Mr.Monkey Posted January 17, 2016 Report Share Posted January 17, 2016 Hi there, i have been playing this game for a while now, since alpha 16 or 17, and since the new update I feel like some civilizations are too weak, so i have a few small and simple suggestions of some changes which would balance things out a bit.First, Persians. Persians have many advantages such as a +25% trade income boost for the team, furthermore they have a really nice champion, the Persian immortal. However it has a HUGE disadvantage, which just makes this civ not viable for competitive players as you can only build ONE apanda, which is where you can spawn the immortals. This is really bad because you can not do "single man batch training" like you can do with every other civ. If you change that value so you can build as many as the Spartan Military mess hall, then you will see a decent amount of people using them.PtolemiesPtolemies have some really unique attributes, for example they are the only civ which has free houses, furthermore they are the only ones which have a lighthouse. However their attacking forces are terrible. Their archers, which are basically the same as the mauryan archers cost more because they cost metal, they have slingers which are decent, however many civs have these, and they are just normal infantry, and to make it even worse, they only have ONE champion. This would be OK if the champion was unique and decent, however the champion is just a normal melee cavalry champion. I suggest that you buff this champion a bit, maybe if you gave it some crush damage, or you increased its armour, or if you could add an upgrade which increases the health and the attack. Then it might be viable, however at the moment no one is using Ptolemies.Other civs need a bit of balancing, such as Seleucids and Cartathenians, however their changes would be a bit more complicated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion.Kanzen Posted January 17, 2016 Report Share Posted January 17, 2016 I agree with persian... For me , they are weaker, they cavalry isn't great deal or have advantage against Greeks factions Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xfs Posted January 18, 2016 Report Share Posted January 18, 2016 (edited) Persians' champions are not "really nice". It is the same spear champions as other civs. But indeed, the low champion production capacity is unbalanced.Ptolemies free houses are penalized by long build time and high cost of barracks, so this is fair.I do use Ptolemies. My army composition is archer cavs and pikemen. This composition is strong in that pikemen are the toughest non-champion tank units in the game and they are prioritized by UnitAI thus protect archer cavs, and archer cavs are a decent DPS with steady output and easily micromanaged. This composition is very effective in defense. Give it a few catapults and it can slowly grind out any fortifications. I managed K/D ratio of 2 during a 1v3 non-champion game using this (lost 450, killed 875). However, this totally does not work against champs, but that is a problem of champs, not the army composition.I don't think champ spear cavs need a buff. Their role doesn't seem to be DPS or tank. They are most effective in scouting, macro, surprise capture, and trade route raiding because of their fastest speed and decent armor. I do think elephants die too fast right now, not sure if it is because of attack prioritization in UnitAt or not enough armor. Edited January 18, 2016 by xfs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Monkey Posted January 18, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 18, 2016 Persians' champions are not "really nice". It is the same spear champions as other civs. But indeed, the low champion production capacity is unbalanced.The data from the structure tree is not 100% accurate, me and my friends have done a lot of in game testing and although they all have the standard 6, 5, 0.75 with the same armour, some are somehow better than others. For example, the champion which seems to beat out most champions are the Spartan hoptiles, this is mainly due to the agoge upgrade, however Briton longswordsman beat them. More interestingly the Mauryan maiden guards, which have the same stats as the Britons, cannot beat the Spartans. The only champion which seems to be able to destroy the Britons are the Iberian champion spearmen. IIRC Persian immortals beat the Athenian city guards, the Carthaginian infantry, the Roman infantry and the Seleucid infantry, so they are definitely an above average champion.As for the Ptolemies, your strat seems very interesting, I would love to see it in action but the fact is that I haven't seen anyone using Ptolemies for ages (not including random picks). If you could send a demo that would be great. Sure the champ spear cavalry isn't bad, however it has no difference among other cavalry champs, infact if you want to go with building cavalry then the Iberian ranged horses are by far the best. they do everything a cavalry champ does but it also has a lot of crush damage, infact it has the highest crush damage output from all the champions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
