You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

General Discussions
Moderated by Maffia, LordKivlov, JimXIX

Hop to:    
Welcome! You are not logged in. Please Login or Register.117 replies
Age of Empires III Heaven » Forums » General Discussions » The real measuring stick - civ gameplay capacities/abilities:
Bottom
Topic Subject:The real measuring stick - civ gameplay capacities/abilities:
« Previous Page  1 2 3 ··· 5  Next Page »
Ender_Ward
Skirmisher
posted 04-24-07 10:23 PM EDT (US)         
I started thinking, and it dawned on me that most of the "problem" civs are those that can do too much, too well, and not those with one particular overpowered unit or three. Those are still factors, but not primary ones. Instead of speaking in generalities, let me simply show you what I mean by looking at each civ specifically.

(Note #1: maximum economic capacity means what is the absolute maximum this civ can expand it's economy to by using gather rate techs and cards)

(Note #2: economic growth speed refers to how quickly a civ can expand it's economy both early and mid game)

(Note #3: I should've specified this right away, "mid game" military strength is actually everything from about 9 minutes in till the rest of the game, including going way into Imperial)

~~~British~~~
Boom: strong
Economic early growth speed potential: very fast
Economic mid game growth speed potential: moderate
Rush: weak
Turtle: weak
Fast Fortress: weak
Military strength early game: average
Military strength mid game: strong
Max economic capacity: very strong


~~~Spanish~~~
Boom: moderate
Economic early growth speed potential: fast
Economic mid game growth speed potential: moderate
Rush: strong
Turtle: weak
Fast Fortress: extremely strong
Military strength early game: extremely strong
Military strength mid game: strong
Max economic capacity: very strong


~~~Germans~~~
Boom: moderate
Economic early growth speed potential: moderate
Economic mid game growth speed potential: moderate
Rush: weak
Turtle: weak
Fast Fortress: moderate
Military strength early game: weak
Military strength mid game: strong
Max economic capacity: very strong


~~~Ottomans~~~
Boom: weak
Economic early growth speed potential: very fast
Economic mid game growth speed potential: weak
Rush: very strong
Turtle: weak
Fast Fortress: strong
Military strength early game: strong
Military strength mid game: strong
Max economic capacity: strong


~~~Sioux~~~
Boom: moderate
Economic early growth speed potential: moderate
Economic mid game growth speed potential: weak
Rush: strong
Turtle: weak
Fast Fortress: strong
Military strength early game: very strong
Military strength mid game: very strong
Max economic capacity: weak


~~~Russians~~~
Boom: strong
Economic early growth speed potential: moderate
Economic mid game growth speed potential: strong
Rush: moderate
Turtle: moderate
Fast Fortress: weak
Military strength early game: average
Military strength mid game: strong
Max economic capacity: very strong


~~~French~~~
Boom: strong
Economic early growth speed potential: moderate
Economic mid game growth speed potential: very strong
Rush: moderate
Turtle: weak
Fast Fortress: strong
Military strength early game: average
Military strength mid game: extreme
Max economic capacity: very strong


~~~Dutch~~~
Boom: strong
Economic early growth speed potential: extreme
Economic mid game growth speed potential: moderate
Rush: moderate
Turtle: extreme
Fast Fortress: strong
Military strength early game: strong
Military strength mid game: very strong
Max economic capacity: weak


~~~Aztec~~~
Boom: very strong
Economic early growth speed potential: fast
Economic mid game growth speed potential: extreme
Rush: moderate
Turtle: strong
Fast Fortress: moderate
Military strength early game: average
Military strength mid game: extreme
Max economic capacity: very strong


