 80/20 and both believe that is 50/50, it is fine if people express their preference.

I did not even object the tower nerf, and gave proposal for more, but people should not dodge/deny the facts as I gave earlier
 
Last edited:

UnknownRayne

Active Member
Jul 6, 2010
349
115
43
thx
I keep coming back because ppl are not referring anything like the win rates/usage when talk about balance, this just makes no sense
balance is subjective, people may like 20/80 aggressive/defensive or 80/20 and both believe that is 50/50, it is fine if people express their preference.

I did not even object the tower nerf, and gave proposal for more, but people should not dodge/deny the facts as I gave earlier
Not sure if there is sarcasm here, but you shouldn't thank me if not. I was referring to your posts and am with some of what Shmolagin said.

Calculating win/loss rates for "strats" makes no sense to me as far as aoc is concerned. Not sure if its just me, but seems a lot of chess lingo and such has graced aoc with its presence in the past 3 years. I doubt you will get anything in aoc like how chess is with wins/losses/draws if that is your aim. I wouldn't understand if anyone would make the effort also.

I don't keep up with aoc much some past years, but, pretty sure some players at high levels were saying trush is op in WK, so it probably is.
 

United StatesShmolagin

Well-Known Member
Jun 14, 2014
1,396
59
63
Voobly
Thewildestmoose
View profile
Ladder
RM - Team Games
Rating
1755
Wins
47
Losses
31
Streak
9
thx
I keep coming back because ppl are not referring anything like the win rates/usage when talk about balance, this just makes no sense
balance is subjective, people may like 20/80 aggressive/defensive or 80/20 and both believe that is 50/50, it is fine if people express their preference.
If balance is subjective then there is no reason to keep demanding exact numbers in this argument.
 
Jul 29, 2018
49
65
23
Not sure if there is sarcasm here, but you shouldn't thank me if not. I was referring to your posts and am with some of what Shmolagin said.

Calculating win/loss rates for "strats" makes no sense to me as far as aoc is concerned. Not sure if its just me, but seems a lot of chess lingo and such has graced aoc with its presence in the past 3 years. I doubt you will get anything in aoc like how chess is with wins/losses/draws if that is your aim. I wouldn't understand if anyone would make the effort also.

I don't keep up with aoc much some past years, but, pretty sure some players at high levels were saying trush is op in WK, so it probably is.
I thank you because you told me to stop the pointless talk, because

1. I always agree that trush needs nerf in WK and even propose a possible further nerf
2. in tournaments trush does not appear very often despite how op it is
3. I prefer to buff many other strategies/civ than nerf one strategy to achieve the goal of balance
4. I have doubt that the change would result in meta change like some civ/strategy domination rather than dynamic games

yet you still think I'm against the nerf, I'm talking about "win rates", I prefer not to nerf anything, etc, what more can I say?

That's why I call Shmolagin a total forum troll, he deviate the topic to irrelevant statements and create straw man arguments that has nothing to do with my post, like saying "I wanna create balance in all strategies" does not mean others don't.

Anyway, I cannot correct his post forever so I always lose the forum war, ECL balance is pretty good and that's what I enjoy.
 

CanadaNuclearPasta

Known Member
Jun 24, 2017
102
138
58
Canada
Voobly
NuclearPasta
View profile
Ladder
RM - Team Games
Rating
1683
Wins
112
Losses
118
Streak
4
anyway

in case you're wondering/really care about the facts

in ECL Europe East 1v1
Out of 20 games of first round, t rush only appeared twice, only dogao vs max G2 on budapest, ACCM vs Viper G2
Again, these stats are pretty meaningless to your argument just because of how skewed they are.
Europe East's civ pool included Byzantines, Goths, Huns, Italians, Magyars, Mongols, Slavs, Teutons, Turks, and Vikings. Of these civs Goths are Teutons are the only ones you could realistically trush with, but you're unlikely to see them picked in 1v1s.

Civs you will see go for a trush are Koreans and Spanish. Spanish weren't an option for most of Europe East, and again, Korean's got nerfed hard.