niektb Posted January 18, 2016 Report Share Posted January 18, 2016 The structure tree is 100% accurate. It's generated on loading the tree. It could be though that there are stats that are not displayed... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Monkey Posted January 18, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 18, 2016 Yes you are probably right, i wasn't sure what exactly it was that makes some units better than others despite them having the same stats on the structure tree, more hidden stats makes more sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xfs Posted January 18, 2016 Report Share Posted January 18, 2016 I doubt your testing method is scientific. For example, I just did a test of 20 city guards vs 20 immortals (same stats). City guards won by small margin. The ultimate source of data is in-game "Display selection state" where it shows unit stats.The reason nobody uses Ptolemies is because right now everyone uses champ only strategy and Ptolemies don't have good champs, not because its base units are bad.Champ spear cavs have very big differences than other champ cavs, so I don't what you mean by this. Iberian champ cavs are in a weird place. They are very weak for anti-units because units all have very high crush armor. They are also very weak for anti-building because they have low pierce armor (generally worse than elephants for anti-building). They are also weak for scouting because they are not fast enough, and with low armor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phalanx Posted January 18, 2016 Report Share Posted January 18, 2016 Well, if you can offer up historical examples of stuff you want to change, this community will definately take a look at it.And dont worry, the Seleucids and Ptolemaics will be more useful once formations and charges work. They'll be good, dont worry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phalanx Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 Okay, I do agree with the fact that Carthage ( Balearic slingers ) need to be balanced. Making them the fastest infantry, the strongest and most accurate slinger is WAAYYYY to unbalanced. Kiting will be lethal against all oponents minus cav, which in grand scheme are easily dealt with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wowgetoffyourcellphone Posted January 21, 2016 Report Share Posted January 21, 2016 Player should use caution when suggesting changes just because current alpha play one way or another. Because everyone in alpha 19 go heavy champion does not mean this will be case in alpha 20, using your suggestions or no. Remember that not all gameplay is complete. It is a hope that formation fighting, charging, tramplling, chasing, etc. will change combat with significance. Until thing like these implemented, it is difficult to say that Persians should get to build more than 1 Apadana so that they can train more Immortals. Why not beef them in another way? Like their archers or other ranged unit. In Delenda Est, Immortals have a train limit of 30, but they are traine supremely fast (4 seconds after all research). Not saying this is solution, but it is alternative you don't mention. Just saying there are many way to balance this stuff but until the gameplay complete it should wait. Obvious to me, the team disagree so "balancing" will continue to take up an unnecessary amount of time better spent on adding feature and squashing of the bugs. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philip the Swaggerless Posted January 26, 2016 Report Share Posted January 26, 2016 About the Persians.. I just realized something interesting. When you select the hero Cyrus, (I haven't tried it out with the other heroes) you can spawn Immortals from him like a mobile military production facility. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
intipablo Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 On another note, I think Britons longswordsmen need to be down-graded a little. I mean come on, it's just unfair. I can think of an easy way to balance these guys. Simply lower the hero "Boudiccas" attack boost down to something like 1-2. 5 is just crazy lol. 20.4 Hack for the longswordsmen, and how fast they can be massed, these guys are just too overpowered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phalanx Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 3 hours ago, intipablo said: On another note, I think Britons longswordsmen need to be down-graded a little. I mean come on, it's just unfair. I can think of an easy way to balance these guys. Simply lower the hero "Boudiccas" attack boost down to something like 1-2. 5 is just crazy lol. 20.4 Hack for the longswordsmen, and how fast they can be massed, these guys are just too overpowered. Well, like wowgetoff said, in the next alpha, they might be able to be mowed by cav charges, or kited by ranged cav. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
intipablo Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 10 hours ago, SeleucidKing said: Well, like wowgetoff said, in the next alpha, they might be able to be mowed by cav charges, or kited by ranged cav. This next Alpha will be great, no doubt! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phalanx Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 23 minutes ago, intipablo said: This next Alpha will be great, no doubt! Hopefully! And in a perfect world, they'll implement the roster I suggested for this Alpha, but probably not.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
