Iberian champion cavalry

[LetswaveaBook]

4 hours ago, Dakara said:

First i think this unit need to be balanced with the chariot britons. Because it the same unit but iberians champion have more dammage cuz they have fire attack.

So nerf attack of ibere champ a little for they have the same attack of chariot britons.

Then we need see if orther champ of other civ have a chance against this unit. 

I was thinking about giving the unit the similar potential as the Briton chariot against most units, with the fire cav retaining a specialty against siege and buildings.

I also ran tests with the chariot, which gets beaten by cataphract(8hp remaining) and the roman consular body gaurd also defeats it(22 HP remaining). Also if we compare the chariot and other cavalry, we see that the main oddity is a DPS of 28.8, which is far higher than most other units.

I also think that Iberians are OP without their champion cavalry.

[Fabius]

1 hour ago, LetswaveaBook said:

I was thinking about giving the unit the similar potential as the Briton chariot against most units, with the fire cav retaining a specialty against siege and buildings.

I also ran tests with the chariot, which gets beaten by cataphract(8hp remaining) and the roman consular body gaurd also defeats it(22 HP remaining). Also if we compare the chariot and other cavalry, we see that the main oddity is a DPS of 28.8, which is far higher than most other units.

I also think that Iberians are OP without their champion cavalry.

Any specific reasons Iberians why considered OP? 

[Dizaka]

1 hour ago, Fabius said:

Any specific reasons Iberians why considered OP? 

I don't think they're OP however they have good synergy with swordsmen.

One of 2 civs with p1 swordsmen (Rome/Iberians).

One of 2 civs with R3 sword forge upgrade (Mauryas/Iberians).

One of 4 civs (or so) with Barracks producing champion swordsmen (Romans/Macedonians/Iberians/Gauls)

Only civ with a hero who decreases costs + increases unit production speed.

One of two civs (Kushite/Iberians) with a monument that increases damage (Now available p2 and counts towards p3).

 

In a way, their synergy with sword can be overwhelming if played right.  But again, it depends on a player.  A good Ptolemy/Mauryas/Roman/Macedonain/Gaul player can give Iberians a run for their money.  I don't even think Iberians stand a chance vs Carth/Mace/Rome/Ptol at all (one of 2 civs with no Archers and no Spearmen infantry; Iberians/Romans).  Only if those civs let them get to p2 then Iberians stand a chance.

On a side note, 2 Iberians decrease each other's Javelineer costs ... that means infantry and cav Javelineers on a 2 Iber team can be overwhelming for some.

Edited November 19, 2021 by Dizaka

[LetswaveaBook]

25 minutes ago, Fabius said:

Any specific reasons Iberians why considered OP? 

Booming=turtling. Lets assume that you  play a 1v1 and are not the Ptolemies, which are even more OP than Iberians. So if you have cheaper javelineers at the start(which are the strongest CS ranged infantry), then it is very difficult for the opponent to outboom you. Neither does aggressive play help, since there are to much javelineers. So basically many factions are left without any way of preventing Iberians from taking an advantage (That is 1).

In p3, they can deal a quick and hard blow with javelineers due to their strong boom and javelineers being the best CS ranged unit. That is the 2nd reason why it is difficult to take them on.

So how about dragging out the game, does that work? With Indibil they can really fast recruit new soldiers after you lose them, so the Iberian player can very easily send a new wave of units towards you. They also have stronger swordsmen (both CS and champion), which are also cheaper with Indibil. With Indibil garrisoned in the CC, he can't be taken out.. So that is 3 reasons.

Do sneaky strategies work against them? Because of the walls you can't really kill all their farmers easily neither is it easy to take out the starting CC with a sneaky attack. Seleucids, Persians and Mauryas can try to wear them out with horse archers or chariot archers, but only seluecids have decent chance of surviving against the push that the Iberian player after reaching p3. So that would be my 4th reason.

Barely any strategy seems really possible against Iberians, assuming equal skill of course. That is my take on it.