~~~Portuguese~~~
Boom: strong
Economic early growth speed potential: slow
Economic mid game growth speed potential: very fast
Rush: weak
Turtle: strong
Fast Fortress: moderate
Military strength early game: weak
Military strength mid game: strong
Max economic capacity: very strong


~~~Iroquois~~~
Boom: extreme
Economic early growth speed potential: moderate
Economic mid game growth speed potential: extreme
Rush: strong
Turtle: extreme
Fast Fortress: extremely strong
Military strength early game: strong
Military strength mid game: extreme
Max economic capacity: very strong


Now, you might say that these evaluations are highly subjective, and they are, since they are based on how I view those civs. If you agree with my assessments, see if you can notice the problems. See if you can correlate how the civs with few or no weaknesses, and/or too many strengths perform overall.
See if you agree that perhaps ES should be thinking in broader terms. Instead of giving a small cut or boost to a unit here and there, they should be evaluating civ abilities, capacities as a whole. By taking a holistic approach to civ balance, they can achieve better results. Not just extend the never ending game of musical civs.

By which I mean, identify what are the important abilities that are required for a civ to be competitive in TWC. Make sure that no civ is left behind so completely as to have no chance, in that ability. Identify what combination of abilities leads to too much strength. Identify which combination leads to too much strength too quickly. Etc. Address those major issues.

For example, say you've identified that the Spanish combination of early economy growth speed, their early game military strength and their FF strength combine into a force that most other civs have a very hard time dealing with at the time it comes together. Evaluate how, perhaps, if you toned down any one of these three abilities, what kind of effect it would have on the overall matchup between Spanish and other civs.

By looking at these civ abilities, you can note confluences that lead to too much advantage. It isn't hard to notice how a civ that is very strong at too many things too early is going to dominate so much, early on, that it'll never actually give other civs the opportunity to get to the point where they have some strengths.

At the same time, if you see a civ that has too many very strong abilities/capacities mid/later game, would become impossible to compete with if not defeated early on. It would follow then, that the matchup would be simply impossible for a civ that doesn't have that many (or any) strengths early on to capitalize upon, and hopefully defeat the late game monster.

Anyway, enough rambling. Hopefully you get my drift.


"One wants to be loved, failing that admired, failing that feared, failing that hated and despised. One wants to instill in other people some form of emotion. The soul shudders before emptiness and wants contact, no matter the cost."

[This message has been edited by Ender_Ward (edited 04-25-2007 @ 01:56 AM).]

AuthorReplies:
KingSteve3721
Skirmisher
posted 04-24-07 10:43 PM EDT (US)     1 / 117       
Great list, especially for those who need a civ change once and awhile and are having a hard time picking. Should be stickied

Besides a couple things (aztecs for one) it's pretty unbiased i think


[FeaR]{KingSteve3721}
“I love my name of honor, more than I fear death.”- Julius Caesar
"The Pope! How many divisions has he got?"- Joseph Stalin
"The hand that gives is above the hand that takes. Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain."- Napoleon Bonaparte
"Dogs, would you live forever?"- Frederick the Great (addressing retreating Prussians at the Battle of Kolin)

[This message has been edited by KingSteve3721 (edited 04-24-2007 @ 10:45 PM).]

TheRomans
Skirmisher
posted 04-24-07 11:00 PM EDT (US)     2 / 117       
Good list, very clean and well thought out. 1 thing I'd like to bring up is the booming potential of aztecs. Aztecs have a very much improved early game eco growth in 1.03 than in 1.02, but their ability to boom mid game has been reduced with the nerf to the aztec eco cards.

I also think you should include late-game stats for civs. As you already know, civs like spanish, ottoman, sioux, and dutch fizzle out while civs that are weaker early game such as germans, brits, and ports pull ahead and are more dominate late game.


+----------+
| PLEASE |
| DO NOT |
| FEED THE |
| TROLLS |
+----------+
Eicho
Skirmisher
posted 04-24-07 11:05 PM EDT (US)     3 / 117       
well, late-late game, when only pop-efficient is what matters, i think both Azrec and Dutch and French are the most powerful,
French can have 60 Gendarmes, Dutch have a 150 pop army, and Aztce have ERK
KingSteve3721
Skirmisher
posted 04-24-07 11:08 PM EDT (US)     4 / 117       
For dutch, it's not so much the pop size of the army that wins you games.

I'd take Germany's 139 vil eco than dutch's 150 pop military anyday.


[FeaR]{KingSteve3721}
“I love my name of honor, more than I fear death.”- Julius Caesar
"The Pope! How many divisions has he got?"- Joseph Stalin
"The hand that gives is above the hand that takes. Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain."- Napoleon Bonaparte
"Dogs, would you live forever?"- Frederick the Great (addressing retreating Prussians at the Battle of Kolin)
Ossian
Skirmisher
posted 04-25-07 00:00 AM EDT (US)     5 / 117       
Ender I have a problem with you listing French turtle as weak when a CDB defense can win you a game, Unless you mean late game turtle but they have no weaker then any other civ so I dunno.

*WINDOWS CRITICAL ERROR 19891126*
Product ID: Ossian Discontinued
Contact your network admin for more details
about this special edition of player...

Allthough cetans are darker, did you know that if you read the word 'cetan' as a dutch word, that you get the same sound as when reading 'satan' in english.-Furby Killer
exc4libulz1022
Skirmisher
posted 04-25-07 00:40 AM EDT (US)     6 / 117       
first of all, im surprised and pleased with the degree of level-headedness with which you judged the ottomans here...i wouldve expected something else. i pretty much agree with this list. one of the things i may not agree with would be french mid-game strength being "extreme". imo, "very strong" would even be a bit of a stretch, they really are nothing special military-wise at this point. the "extreme" comes in the very late-game. also, iroquois early military is moderate at best, tomahawks and aennas are pretty terrible units. that doesnt really matter though since iroquois are never in colonial :P

i dont quite understand what this post is suggesting, though. do you think they DONT consider these aspects when boosting/nerfing a civ?

i mean, take the iroquois nerf for example. that was a pretty ineffectual nerf, but they certainly took a poke at part of the problem, which was the extremely broken unit the iros got for doing their extremely broken FF/turtle. its not like they saw that iros were up at 65% win and tried to nerf tomahawks or something. ES knows the problems...


"he will have a hard getting banks up"
~rel4xed

"I accidently drop kicked someone once"
~george_uk

[This message has been edited by exc4libulz1022 (edited 04-25-2007 @ 00:41 AM).]

schildpad
Skirmisher
posted 04-25-07 01:06 AM EDT (US)     7 / 117       
Why is dutch turtle better then iro turtle? Yes dutch have banks, but iro can get plantations cheap anyway, who needs banks then.

"such a kind fellow!" ~ ķįŋğ_Ćħŗĩ_ĬĬ

Furby killer should be crowned leader of AOE forum ~ [SW_GD]Teutonic

MusketKing
Skirmisher
posted 04-25-07 01:55 AM EDT (US)     8 / 117       
Nice little list Ender, but from what I see according to his it could be argued that Aztecs should be the strongest civ whcih tye aren't.
~~~Germans~~~
Boom: moderate