intipablo Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 4 minutes ago, SeleucidKing said: Hopefully! And in a perfect world, they'll implement the roster I suggested for this Alpha, but probably not.... Don't want to flood this thread here with our little chat but what roster? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phalanx Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 Check this out! This is the thread I created to create a roster and "finalize" the Seleucid faction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarcReaver Posted January 28, 2016 Report Share Posted January 28, 2016 The design isn't even remotely finished ata all, so there is no apparent gameplay apart from "harvest lumber + food, build soldiers". Like half of all techs are missing, there are a handful of units which do not cost a logical amount of resources and the economy system is unfinished. How can this be unbalanced? Also, how is this graphic alpha in any respect "competitive"? I don't get it.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wowgetoffyourcellphone Posted January 31, 2016 Report Share Posted January 31, 2016 On 1/28/2016 at 9:43 AM, DarcReaver said: The design isn't even remotely finished ata all, so there is no apparent gameplay apart from "harvest lumber + food, build soldiers". Like half of all techs are missing, there are a handful of units which do not cost a logical amount of resources and the economy system is unfinished. How can this be unbalanced? Also, how is this graphic alpha in any respect "competitive"? I don't get it.. I really think unit should not cost mor than 2 different resource. I am baffle why so many unit cost 3 resource. A lot of tech cost are really very strange as well. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phalanx Posted January 31, 2016 Report Share Posted January 31, 2016 11 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said: I really think unit should not cost mor than 2 different resource. I am baffle why so many unit cost 3 resource. A lot of tech cost are really very strange as well. Well, it is more realistic, but maybe that is a realism that must be trades for ease of gameplay.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wowgetoffyourcellphone Posted January 31, 2016 Report Share Posted January 31, 2016 (edited) 7 minutes ago, SeleucidKing said: Well, it is more realistic, but maybe that is a realism that must be trades for ease of gameplay.. Realkisticallly, a unit should cost dozens of resources. From gameplay perspective, Food for all organic unit make sense, and then 1 more non-food resource to give hint to their primary weapon and usage. Edited January 31, 2016 by wowgetoffyourcellphone 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phalanx Posted January 31, 2016 Report Share Posted January 31, 2016 32 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said: Realkisticallly, a unit should cost dozens of resources. From gameplay perspective, Food for all organic unit make sense, and then 1 more non-food resource to give hint to their primary weapon and usage. I agree! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palaiogos Posted January 31, 2016 Report Share Posted January 31, 2016 On 1/17/2016 at 5:33 PM, Mr.Monkey said: Hi there, i have been playing this game for a while now, since alpha 16 or 17, and since the new update I feel like some civilizations are too weak, so i have a few small and simple suggestions of some changes which would balance things out a bit. First, Persians. Persians have many advantages such as a +25% trade income boost for the team, furthermore they have a really nice champion, the Persian immortal. However it has a HUGE disadvantage, which just makes this civ not viable for competitive players as you can only build ONE apanda, which is where you can spawn the immortals. This is really bad because you can not do "single man batch training" like you can do with every other civ. If you change that value so you can build as many as the Spartan Military mess hall, then you will see a decent amount of people using them. Ptolemies Ptolemies have some really unique attributes, for example they are the only civ which has free houses, furthermore they are the only ones which have a lighthouse. However their attacking forces are terrible. Their archers, which are basically the same as the mauryan archers cost more because they cost metal, they have slingers which are decent, however many civs have these, and they are just normal infantry, and to make it even worse, they only have ONE champion. This would be OK if the champion was unique and decent, however the champion is just a normal melee cavalry champion. I suggest that you buff this champion a bit, maybe if you gave it some crush damage, or you increased its armour, or if you could add an upgrade which increases the health and the attack. Then it might be viable, however at the moment no one is using Ptolemies. Other civs need a bit of balancing, such as Seleucids and Cartathenians, however their changes would be a bit more complicated. Aren't the Ptolemies still in an alpha state and they are still being worked on a lot? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
av93 Posted January 31, 2016 Report Share Posted January 31, 2016 57 minutes ago, Palaiogos said: Aren't the Ptolemies still in an alpha state and they are still being worked on a lot? Everthing is in alpha state. I would add persians champs to barraks also (Just for now). BTW, I think that charging won't be included in next alpha. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phalanx Posted February 1, 2016 Report Share Posted February 1, 2016 2 hours ago, av93 said: Everthing is in alpha state. I would add persians champs to barraks also (Just for now). BTW, I think that charging won't be included in next alpha. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.