[BreakfastBurrito_007]

6 hours ago, Fabius said:

Consular have no chance because of the high hack armour on fire cav compared to return damage taken. Cataphracts may still have a slim chance given their 1.5 damage modifier against cavalry and higher health pool, but I honestly think they will still lose badly. Bolt shooters no longer have the fire rate of A23 and catapults have no area damage. And infantry dies or cannot do enough damage to merit them even trying. As it stands there is no hard counter

Roman cavalry can definitely beat iberian cavalry, especially if the iber player does not have at least half of their cav army as CS spearcav. Keep in mind that ibers don't have a hero that can boost their cavalry, so if you mix cataphracts or consular bodyguard with a melee cavalry you can beat them. I have even seen Persian CS only cavalry beat 40-50 of them at once by trapping them against another army they were attacking. 

I am not saying the unit is balanced of course, it certainly takes way more skill to counter iberian cavalry than it does to use them. I think indibil should have the -20% training time removed, because the -15% cost is both unique and also good enough.

As for ibercav, the unit, I would like to keep base damage of firecav the same, but just no fire damage to units, this way, the briton chariots are better when they are head to head. Also, reducing their range would help other units counter them, as well as make it harder to keep them alive while killing buildings such as CC, barracks, or fort because spearmen could degarrison.

Let's not forget that cavalry in general are a bit too survivable in a25 anyway, and spearmen are really not an effective counter. If infantry are given fast acceleration and cavalry very slow acceleration, then there will be more instances where spearmen can touch cavalry, and this will effect firecav more if they have their range reduced.

4 hours ago, Gurken Khan said:

If there's so much agreement that they're OP let's just nerf them some

Adding or reducing damage is not always the best way to balance a unit.

6 hours ago, Reyhan said:

There is another solution: make this unit completely unaffordable in most games, like the will to fight tech. We can raise the cost of each champion cavalry to 300 food, 300 wood, 200 stone and 250 metal. If you want to assemble an army of 20 fire cavalry, you would need 5000 metal, 6000 food and wood as well as 4000 stone. Not many people can afford this in a team game without being an useless team mate. 

Many players who try to win by making this unit do wind up being useless anyway and the firecav come too late to make a difference.

[Dizaka]

20 minutes ago, LetswaveaBook said:

Booming=turtling. Lets assume that you  play a 1v1 and are not the Ptolemies, which are even more OP than Iberians. So if you have cheaper javelineers at the start(which are the strongest CS ranged infantry), then it is very difficult for the opponent to outboom you. Neither does aggressive play help, since there are to much javelineers. So basically many factions are left without any way of preventing Iberians from taking an advantage (That is 1).

Early phase ibers are vulnerable to Rome, Macedonia, Carthage, and Ptolemies.  They can also lose to Mauryas, Gauls, Britons, in the first 8 minutes.  You can even capture an Iberian CC with 8-9 minutes gametime with Kushites.

Rome/Macedonia can mass rush with spear cav (yes, even if spear cav is weak vs skrimishers they are strong enough in mass).  To prevent this you will have to go mass skrimishers and play a roll of the dice.  Either you get rushed and you counter the rush or if you boom with women, you risk losing access to all tree lines.

Carthage has merc swordcav.  RIP to any Iberian/Rome player.  Period, it's not a competition in the first 8 mins of gametime.

Ptol can outrange Iberians.  The only counter is towers and outposts and dmg upgrades for towers.

 

20 minutes ago, LetswaveaBook said:

In p3, they can deal a quick and hard blow with javelineers due to their strong boom and javelineers being the best CS ranged unit. That is the 2nd reason why it is difficult to take them on.

That's a Javelineer damage issue and not an Iberian issue.  Also, scouting this is beautiful on civs that have siege towers.  Just build siege towers (Ptol/Seleucid/Carthage/Kushite).  Force the enemy to rebalance their army.

 

20 minutes ago, LetswaveaBook said:

So how about dragging out the game, does that work? With Indibil they can really fast recruit new soldiers after you lose them, so the Iberian player can very easily send a new wave of units towards you. They also have stronger swordsmen (both CS and champion), which are also cheaper with Indibil. With Indibil garrisoned in the CC, he can't be taken out.. So that is 3 reasons.

There are a lot of heroes like Indibil that don't need to be on battle field to impact damage.  Rome has one.  Mauryas have at least two.  Pretty sure other civs have such heroes too.