Hmmm I think Germans have an awesome boom, age 3, 3 TC's and 2 mills producing settler wagons and you have what is effectively the best boom on the game. You might mean something other tha this though :O

"The better at AoE, the worse at RL" - Doppel
After someone suggesting to make a meatshield to fight off petards..."Where can I find this meatshield? Is it in the TC?" - Sjalle

"That last comment has earned you a ban Musk" - Solus
On realising I was on a 2nd account:"Quinarvy ehhh" - Solus

RUSSIAN CIVIL WAR - VERY GG
Mine and Micky's OPness
Medio
Skirmisher
(id: Mediolanus)
posted 04-25-07 02:06 AM EDT (US)     9 / 117       
Hmmm I think Germans have an awesome boom, age 3, 3 TC's and 2 mills producing settler wagons and you have what is effectively the best boom on the game. You might mean something other tha this though :O

How often, in a normal game, have you got 3 TCs and 2 Mills kranking out gatherers? I can't remember once.

Ender_Ward
Skirmisher
posted 04-25-07 02:13 AM EDT (US)     10 / 117       
TheRomans,
Don't confuse economic growth speed with maximum economic capacity. The latter for the Aztec saw a nerf in 1.03 (the cards), but the former remained exactly the same.


Ossian,
While CdBs turn French basically unrushable, they don't actually allow them to turtle like Iroquois or Dutch can. If you keep using CdBs for defense in a turtle-like strat, you'll get completely outboomed by the opponent, as you're using the majority of your resource gatherers to fight, instead of generating resources. Unlike Dutch or Iroquois who can fill one CM TC/Great House with 10 villagers and annihilate most of your army, while the majority of their gatherers continue to generate resources.
The French turtle is weak precisely because it is only strong very early on and is unsustainable long term.


