Jump to content

What mistakes I did? Feedback on my streamed game...


BeTe
 Share

Recommended Posts

I had a hard time understanding your comments, so first suggestion would be to increase your mic volume relative to the game audio.

Different units have different gather rates: don't put your soldiers on food, don't put your women on minerals. Skiritai have very poor gathering rates, collecting with them is not very efficient, use them for building or fighting. Champions can't gather at all. "Workers" are women + infantry citizen soldiers. If you put your storehouse directly next to a mine gathering will be less efficient (longer walk distances). You somewhat researched your gathering tecs.

Use the alarm bell in the CC to save your women! They will automatically hide and when you end the alarm they will automatically resume working; your enemy killed more women then he should've been able to, totally wrecking your food eco. Build your base defensible: choke-points, some units to repel raiders, some spots to garrison women/soldiers.

You built ~all your strategic buildings to the back; longer supply lines, less support near the front (temple). You realized you didn't manage formations well; was painful to watch you go into the column formation over and over. Either use none or a better one; also watch your units' stances: aggressive if they're supposed to chase, stand ground + attack move order if they're not. You picked the worst possible spot to engage the enemy army: between a garrisoned CC and the garrisoned fortress; with that and your neglect of armor upgrades you go ripped to pieces as you were.

HTH

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi,

scouting is essential for 1v1. Furthermore as a basis an okish economy is important (no res flowing, tec timing, not get housed, enough production buildings, balance of food and wood income). See also from ValihrAnt

https://wildfiregames.com/forum/topic/62720-challenge-to-reach-100-pop-in-the-shortest-time/

Do not fight in formation and not in range of a fort / CC.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, BeTe said:

Did I start making Skiritais too early considering it's gather rates? When should I start building them?

When you think it's the right time. ;)

But seriously, I think when you got your eco running and prepare for the next strategical phase. Let's say you built a tower near your backwards wood and left three soldiers there to man it; you had houses near so you could've garrisoned your women if there were a raid. You could pull up you other CS inf to the front/middle wood/metal and have your Skiritais build your military buildings near that. Maybe include a stable; having some quick responders is nice against cav raids. The stable upgrades aren't that expensive, and if you have some horsies chasing raiders, hide your women and have a tower or two shoot at the intruders that would take the fun out of the raids.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BeTe said:

All clear. Did I start making Skiritais too early considering it's gather rates? When should I start building them? 

there is not one right time. but when you start to train, you train a good lot then you attack. any time you spend without fighting is time you are falling behind in eco because skirtay gather slowly.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, alre said:

there is not one right time. but when you start to train, you train a good lot then you attack. any time you spend without fighting is time you are falling behind in eco because skirtay gather slowly.

Yeah, well. It's good to have them (for example if an enemy should show up with siege), and if they're building to prepare an offensive their low gathering rate doesn't matter.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I think the big battle was where you dropped the ball:

  • you had troops just standing around, including Skiritai; instead of feeding them piecemeal to the enemy archers they could have cut through them
  • what you did with your rams was not only a waste of resources but they were hindering you; standing in the way when you were still gathering, not getting to the front (maybe countering the enemy rams) but blocking your path; then instead of holding them back you should've sent them forward, being at least a concern or actually taking down enemy buildings
  • make up your mind about stances and formations; I'd wager aggressive and no formations would have served you better

If you review the battle I think you might agree.

Minor points:

  • don't have women around the front action
  • maybe get farming upgrades and start gathering minerals earlier
  • if you use towers also get their upgrades
  • have multiple production buildings on a hotkey so you can easily reinforce

 

Everything IMHO and not trying to be harsh but concise. HTH :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Gurken Khan said:

I think the big battle was where you dropped the ball:

  • you had troops just standing around, including Skiritai; instead of feeding them piecemeal to the enemy archers they could have cut through them
  • what you did with your rams was not only a waste of resources but they were hindering you; standing in the way when you were still gathering, not getting to the front (maybe countering the enemy rams) but blocking your path; then instead of holding them back you should've sent them forward, being at least a concern or actually taking down enemy buildings
  • make up your mind about stances and formations; I'd wager aggressive and no formations would have served you better

If you review the battle I think you might agree.