20 minutes ago, LetswaveaBook said:

Do sneaky strategies work against them? Because of the walls you can't really kill all their farmers easily neither is it easy to take out the starting CC with a sneaky attack. Seleucids, Persians and Mauryas can try to wear them out with horse archers or chariot archers, but only seluecids have decent chance of surviving against the push that the Iberian player after reaching p3. So that would be my 4th reason.

Barely any strategy seems really possible against Iberians, assuming equal skill of course. That is my take on it.

Any civ can build walls.  Just because they don't build them or use them doesn't make the walls around iberians overwhelming.  Walls are a game feature.  Just because other players decide not to build them shouldn't be a strike against iberians IMO.

There's plenty of sneakiness that can be done vs Iberians.  Mauryan champ macemen come into mind - they are trained at barracks.  Kushite macemen in early p2 can also be effective. 

 

Edited November 19, 2021 by Dizaka

[BreakfastBurrito_007]

10 minutes ago, LetswaveaBook said:

Barely any strategy seems really possible against Iberians, assuming equal skill of course. That is my take on it.

A big attack with ptol or seleucids pike/skirm or pike/sling with hero and elephants is something an iber player can not counter at minute 15 if he is going for ibercav. While iberians have the best CS ranged infantry, seleucids also have that alongside the best CS melee infantry, which means that their skirmishers will be invincible for longer than the iberian ones (melee always die first). 

If there is any setup that can beat iber, then this has got to be it.

40 minutes ago, Dizaka said:

2 Iberians decrease each other's Javelineer costs

Civ team bonuses now affect the civ that give it too, so in a 1v1 an iber will have 45/45 costing skirms.

[Dizaka]

Just now, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:

Civ team bonuses now affect the civ that give it too, so in a 1v1 an iber will have 45/45 costing skirms.

So Rome (production speed) / Gauls (forge upgrade costs) / Mauryas (temple upgrades), etc?  Whoa.

[Player of 0AD]

42 minutes ago, Dizaka said:

On a side note, 2 Iberians decrease each other's Javelineer costs ... that means infantry and cav Javelineers on a 2 Iber team can be overwhelming for some.

No, team boni never stack

[BreakfastBurrito_007]

2 minutes ago, Dizaka said:

So Rome (production speed) / Gauls (forge upgrade costs) / Mauryas (temple upgrades), etc?  Whoa.

now think how good sele is after u have kush, iber, and rome on ur team. :O 

cheaper eles, 

faster, cheaper training of the best CS infantry composition.

 

Edited November 19, 2021 by BreakfastBurrito_007

[Dizaka]

3 minutes ago, Player of 0AD said:

No, team boni never stack

Wasn't thinking about stacking.  It used to be that team bonus excludes the civ giving the team bonus ...

 

2 minutes ago, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:

now think how good sele is after u have kush, iber, and rome on ur team. :O 

cheaper eles, 

faster, cheaper training of the best CS composition.

 

Don't forget with Sele you have champion elephant for +20% dmg and +20% speed.  Can mow through a lot of territory that way.  Every 4 eles basically you have 1 free ele just because of champion.

Edited November 19, 2021 by Dizaka

[LetswaveaBook]

51 minutes ago, Dizaka said:

Early phase ibers are vulnerable to Rome, Macedonia, Carthage, and Ptolemies.  They can also lose to Mauryas, Gauls, Britons, in the first 8 minutes.  You can even capture an Iberian CC with 8-9 minutes gametime with Kushites.

Rome/Macedonia can mass rush with spear cav (yes, even if spear cav is weak vs skrimishers they are strong enough in mass).  To prevent this you will have to go mass skrimishers and play a roll of the dice.  Either you get rushed and you counter the rush or if you boom with women, you risk losing access to all tree lines.

Carthage has merc swordcav.  RIP to any Iberian/Rome player.  Period, it's not a competition in the first 8 mins of gametime.

If the Iberian player plays well, I think all of these strategies do not work in a 1v1, except the one with Ptolemies. If you have any evidence to show the contrary, I would be happy to see it.

[Dizaka]

1 minute ago, LetswaveaBook said:

If the Iberian player plays well, I think all of these strategies do not work in a 1v1, except the one with Ptolemies. If you have any evidence to show the contrary, I would be happy to see it.

Well, if anyone plays well on any civ most strategies, if not all, won't work on them too.  As long as there are counter strategies then it is fine imo.  How someone plays is a subjective issue.