Exc4libulz1022,
I edited the original post, because by "mid game" military strength I actually meant everything from about 9-10 minutes into the game and on. As in, the time period when combat cards begin to be applied, upgrades are made, and the first massing of the "broken" units stats to take place. And all the way into Industrial/Imperial.

And yes, I don't think they are evaluating the civs in this manner. They seem to take these stabs in the dark every patch, making changes that aren't needed, over-nerfing entire aspects of civs, rendering them weak or completely useless, don't nerf other aspects nearly enough and introduce new features that only further unbalance the game.

As for your Iroquois example, they could've actually left Forest Prowlers as they were in 1.02, if they adjusted in a major way the other aspects of the civ, it's other extreme strengths. And if that wasn't enough, then nerf Forest Prowlers. As it is, they got nerfed, yet the civ still reigns supreme. After all, is anyone here under the delusion that Iroquois wouldn't be just as broken, even if Prowlers suddenly had the stats of Skirmishers? No, the civ would still be utterly broken. Because it does so much, too much else so well.

I may be wrong, but I only have my impressions of the patches to date to go on.


Schildpad,
I actually meant that Dutch and Iroquois have the same ridiculously overpowered turtle. I just worded it slightly differently. I edited the original post to make it clearer.


MusketKing,
The way I see it is Aztec should be viewed as the average civ, that does everything OK early on, and only reaches broken aspects later in the game. Compare it to the rest of the civs, many of which do most things better, earlier, and only "fizzle out" later on.

As for German boom, consider that you get 3 SW to start, you ship 5 more pretty much always, and this only leaves you 12 more SWs to "boom" to, at the price of a Fortress card. The German SW boom really isn't as great as it seems.


"One wants to be loved, failing that admired, failing that feared, failing that hated and despised. One wants to instill in other people some form of emotion. The soul shudders before emptiness and wants contact, no matter the cost."
MusketKing
Skirmisher
posted 04-25-07 03:01 AM EDT (US)     11 / 117       
@ Medi, I'm simply saying they have the capability of having a great boom, I never said it's always used.

@ Ender, fair comment about Aztecs. Them twelve settler wagons could be worth it if accompanied by the card in age 4 that boosts all SW stats by 35%. Yes I agree this card probably hardly ever gets used but the capability is there.