Minor points:

  • don't have women around the front action
  • maybe get farming upgrades and start gathering minerals earlier
  • if you use towers also get their upgrades
  • have multiple production buildings on a hotkey so you can easily reinforce

 

Everything IMHO and not trying to be harsh but concise. HTH :)

Thx a lot man.

Ohhh, so Rams can be used to soak damage from skirmishers and spearmans and to kill his rams, right? Hm, I haven't think about that usage of them...

I guess I underestimated opponent size and that I guess Skiritais are OP against his army. It's very hard to estimate for me as there are too many units on the screen...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BeTe said:

Ohhh, so Rams can be used to soak damage from skirmishers and spearmans and to kill his rams, right? Hm, I haven't think about that usage of them...

Rams can handle nearly unlimited amounts of attacks from skirmishers and other ranged units like archers while taking basically no damage. They can also take out other rams, but it's best to use sword cav or swordsmen to do that. Trying to use skirmishers against rams is a common mistake people make when they're starting out. If you've got an opponent who does that, then send the rams forward.

Edited by thephilosopher
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, thephilosopher said:

Rams can handle nearly unlimited amounts of attacks from skirmishers and other ranged units like archers while taking basically no damage. They can also take out other rams, but it's best to use sword cav or swordsmen to do that. Trying to use skirmishers against rams is a common mistake people make when they're starting out. If you've got an opponent who does that, then send the rams forward.

Wow that's important aspect of army micro that I wasn't aware of. I knew about swords and I used them in above game, but I kept rams to save them from his army. I should not do it since he didn't have swords if I remember well.

Bug how would I distinguish units in such a huge blob and see if there are swords in front? I can't even estimate how big army is...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, BeTe said:

Bug how would I distinguish units in such a huge blob and see if there are swords in front? I can't even estimate how big army is...

I've never had much luck with distinguishing units in a huge blob, other than watching what they do. Skirmishers and archers stop further away and fire, with melee units move all the way up and fight at close range.

Beyond that, there are some things you can infer from the civs people choose. Usually people choose a civ for its special units. People who play Britons probably like using slingers. People who play Carthaginians probably want those merc cav. I used to play Spartans all the time because I liked using skiritai. Gaul players often like to do cav rushes. And so on. You can tailor your army a bit around what you think your opponent will probably use.

Maybe this isn't the best example because I obviously lost the game, but when ValihrAnt and I played yesterday, he chose Han. Plus I knew he was a great player. From that, it was pretty obvious he was going to be sending sword cav to go after me in Phase 1. So I built my early army around defense from sword cav. He easily won the game, but at least he didn't completely wipe me out in the first 5 minutes with his sword cav. I survived long enough to hit phase 2.

Edited by thephilosopher
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, BeTe said:

I can't even estimate how big army is..

It is usually safe to assume his army is slightly bigger, at least I do whenever I have a battle. Remember your opponent knows much about his own army, so if you can try to read his behavior you can have an idea whether or not you can beat him. Unless it is visually apparent, the army size difference will be less important than micro and upgrades and unit composition.

Edited by BreakfastBurrito_007
  • Like 2
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This time I really don't understand why I lost engagement. :banger:

I had more upgrades (weapons on level 2 - he on 1. I had 25% from Agoge/champion upgrade from Hall), I had Siege, Skiritais, 25% melee from Hero and similar or more army in fight. 

What I did wrong in micro ? Especially that fight on min 15-16.

BeTe-DirtyBastard.zip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 17/10/2022 at 2:01 PM, BeTe said:

This time I really don't understand why I lost engagement. :banger:

I had more upgrades (weapons on level 2 - he on 1. I had 25% from Agoge/champion upgrade from Hall), I had Siege, Skiritais, 25% melee from Hero and similar or more army in fight. 