There are players who are master Ptol players but if you put them on Mauryas (e.g., Rauls) they confuse their right hand with their left hand.  Or master Iber players (e.g., breakfastburrito) who only play a handful of civs.  Or me who doesn't touch Iber much as I just dislike them where I prefer Gauls/Mauryas/Carthage and Sele in right environments but put me on Brits/Athens/Romans and I start playing like a tard.

[LetswaveaBook]

16 minutes ago, Dizaka said:

Well, if anyone plays well on any civ most strategies, if not all, won't work on them too.

That is untrue according to me. There are really strategies which some faction struggle to deal with. So you could still play to the best of your abilities and be defeated by a similar skilled player. I think for Macedonians it is difficult to deal with a Briton player that opens with a stable (or two). Also mysticjim casted a game where I used a mercenary strategy in a Macedonian mirror against dakeyras and he could not win, despite not playing bad.

[BreakfastBurrito_007]

@Dizaka @LetswaveaBook do you think a range reduction makes sense for ibercav? I think it is a bit too easy to take down cc's. If in the next alpha, cavalry have slower acceleration to put some risk back into cavalry, then ibercav would be more impacted by this if their range was reduced. It at least makes sense to have reduced range since a javelin covered in fuel will weigh more and have more drag than one without the fuel. I think combining this with the removal of fire damage affecting units would be a good starting point to re-evaluate how op it is.

As for an overall iber nerf, what do you think about removing the indibil -20% train time?

[Lion.Kanzen]

6 minutes ago, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:

@Dizaka @LetswaveaBook do you think a range reduction makes sense for ibercav? I think it is a bit too easy to take down cc's. If in the next alpha, cavalry have slower acceleration to put some risk back into cavalry, then ibercav would be more impacted by this if their range was reduced. It at least makes sense to have reduced range since a javelin covered in fuel will weigh more and have more drag than one without the fuel. I think combining this with the removal of fire damage affecting units would be a good starting point to re-evaluate how op it is.

As for an overall iber nerf, what do you think about removing the indibil -20% train time?

Wouldn't it be better to reduce the Accuracy?

This is how this mechanic is handled in various games.

[Dizaka]

9 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

Wouldn't it be better to reduce the Accuracy?

This is how this mechanic is handled in various games.

Also, make iber fire dmg not double/triple/quadrupe stack on units.  I think it is fine for buildings to be able to take them down though.

If I'm on fire and run through a fire I'm not on fire 2x.

20 minutes ago, LetswaveaBook said:

That is untrue according to me. There are really strategies which some faction struggle to deal with. So you could still play to the best of your abilities and be defeated by a similar skilled player. I think for Macedonians it is difficult to deal with a Briton player that opens with a stable (or two). Also mysticjim casted a game where I used a mercenary strategy in a Macedonian mirror against dakeyras and he could not win, despite not playing bad.

There should be such strategies.  That's what adds to uniqueness to the civs.  They shouldn't be cookie cutter civs.  The diversity in teamgames is the fun part.  If players want to determine who is better do mirror civs.

Iber/Rome will always have a struggle dealing with a Mace/Rome player who opens up with 14-16 spear cav to rush around minute 5/5.5.  Always, irrelevant of your skill and preparation.  However, skrimishers are stronger than spear cav.  How is that?

So the conclusion from that is you are a better Macedonian player than dakeyras.  Generally, all civs have the same openings.  I saw the replay and dakeyras didn't mirror strategy. He tried a different strategy over you.  His strategy failed.  Yours succeeded.  That makes your strategy the better opener vs Dakeyras than his strategy vs you.

Edited November 19, 2021 by Dizaka

[Lion.Kanzen]

Just now, Dizaka said:

Also, make iber fire dmg not double/triple/quadrupe stack on units.  I think it is fine for buildings to be able to take them down though.

If I'm on fire and run through a fire I'm not on fire 2x.

We have to introduce support mechanics against X damage.

The defenses should have technologies to withstand fire.This is already rolling out in AoE IV where all units fire torches.

The only ones that cannot be burned are the walls.

[Dizaka]

2 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

The only ones that cannot be burned are the walls.

Yea, but we have palisades and rome/maury wooden walls ;P.  Those walls should be burnable and more prone to fire dmg, imho.