I wouldn't agree that:

~~~Iroquois~~~
Max economic capacity: very strong

As far as I know they don't have a great deal of upgrade cards eco wise. And with their late game ECO it could be argued that they have to sacrifice some villagers to go on the fire pit which leaves them with an eco of at least below 100 villagers.

"The better at AoE, the worse at RL" - Doppel
After someone suggesting to make a meatshield to fight off petards..."Where can I find this meatshield? Is it in the TC?" - Sjalle

"That last comment has earned you a ban Musk" - Solus
On realising I was on a 2nd account:"Quinarvy ehhh" - Solus

RUSSIAN CIVIL WAR - VERY GG
Mine and Micky's OPness
schildpad
Skirmisher
posted 04-25-07 06:09 AM EDT (US)     12 / 117       
imo iro turtle is much better then dutch turtle.

"such a kind fellow!" ~ ķįŋğ_Ćħŗĩ_ĬĬ

Furby killer should be crowned leader of AOE forum ~ [SW_GD]Teutonic

Sporting_Lisbon
Skirmisher
posted 04-25-07 06:23 AM EDT (US)     13 / 117       
Iro's eco in late game is pretty bad due to the lack of eco cards, no factories and having less than 100 vills eco to have firepit dances.
L_Clan_Socrates
VIP
posted 04-25-07 07:21 AM EDT (US)     14 / 117       
12 SW is still 24 vills =\ Not bad since you get them from a 400 wood building as opposed to a 600 wood building.

[img]http://www.aoe3-arena.com/sign2/WaCkO,3,0.png[/img]
Voltiguer
Skirmisher
posted 04-25-07 08:27 AM EDT (US)     15 / 117       
-No pop advantage
-cost wood themselves => therefore more expensive than vills
-need a card to send

SWs^^

Legiondude
Skirmisher
posted 04-25-07 09:48 AM EDT (US)     16 / 117       
Have the British gotten that bad by Warchiefs?Because I've been using turtle since day one and I've only lost a couple walls/outposts or two.Stops even a good rush(At least for a bit)

AOEIII:The Reinforcements Mod

"Check in your wallet,that's me on the dollar bill" - George Crushington
Ender_Ward
Skirmisher
posted 04-25-07 09:56 AM EDT (US)     17 / 117       
Iroquois can boost maximum gathering capacity through cards for:

Food +25%
Plantations by 20%
(They also have Stockyards, Ranching and Fulling Mills, but those never get used.)

This is about what a typical European player will include in their decks. Nobody (not even me) stacks up every available economic card into their decks. Some "boomers" don't actually include any at all.
Max economic capacity will never get used by any civ outside of treaty games. The measurement in my list was meant to indicate the availability of cards that will get used, realistically (which is also why Germany isn't rated higher).
Using myself as example. I constantly notice that I have more economic cards than my opponents in pretty much all my decks. Yet even I "max out" at +35% Mills and +35% and Plantations in my typical decks. Half the decks max out at less than that even. Because of deck space. I cannot use ANY economy upgrade cards in Colonial, for example. Just can't afford to sacrifice what's already absolutely necessary.

Look at Sioux, for example, their max economic capacity is weak because they don't even get a choice to go beyond +15% for food. And they cannot boost Plantations at all.

Then look at Dutch. They can expand food signficantly, but beyond a certain point, they can't expand their gold generation at all. While mid-late game they are already playing catchup due to having to spend cards just to unlock their standard economy (which means less space for economic upgrades), the Plantation cards are useless to them, so they can only get one 15% Bank upgrade card, and very late in Imperial +2 Banks does not in any way shape or form equal to +50% gather rate for the rest of the civs.

Then look at Aztec. It may seem that they can have an incredible late game economic capacity, but in reality half their economic cards are dumped together in Colonial. And there are only 10 cards you can jam in there. Competition for deck space in that age is very tough. "Sustainable Agriculture" is almost certainly never going to see the light of day in a typical 1v1 deck. "Grain Marker" MAY see use, but isn't likely. You'll almost certainly only have "Chinampa" in there, because you need so much other stuff.

Then there's that temple support card, which I never see in any Aztec decks.

So you'll include the "Food Silos" in Discovery, and "Great Chinampa" in Fortress. Which means you will realistically have a 25-35% lower gather rate for food, and a 10% lower gather rate for Plantations, than your technical maximum economic capacity might indicate.

And this is because deck space is also a resource. And max economic capacity expanders (cards) compete with other options, military units, upgrade cards, etc.


"One wants to be loved, failing that admired, failing that feared, failing that hated and despised. One wants to instill in other people some form of emotion. The soul shudders before emptiness and wants contact, no matter the cost."

[This message has been edited by Ender_Ward (edited 04-25-2007 @ 10:04 AM).]

justiw
Skirmisher
posted 04-25-07 10:03 AM EDT (US)     18 / 117       
I really like this analysis. I think it accurately depicts civs strengths and weaknesses. Furthermore, it has a potential to add a numerical analysis to produce a civ ranking.

Here are my thoughts:
Ratings:
weak/slow = 0
average/moderate = 1
strong/fast = 2
very strong/very fast = 3
extremely strong/extremely fast = 4

Factors:
Late game advantages have a factor of 1
Early game advantages have a factor of 1.5 (including FF)
(this is assuming early game is more important than late game which I think most supremacy players would agree with)

Calculate civ power as the sum of Rating*Factor

Results:
Iroquois34.5
Dutch25.5
Spanish25
Aztec24.5
French21
Ottomans19
Sioux16
Russians15
Portuguese14.5
British14