If you want to talk about trushing in tournament games ECL is a poor example. It's been purposely altered to deter strats like trushing and slinging.
 
Oct 25, 2016
9
5
8
As someone who has watched hundreds of recs of top players I can confirm that there is a reasonable balance in strategies. Trush/[email protected] into towers is not as popular as people might think it is (maybe used 10-20% of games by top players except for players like vivi of course. In comparison a strategy like scouts is used about 33% of the time). Most times the strategy is only used because the particular civ has a bonus for it (i.e tuetons/korean towers, but the same is true for a civ like mongols that goes scouts around 80% of the time)

Also I've noticed that [email protected] towers/tower rush seems to be a bit more effective against players that have a tendency to push deers all day. Maybe if people scouted their enemy a bit more they wouldn't titanic as fast when the "surprise" towers come in
 
Last edited:
Jul 29, 2018
49
65
23
Again, these stats are pretty meaningless to your argument just because of how skewed they are.
Europe East's civ pool included Byzantines, Goths, Huns, Italians, Magyars, Mongols, Slavs, Teutons, Turks, and Vikings. Of these civs Goths are Teutons are the only ones you could realistically trush with, but you're unlikely to see them picked in 1v1s.

Civs you will see go for a trush are Koreans and Spanish. Spanish weren't an option for most of Europe East, and again, Korean's got nerfed hard.

If you want to talk about trushing in tournament games ECL is a poor example. It's been purposely altered to deter strats like trushing and slinging.
fair enough, but it also brings back the question that "if trush is not available, do civs like Goths and Teutons become more viable in 1v1"? or those civs become worse by lost their relative strength on 1v1 stage?

about stats in other recent 1v1 tournaments, say Paladin Cup, I didn't count the exact number, but generally 2 out of every 7 games will feature t-rush. the game setting was free pick no repeat civ, so usually when players choose tower civ, or make fatal errors in early game (Max vs Yo) they go trush, but when players choose other popular civs like Mayans, Magyars, Huns, etc they all use other strategies.

in the end, though, I like current game dynamic in ECL a lot (after all the nerf), and ECL makes people choose these less popular civs
 
Last edited:
Likes: AlphaAndOmega
Sep 14, 2018
2
0
6
in the end, though, I like current game dynamic in ECL a lot (after all the nerf), and ECL makes people choose these less popular civs
Agreed, but a couple of those ECL nerfs could be increased even more to enhance the game dynamic even more in my opinion. As a viewer I still see too many trushes with the current balance changes.
 

UnknownRayne

Active Member
Jul 6, 2010
349
115
43
I thank you because you told me to stop the pointless talk, because

1. I always agree that trush needs nerf in WK and even propose a possible further nerf
2. in tournaments trush does not appear very often despite how op it is
3. I prefer to buff many other strategies/civ than nerf one strategy to achieve the goal of balance
4. I have doubt that the change would result in meta change like some civ/strategy domination rather than dynamic games

yet you still think I'm against the nerf, I'm talking about "win rates", I prefer not to nerf anything, etc, what more can I say?

That's why I call Shmolagin a total forum troll, he deviate the topic to irrelevant statements and create straw man arguments that has nothing to do with my post, like saying "I wanna create balance in all strategies" does not mean others don't.

Anyway, I cannot correct his post forever so I always lose the forum war, ECL balance is pretty good and that's what I enjoy.
Ah, I see.

I wasn't sure where you were coming from but now I see.

As far as early on tactics are concerned, they come and go. But the plans at the very base remain the same pretty much. Said it before, but its old wine in a new bottle. You get tired of doing one thing for so long, then another plan comes along that achieves the same strategic end. Comes and goes; one thing remains dominant because it fits more situations and like every other player, I enjoy winning with what has most success.

I don't know how aware you are of aoc history, but pre-Fulgore era (around late 2008 I believe he came along and forever changed aoc), the typical plans early on were forward, scouts + ranged army, trush (usually went with forwarding), and archers at base. I won't get into all the details as to why these are good in numerous situations, but the most dominant ideas were scouts + ranged or forward; they were better in more situations.

