Jump to content

thankforpie

Community Members
  • Content Count

    86
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

thankforpie last won the day on October 4

thankforpie had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

42 Excellent

About thankforpie

  • Rank
    Discens

Recent Profile Visitors

191 profile views
  1. thankforpie

    Roland (Gaul) v DoctorOrgans (Sparta) 2x

    jc why are you being this angry over a game
  2. thankforpie

    Roland (Gaul) v DoctorOrgans (Sparta) 2x

    total smash
  3. thankforpie

    Grumpy Gurken's recent ramblings

    happens everytimehere tbh
  4. thankforpie

    Is there any nerf planned for gauls and britons?

    spamming units and fast growth is something that will always be important. IMO it will be easier to nerf 2 civilizations than to buff every civilization except these two.
  5. thankforpie

    Is there any nerf planned for gauls and britons?

    what you said means exactly that they are op
  6. It is no coincidence that in teamgames of 8 people often 6 of them pick either gauls or brits when there are way more civs. They have good heros and receive bonus pop from barracks and other buildings. that makes them achieve full pop + fortress and first rams about minute faster than other civs can. Is there any nerf in plans?
  7. thankforpie

    Cheat walls

    so stacked bolts are less op than stacked walls?
  8. thankforpie

    Siege unit

    funny you started saying how op siege towers are after I smashed you hard yeah thats entirely why you want siege nerfed this much, while you try to dance with cav hero everytime just before battle starts. dancing is way way way more unrealistic than siege towers issue. but thats not an 'unrealism' issue for you because dancing is something you can employ in your favorite civ while siege tower strat is not and catapults are easy to catch due to slow packing/unpacking. no need to make it easier
  9. I noticed formations work quite well because archer units are on the back and melee tanks are on the front, especially in open order or closed order formations. But if you put there pikes and spearmen then they will be mixed. Shouldnt pikes be first and spearmen on the back? It would prevent units with bigger dmg and less defence (spearmen)going to the front even before battle starts.
  10. thankforpie

    Usage of spear cav

    of course yes, but if enemy is similar to you with the difference that he has 6 fields and you have 10 fields then he will come with bigger army. in other words to afford cav spam your army will be smaller than if you were spamming slingers or skirmishers
  11. thankforpie

    Usage of spear cav

    your post made me giggle because thats my exact thought after first 3 days spent in multiplayer. anyway what you think of ranged cavalry? or is it too expensive
  12. thankforpie

    Usage of spear cav

    ye, but you have to manually target or they will buggily lose even more DPS. example, select 50 slingers and do ctrl+q, they will kill one by one (from closest to furthest). now select 50 spear cav, do ctrl+q, and only about 10 will hit the target, other will spend time looking for a way to reach the target (because it was blocked by 10 cav that is already hitting the target) so you have to select manually and thatstough
  13. thankforpie

    Usage of spear cav

    I use them to kill enemy eco and rams, and other cav. but honestly they are slow at killing rams, and their dps is bad. is there any other usage for this unit so massproducing them wouldnt be just wasted resources?
  14. is the 600 points difference factual limit? because it means exactly what i said, that you can play vs new players to get in top 100 (1600) (only 400 points difference here, because new players are about 1200) or even up to 1800 (600points difference, if gives no points then just play vs 1250 rated player and ranking rises...) and that makes whole rankings at least up to 1800 very untrue
  15. What i mean is exlusively the fact that you with rank such as 1600 or 1800 can play vs people rated 1200 and still gain a lot of points? I understand this could be implemented because there wasnt enough players but isnt it making the rating system much less purposeful? if high rating == high skill, then you shouldnt get points from low rated players,because that makes the entire list much less consistent with actual player skill in reality for example i saw some guy 1600 drop to 1500 (some games vs me, some vs others) and he quickly made it back to 1600 on people who have default rating (1200) or near (1100) and have absolutely 0 clue about game. in current ranking system you can easily get to 1600 (which means become to get in top 100 of players) just by playing with people who are not harder than medium petra AI if you are willing to spend the time
×