What I did wrong in micro ? Especially that fight on min 15-16.

BeTe-Dirty@#$%.zip 325 kB · 0 downloads

this was close, good game.

you move your army way too much, when you see advantage always engage, don't disengage until you go under. why moving back all your army to join an incoming hero? if you have already engaged, just keep fighting while your hero comes, if you want to wait the hero, do so before you attack.

if you had more barracks you could have built back your army faster, and win.

get the baskets technology, especially if you build that few dropsites.

when you start a big attack, call in all your men, all of them, including those on mines ecc, more is always going to be better.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 19/10/2022 at 6:20 PM, alre said:

this was close, good game.

you move your army way too much, when you see advantage always engage, don't disengage until you go under. why moving back all your army to join an incoming hero? if you have already engaged, just keep fighting while your hero comes, if you want to wait the hero, do so before you attack.

if you had more barracks you could have built back your army faster, and win.

get the baskets technology, especially if you build that few dropsites.

when you start a big attack, call in all your men, all of them, including those on mines ecc, more is always going to be better.

Thanks.

Now I checked replay again - I should have continue first 2 fights. But problem for me estimating of army size and strength. Should be better with time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
25 minutes ago, BeTe said:

Anyone has time and will to check again, please? :)

I had equal number of Javeliners 16 pierce (+some P1 upgrades+2x towers) vs slingers ~11 pierce and I lost significantly. Is it about formation or what?

bete-eskro.zip 176 kB · 1 download

Not enough spearmen, it doesn't matter that your units do more damage if the enemy can just attack your ranged units with much fewer overkill.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Feldfeld said:

Not enough spearmen, it doesn't matter that your units do more damage if the enemy can just attack your ranged units with much fewer overkill.

Somewhere in balancing discussions I have read that current meta is kind of spamming ranged units... Obviously, I misunderstood something...

What's the best ratio ?  1:1 , 2:1 or 3:1 for ranged?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BeTe said:

Somewhere in balancing discussions I have read that current meta is kind of spamming ranged units... Obviously, I misunderstood something...

What's the best ratio ?  1:1 , 2:1 or 3:1 for ranged?

Meat shield is important too. Personally something close to 2:1 - 3:1 for ranged should be good. There is probably a wide range of working ratio, especially if you can afford to retreat if your meatshield is done but the enemy is still going good. I'd argue that the closer your ranged units is to the skirmisher line (low range high damage), the closer you will be to a 1:1 ratio. Meanwhile archers can afford to have a more imbalanced ratio.

Mixing the type of ranged units can also be good btw.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Feldfeld said:

Meat shield is important too. Personally something close to 2:1 - 3:1 for ranged should be good. There is probably a wide range of working ratio, especially if you can afford to retreat if your meatshield is done but the enemy is still going good. I'd argue that the closer your ranged units is to the skirmisher line (low range high damage), the closer you will be to a 1:1 ratio. Meanwhile archers can afford to have a more imbalanced ratio.

Mixing the type of ranged units can also be good btw.

Wait what? Lower range - more damage? Is that b/c of missed arrows? I wasn't aware of that...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, BeTe said:

Wait what? Lower range - more damage? Is that b/c of missed arrows? I wasn't aware of that...

No, I meant that slingers have lower range but higher pierce damage than archers in their template, and skirmishers have lower range but higher pierce damage than slingers.

Edit: In other words, if you are using skirmishers unit it's probably wise to have more melee infantry in your army than if you were using archers

Edited by Feldfeld
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Feldfeld said:

No, I meant that slingers have lower range but higher pierce damage than archers in their template, and skirmishers have lower range but higher pierce damage than slingers.

Edit: In other words, if you are using skirmishers unit it's probably wise to have more melee infantry in your army than if you were using archers

Ah got it, thx. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...