Then along came Fulgore, introducing the drush and opting for an fc with it for Huns to take advantage of CA power. But that's only one side of the coin. Its a mistake to think it ends there. Drush became very popular because it was also another way to prevent opponent from controlling crucial hills and key resources, generally gold. Whereas in the past, a lot of players would generally feel they 'must' forward because of their bad map, a defensive mechanism. Not anymore with drush. It allowed another option with success, a new toy to play with as well. For this, its old wine in a new bottle. (There is also more I can add like how drush + fc can just increase your advantage due to map, but will end it there as I achieved my point.)

Then we can fast forward to late 2014/2015 when the whole MAA came on the scene. It was there in the past in 2011 (generally drush was the precursor to upgrading 5 maa with an 11:00 - 11:30 Feudal time), but not as prevalent nowadays. This is strong for a lot of reasons many know about. But like with drush, this was also another way to prevent opponent from controlling hills and key resources, if they should forward -- again old wine in a new bottle here (for this reoccuring dilemma on Arabia). It also shredded anyone who was careless with scouts. I believe drush generally faded from 1v1s because this was just a superior option in many situations.

Things generally just come and go is my point. Doesn't really need to be said anymore, but one thing remains dominant because it fits more situations. But it doesn't mean drush is still ineffective, or scouts + ranged are, or forwarding is as well. That's where you weigh as many factors as possible and see how it tips the scales for those early on tactics. As I did say before though, I enjoy winning with what has best success as do many others. I don't know if something better will happen in the future in aoc, but it would be a very neat discovery.

Buffing 'strategies' as you mention seems less about balancing but more about popularizing old toys. Balancing is tricky business for sure though.
 

CanadaNuclearPasta

Known Member
Jun 24, 2017
102
138
58
Canada
Voobly
NuclearPasta
View profile
Ladder
RM - Team Games
Rating
1683
Wins
112
Losses
118
Streak
4
fair enough, but it also brings back the question that "if trush is not available, do civs like Goths and Teutons become more viable in 1v1"? or those civs become worse by lost their relative strength on 1v1 stage?

about stats in other recent 1v1 tournaments, say Paladin Cup, I didn't count the exact number, but generally 2 out of every 7 games will feature t-rush. the game setting was free pick no repeat civ, so usually when players choose tower civ, or make fatal errors in early game (Max vs Yo) they go trush, but when players choose other popular civs like Mayans, Magyars, Huns, etc they all use other strategies.

in the end, though, I like current game dynamic in ECL a lot (after all the nerf), and ECL makes people choose these less popular civs
If a trush isn't viable then Goths will go with a Man at Arms rush, which they already do most of the time. Teutons will have a weaker early game, but they can convincingly go scouts thanks to their decreased farm cost.

Only around twice is a set of seven games isn't bad in my opinion.
I don't think towers need to be nerfed too hard. +25 wood and decreased damage to walls is probably enough. The big issue is Koreans, a civ with like five bonuses that contribute to towers.

Yeah, I've been happy with the ECL games so far. Towers are still viable if players so choose to use them.
 

Time

Your time
G M T
Your zone

Upcoming Events

Talk of the Empire
Wednesday 20:00 (GMT +02:00)
w/ Nili, Zak & Nicov
ECL Africa 3v3
Saturday 16:00 (GMT +02:00)
ECL Africa 3v3 Round of 8
ECL Africa 3v3
October 6th 16:00 (GMT +02:00)
ECL Africa 3v3 Semi Finals & Grand Final
Halloween Party - 12 Hour Stream!
October 26th 21:00 (GMT +02:00)
Halloween Stream

Age Of Empires On Twitch

There are in total 19 streamers online
Click here for details
Age of Empires II 318 viewers
Age of Empires II 243 viewers
Age of Empires 138 viewers
age of empires ii 61 viewers
Age of Empires II 16 viewers
Top