Fanatics Are Broken Beyond Repair — The Real Spam Nightmare After Champ Cavs

[TheCJ]

3 hours ago, king reza the great said:

Well i believe only active op players who play or spec op games, able to balance the units not people who play vs bots and noobs Or people who are not in the op games.

Well, I believe you are wrong. For the following reasons:

1. Just because you're better at the game (supposedly), you aren't necessarily smarter or better at balancing. Even a complete noob that uses their brain can understand why champion cavalry are too strong at the moment, no matter if they ever built some themselves.

2. If you're actively playing the game and investing a lot of time into it (which you need to reach a highly skilled level of gameplay), chances are that your opinion on a good balance is biased. Because you want your favourite strategy to be viable (or perhaps even the best), while you want strategies that you struggle against to be reduced in effectiveness, even if they may not actually need any balancing. 

3. Concerning yourself only with the opinions of pro players inadvertently leads to a worse experience for less skilled players. This can be seen in almost all teamgames that have an E-sport scene; some tactics only become very good with communication and teamplay, but nerfing the tactic itself will make it unusable in casual play.

 

3 hours ago, king reza the great said:

I cant underestand how we make fanas more expensive. Just decrease wood and food and add metal.

Well, either you make fanatics more expensive to reduce their cost-effectiveness or you aren't actually making them more expensive, in which case such a change would be useless. A good player can balance his eco (as you should know if you're playing in "op games"), so it doesnt actually matter to him whether its a metal or food cost.

The only exception being that metal has a ceiling of how many gatherers it can have and a ceiling of how much metal you can mine. Both of which are pretty much irrelevant in early p2.

Edited 19 hours ago by TheCJ

[Seleucids]

Besides cost effectiveness, you must consider the activation cost. Champs are much more cost effective than citizens but they have such a large initial investment that blocks players out from making them. Fanatics are the champs with a low activation cost, because food and wood are gathered en mass and the 100 each is nothing for a P2 player. You can put 70 units at one forest and station 55 womens to farm, but the metal mines and stone mines allow up to 24 units only

 

@TheCJ raised a good point about viability. Fanatics are only available for Gauls and other civs Dont have effective counters

[king reza the great]

1 hour ago, TheCJ said:

Well, I believe you are wrong. For the following reasons:

1. Just because you're better at the game (supposedly), you aren't necessarily smarter or better at balancing. Even a complete noob that uses their brain can understand why champion cavalry are too strong at the moment, no matter if they ever built some themselves.

2. If you're actively playing the game and investing a lot of time into it (which you need to reach a highly skilled level of gameplay), chances are that your opinion on a good balance is biased. Because you want your favourite strategy to be viable (or perhaps even the best), while you want strategies that you struggle against to be reduced in effectiveness, even if they may not actually need any balancing. 

3. Concerning yourself only with the opinions of pro players inadvertently leads to a worse experience for less skilled players. This can be seen in almost all teamgames that have an E-sport scene; some tactics only become very good with communication and teamplay, but nerfing the tactic itself will make it unusable in casual play.

 

Well, either you make fanatics more expensive to reduce their cost-effectiveness or you aren't actually making them more expensive, in which case such a change would be useless. A good player can balance his eco (as you should know if you're playing in "op games"), so it doesnt actually matter to him whether its a metal or food cost.

The only exception being that metal has a ceiling of how many gatherers it can have and a ceiling of how much metal you can mine. Both of which are pretty much irrelevant in early p2.

I never said i want to balance the game. Im here to report the issues. And i say my suggestions, may sb find them useful.

[king reza the great]

1 hour ago, TheCJ said:

would

Yes an op player can balance his eco to abuse fanas. Ask your self now why they didnt do that in last alphas when they needed metal for fanas?

Anyway i think metal is good solution because an op player although still can make fanas but he cant make mass fanas because he needs lot of metal.

Here Aslan sometimes sucide his fanas easily! But his sucide still works. U know why? Because wasting wood and food is nothing compared to wasting metal when u can slow down your opponent.

Edited 18 hours ago by king reza the great

[guerringuerrin]

Posting some videos

 

Marine vs Fanatic

Temple:
300 wood
160s buildtime
Gymnasium:
150 Stone 100 metal.
200s buildtime
Marine wins by tiny margin.
Fanatic can choose the fight bc movement speed.

 

 

Spartan Spartiates vs Fanatic
Syssytion:
150 stone 150 Metal
200s buildtime
Spartiates wins with 1/4 HP left

Edited 17 hours ago by guerringuerrin

[guerringuerrin]

Is this thread went restricted? Aprove my post plss

[TheCJ]

4 hours ago, Seleucids said:

You can put 70 units at one forest and station 55 womens to farm, but the metal mines and stone mines allow up to 24 units only

So if you replace the 100 food cost with 50 food and 50 metal, instead of 55 farmers, youd need 27.5 farmers and 27.5 metal miners. You can always have 24 metal miners, but you might want more for upgrades... which would mean you can not do the tactic exactly as before, so long as you dont have any extra metal. But with just one extra metal deposit, you can easily put the 28 citizen soldiers on metal that you need to have the exact same output of fanatics.

 

3 hours ago, king reza the great said:

Ask your self now why they didnt do that in last alphas when they needed metal for fanas?

Ask yourself why the market abuse possibility went unnoticed for 3 (?) years. Sometimes it just takes time to come up with a tactic.
But in this case, there are other factors aswell; the relative strength of melee compared to ranged units, the superiority of cavalry to infantry, etc. which werent the case 3 years ago.

[Seleucids]

10 hours ago, TheCJ said:

Ask yourself why the market abuse possibility went unnoticed for 3 (?) years. Sometimes it just takes time to come up with a tactic.

Actually weirdJokes discovered the market bug 4 years ago but he didn't abuse it and the few people who heard about it just ignored it. This was because of the unit cost and the lower floats at the time. Karim and Cube demo it in a few TGs in front of many people and it became viral.  

[Dakara]

1 hour ago, Seleucids said:

Actually weirdJokes discovered the market bug 4 years ago but he didn't abuse it and the few people who heard about it just ignored it. This was because of the unit cost and the lower floats at the time. Karim and Cube demo it in a few TGs in front of many people and it became viral.  

with the old bonus civ macedonians, it was worse i guess 

[TheCJ]

1 hour ago, Seleucids said:

Actually weirdJokes discovered the market bug 4 years ago but he didn't abuse it and the few people who heard about it just ignored it.

ah so it were at least 4 years. Maybe someone also used fanatics 4 years ago, but didnt "abuse" them and now the tactic is reappearing. Which is why rezas argument is not an argument at all.