Germans9

I'd say that's a pretty good picture of civ balance. You have the stronger civs (Dutch, Spanish, Aztec, French, and Ottomans), the weaker civs (Sioux, Russians, Portuguese, and British), and the unbalanced civs (OP Iroquois, and UP Germans). I'd even say that the order of the civs is pretty good too. I wonder how this compares to win % (garlef???).

Furthermore, we can predict the results of balance changes. If Iroquois GH was mildly nerfed it would reduce their turtle, boom (indirectly), and FF (indirectly) from extreme to very strong. The resulting power score would be 30.5. A big nerf to GH and/or travois would take these 3 ratings from extreme to strong and the resulting power score would be 26.5 (balanced with the strong civs).


Counter the attack, then Counter Attack!!!
justiw
Skirmisher
posted 04-25-07 10:09 AM EDT (US)     19 / 117       
Also a few notes to Ender.

1. You might consider adding a category for raiding.

2. Remember the aztecs have a 120 villager economy that costs 110 pop (10 WP = 20 vils dancing = 10 pop). You can argue that they aren't quite as good as normal eco VS but they do exist and they do boost your economy.


Counter the attack, then Counter Attack!!!
Voltiguer
Skirmisher
posted 04-25-07 11:00 AM EDT (US)     20 / 117       
Raiding is kinda hard to include. Why? Because there are different kinds of: Early game raiding (Sioux, Uhlans mainly), mid game (mainly ERKs and opris and also ARs w cards+siege dance) and lategame (ERKs, opris, cuirs etc).

Anyway, the balance picture doesnt really fit. Iros<<Spain, and Dutch can beat Iros pretty nicely.

Destiny_Devil
Skirmisher
posted 04-25-07 11:25 AM EDT (US)     21 / 117       
Results:
Iroquois34.5
Dutch25.5
Spanish25
Aztec24.5
French21
Ottomans19
Sioux16
Russians15
Portuguese14.5
British14
Germans9

I completley disagree with aztecs place in this ladder, there is no way in hell aztecs>france and no-one with any sense would argue otherwise, Aztec>sioux + ottoman (although sioux have trouble with aztecs this in in overall) is already quite absurd. Aztecs are definitley one of the lowest rated civs if not the lowest because they cannot deal with light infantry (classic sense) except for a few exceptions of sioux russia mirrors (mirrors being irrelevant for obvious reasons) and against stupid players who do not carry every upgrade for their erk counters in a deck they will use for aztecs do aztecs become able to beat light infantry (classic sense) effectivley.

p.s. Ender I do not care how much you argue with me about erks you will lose the argument so don't bother.

[This message has been edited by Destiny_Devil (edited 04-25-2007 @ 11:26 AM).]

justiw
Skirmisher
posted 04-25-07 11:36 AM EDT (US)     22 / 117       
Destiny_Devil, I agree with you about the aztecs. I'm not claiming this is perfect. Also, there is still some debate about the ratings Ender gave the aztecs. A few reasonable changes in their ratings would move them down to where you think.


Anyway, the balance picture doesnt really fit. Iros<<Spain, and Dutch can beat Iros pretty nicely.

Civ matchups are a different story. Just because spain and dutch can counter iro is not an indicator of their overall balance. I'm not sure that many people would agree with you to say that spain and dutch beat iro in the first place. Sure they can win, because they have some advantages (lancers and rods for spain, and massed cannons and possibly mercs for dutch). But do they win consistently? I don't think so, but you can prove me wrong.


Counter the attack, then Counter Attack!!!
Sporting_Lisbon
Skirmisher
posted 04-25-07 11:53 AM EDT (US)     23 / 117       
Isn't Sioux a little better than Aztecs?
Ender_Ward
Skirmisher
posted 04-25-07 12:12 PM EDT (US)     24 / 117       
Justiw isn't measuring civ strength (it's not a "ladder", Destiny_Devil). He's quantifying civ capabilities.

Just because Aztec can do more things better, on average, than Sioux, doesn't necessarily make them a stronger civ. The Sioux military strength, for example, can completely overshadow the early Aztec "moderate" strengths.

At the same time, while technically the Sioux, Spanish and Ottoman ratings take a penalty for having a weak turtle, in practice it doesn't much matter, as these civs rarely fight on the defensive. A strong turtle is not that important to aggressor civs.

But to a civ like Dutch, or Iroquois, a strong turtle is extremely important, since they are the civs that often find themselves on the defensive.

Not all civ "capabilities" are worth the same in practice. Which is actually why it's hard to quantify them. Why I stuck with generalities.
Yet it isn't that hard to take as an indicator of imbalance, when a civ is strong in every single area. Or what's more important, strong in the more valuable capabilities.

P.S.
Destiny_Devil,
I've yet to lose the Eagle Knight argument. That is why I won't bother. Especially when I would, again, be arguing with a low 1600s, sub 20 PR player. It would be like me having the hubris to tell Ourk or NaturePhoenix what works in the game and what doesn't ...


"One wants to be loved, failing that admired, failing that feared, failing that hated and despised. One wants to instill in other people some form of emotion. The soul shudders before emptiness and wants contact, no matter the cost."
justiw
Skirmisher
posted 04-25-07 12:32 PM EDT (US)     25 / 117       
Ok, I think the calculation kindof double counted the boom ability. I think the civs ability to boom is completely captured by the early and mid game economic growth ratings. Rush might be double counted too since we have early military strength in there, but I'm reluctant to remove it.

So, when I removed the boom rating, and I went through and made up my own ratings this is what I get.