But I agree, if there is a dmg type there should be a defense for that dmg type.

[Huffman3829]

I agree with you that the Iberian Champion Cavalry attack damage should be lowered a bit. I remembered once in a game I trained 30 of these, and I was attacked by literally hordes of Infantry with sustaining no casualties whatsoever, suffering very little damage to the Cavalry. I'm talking near 100 troops trying to break through each horde, and there was 2 of them. I used them as guards, and to good effect. If you do want to nerf their Cavalry, It is needed, but you can still do that without taking the fire bonus away. But fire shouldn't give the Javelins a 20 point bonus. Maybe a 5 point bonus would suffice. Any suggestions?

Edited November 19, 2021 by Huffman3829

[Lion.Kanzen]

Just now, Dizaka said:

Yea, but we have palisades and rome/maury wooden walls ;P.  Those walls should be burnable and more prone to fire dmg, imho.

But I agree, if there is a dmg type there should be a defense for that dmg type.

This mechanics is complex, you must spend a while I send you torches before it burns.

This means that the more fire attacks the damage accumulates, making the snowball effect.

 

With the siege towers and rams you can research technologies to protect them, what was done was to cover them with wet skins.

in the case of the Roman fortress it would be another abstraction, the soldiers garrisoned are supposed to act as firefighters.

Things are situational. What I noticed is that the buildings connected to the influence of other buildings. It doesn't just depend on a single factor.

[BreakfastBurrito_007]

40 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

Wouldn't it be better to reduce the Accuracy?

This is how this mechanic is handled in various games.

Range reduction serves 2 purposes as a way to nerf iber cav, it would mean they need to get closer to cc to destroy it, which gives the defender more opportunity to surprise them. Also, it enables other champions, and other cavalry units to be more effective against them.

Also, if cavalry have slower acceleration, then palisade or stone walls would be useful for controlling invading cavalry movement and enabling spearmen to trap them. Also, iber cavalry would be more at-risk from spearmen or spearcav, or any of the logical counter units than other cavalry because they would usually exist closer to the cc, or enemy units. I also like a reduction in accuracy, and it might make sense to balance the nerf between range reduction and accuracy reduction.

Ideally, at the end of the changes, iberian cavalry would still be good but vulnerable to other civs cavalry who have heroes and specialty units.

 

[Lion.Kanzen]

4 minutes ago, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:

Also, if cavalry have slower acceleration, then palisade or stone walls would be useful for controlling invading cavalry movement and enabling spearmen to trap them. Also, iber cavalry would be more at-risk from spearmen or spearcav, or any of the logical counter units than other cavalry because they would usually exist closer to the cc, or enemy units. I also like a reduction in accuracy, and it might make sense to balance the nerf between range reduction and accuracy reduction.

The problem would be the pikes.

[LetswaveaBook]

1 hour ago, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:

do you think a range reduction makes sense for ibercav? I think it is a bit too easy to take down cc's. If in the next alpha, cavalry have slower acceleration to put some risk back into cavalry, then ibercav would be more impacted by this if their range was reduced.

I would dislike to make them super uncomfortable to use to use. If you want them to have short range, why not let it be a melee unit.

In 1v1s, you will feel the costs of the cavalry which shows its limitations. I conjecture that in a team game, when the pocket player requires more time to build his cavalry army because of the extra expenses, the players at the flank will feel that. So that might give the false impression that the expenses are bearable and the cavalry player is doing well, because his absense is not directly felt by himself. I still think most cavalry is fairly balanced by its cost. Iberian and Roman cavalry is obviously not well balanced, though Roman cavalry is not a top treat in 1v1s.

[Philip the Swaggerless]

On 19/11/2021 at 10:02 AM, LetswaveaBook said:

I was thinking about giving the unit the similar potential as the Briton chariot against most units, with the fire cav retaining a specialty against siege and buildings.

I also ran tests with the chariot, which gets beaten by cataphract(8hp remaining) and the roman consular body gaurd also defeats it(22 HP remaining). 

1. My favorite solution is to make the Iberian champ attack + fire damage equal Briton chariot attack.

2. So the cataphract, which is supposed to be an anti-cavalry unit, does worse against the chariot than than the consular bodyguard?  This is not good my friends. Sword cav may need to have 1 less pierce armor or something.