~~~British~~~
Economic early growth speed potential: very fast
Economic mid game growth speed potential: moderate
Rush: weak
Turtle: average
Fast Fortress: average
Military strength early game: average
Military strength mid game: strong
Max economic capacity: very strong


~~~Spanish~~~
Economic early growth speed potential: fast
Economic mid game growth speed potential: moderate
Rush: strong
Turtle: weak
Fast Fortress: extremely strong
Military strength early game: extremely strong
Military strength mid game: strong
Max economic capacity: very strong


~~~Germans~~~
Economic early growth speed potential: moderate
Economic mid game growth speed potential: moderate
Rush: weak
Turtle: average
Fast Fortress: strong
Military strength early game: weak
Military strength mid game: very strong
Max economic capacity: very strong


~~~Ottomans~~~
Economic early growth speed potential: very fast
Economic mid game growth speed potential: weak
Rush: very strong
Turtle: weak
Fast Fortress: strong
Military strength early game: strong
Military strength mid game: very strong
Max economic capacity: strong


~~~Sioux~~~
Economic early growth speed potential: fast
Economic mid game growth speed potential: fast
Rush: strong
Turtle: weak
Fast Fortress: strong
Military strength early game: very strong
Military strength mid game: very strong
Max economic capacity: weak


~~~Russians~~~
Economic early growth speed potential: moderate
Economic mid game growth speed potential: very strong
Rush: moderate
Turtle: strong
Fast Fortress: weak
Military strength early game: average
Military strength mid game: strong
Max economic capacity: very strong


~~~French~~~
Economic early growth speed potential: fast
Economic mid game growth speed potential: fast
Rush: moderate
Turtle: moderate
Fast Fortress: strong
Military strength early game: average
Military strength mid game: extreme
Max economic capacity: very strong


~~~Dutch~~~
Economic early growth speed potential: extremely fast
Economic mid game growth speed potential: moderate
Rush: moderate
Turtle: very strong
Fast Fortress: strong
Military strength early game: strong
Military strength mid game: very strong
Max economic capacity: weak


~~~Aztec~~~
Economic early growth speed potential: fast
Economic mid game growth speed potential: extremely fast
Rush: moderate
Turtle: moderate
Fast Fortress: moderate
Military strength early game: average
Military strength mid game: very strong
Max economic capacity: very strong


~~~Portuguese~~~
Economic early growth speed potential: average
Economic mid game growth speed potential: very fast
Rush: weak
Turtle: strong
Fast Fortress: strong
Military strength early game: weak
Military strength mid game: strong
Max economic capacity: very strong


~~~Iroquois~~~
Economic early growth speed potential: moderate
Economic mid game growth speed potential: extremely strong
Rush: strong
Turtle: extremely strong
Fast Fortress: extremely strong
Military strength early game: average
Military strength mid game: extreme
Max economic capacity: very strong


This results in:
Iroquois29
Spanish24
Dutch22
Ottomans20
French19.5
Aztec19
Sioux18.5
British16
Russians15.5
Portuguese15.5
Germans13

I think this looks better. Germans could use a slight boost, because they are clearly weaker than the rest. Looking at the big jumps in numbers, there's a clear difference between the bottom 4 and the middle 4 which I think reflects reality. The top 3 are distancing themselves a bit too, which I also think reflects reality. Dutch is better than the bottom 8, while spain is better than dutch, and iro is clearly better than everyone.


Counter the attack, then Counter Attack!!!
« Previous Page  1 2 3 ··· 5  Next Page »
You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Hop to:    

Age of Empires III Heaven | HeavenGames