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.445 replies
Age of Empires III Heaven » Forums » General Discussions » 1.03 Patch Notes
Bottom
Topic Subject:1.03 Patch Notes
« Previous Page  1 ··· 10 ··· 15 16 17 18  Next Page »
L_Clan_Socrates
VIP
posted 02-27-07 04:17 PM EDT (US)         
https://forum.agecommunity.com/ibb/posts.aspx?postID=439375

gl, hf etc. etc.


[img]http://www.aoe3-arena.com/sign2/WaCkO,3,0.png[/img]
AuthorReplies:
Brtnboarder495
Skirmisher
posted 03-09-07 08:15 AM EDT (US)     401 / 445       
First off, he never said anything about slower vils, he said he hated aging with 14 vils. I said that you can age with a 16 villager effective economy.

Now wood trickle doesn't get upgraded, your right, but even 2 vils with the first wood upgrade are just barely more effective than that card because your "villagers" are never idle, can't ever be raided, don't bump into eachother, don't move from tree to tree, ect.

You can also send Economic theory which boosts your current vils by giving them 10% economic bonuses, for every resource, giving you a 15.4 villager effective age up. It's worse than the trickle card early on, but it can be upgraded upon and becomes more and more effective as you produce more villagers.

Russia STILL gets vils faster than other civs, I believe the rate is just 40% now (or 45%, can't recall perfectly) instead of 50%.

Giving them back the vanilla training time would make them waay OP (19 villager effective age up? Are you crazy?).

If anything, giving them the strelet training time of vanilla, a more viable age2 and possibly even age3 cav counter. I wouldn't mind giving them a villager price of 260 either, just keep the training time.


Gameranger: _NiGhThAwK_

[This message has been edited by Brtnboarder495 (edited 03-09-2007 @ 08:17 AM).]

Ender_Ward
Skirmisher
posted 03-09-07 09:14 AM EDT (US)     402 / 445       
Actually most people tend to forget that the wood trickle is equivalent to 2.5 villagers on wood, which makes it a 16.5 villager age up at 4:40. Out of all the trickle cards, it gives you the highest number of virtual, unraidable villagers.

A 16.5 villager age up at 4:40 with 400 wood is better than a Sioux 5:00 age up with 15 villagers and 400 wood, for example.


"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 03-09-2007 @ 09:15 AM).]

TheRomans
Skirmisher
posted 03-09-07 06:24 PM EDT (US)     403 / 445       
I just want to get some Russian facts straight.

Train Times
Strelet
Vanilla:22.5
TWC:32

Musket
Vanilla:22.5
TWC:27

Settler
Vanilla:50
TWC:55

A 5 second nerf to strelets would have been ok, but 9.5 seconds is way too much for a civ that was only borderline OP.


+----------+
| PLEASE |
| DO NOT |
| FEED THE |
| TROLLS |
+----------+
James Lock
Skirmisher
posted 03-09-07 07:04 PM EDT (US)     404 / 445       
How much time does 3 normal villagers take to train?

Thanks to all those that signed the petition to get me unbanned here.
And special thanks to smashnbash for making it.
Brtnboarder495
Skirmisher
posted 03-09-07 07:31 PM EDT (US)     405 / 445       
Ender, isn't the wood trickle card 1w/s, not 1.25w/s? I don't play Russia or that card often, so I'm probably wrong. Either way, just more power to Russia.

Gameranger: _NiGhThAwK_
Arvedui
Messiah of Fail
(id: ashwin13)
posted 03-09-07 07:44 PM EDT (US)     406 / 445       
I've never understood balance discussions... What's the point?

"Arvy is randomly full of win." - Skarr
|
"I don't watch cartoons, those are for third class people." - Arvy
"Yeah, children, those third class people." - Sails
And because I bet Blatant he wouldn't be orange in two days and lost... HEIL BLATANT!
StonewallJ
Seraph Emeritus
(id: Conquistador34)
posted 03-09-07 07:46 PM EDT (US)     407 / 445       
@Brtn, it's 1.25 w/s:

http://www.hanson-family.ws/aoe3/twc/Russians_cardlist.html


[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
[][][][][][][][][][] Stonewall J [][][][][][][][][][][]
[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
Garlef
Skirmisher
posted 03-09-07 08:18 PM EDT (US)     408 / 445       

Quoted from James Lock:

How much time does 3 normal villagers take to train?

'Normal vills' (non-CdB) take 25 secs each.
So Russia gets 3 in 55 Secs
Other players get 3 in 75 Secs.

Ender - Won't the Sioux have more than 15 vills, if they send 3 Vill card?
They start with 5, ship 3, build x

[This message has been edited by Garlef (edited 03-09-2007 @ 08:26 PM).]

blakeyboi14
Skirmisher
posted 03-09-07 09:45 PM EDT (US)     409 / 445       
BRITS WILL REIGN SUPREME! (not)

-blake


Supporter of Gay Marriage.
George_uk
Skirmisher
posted 03-10-07 07:17 AM EDT (US)     410 / 445       

Quote:

Ender - Won't the Sioux have more than 15 vills, if they send 3 Vill card?
They start with 5, ship 3, build x

No. They start with 5, ship 3 and build 7. Then age up with 400w to get to age2 around 4:50.

3:50 with the messenger.


Previously known as MoNo Ager

[This message has been edited by George_uk (edited 03-10-2007 @ 07:20 AM).]

James Lock
Skirmisher
posted 03-10-07 07:29 AM EDT (US)     411 / 445       

Quoted from Garlef:

'Normal vills' (non-CdB) take 25 secs each.
So Russia gets 3 in 55 Secs
Other players get 3 in 75 Secs.

That's still a clear advantage in training time. So A Russian could even outboom a portugese player if he FFs with him. Afterall Russia isn't going to have an easy time taking down his TC with stretlets.

I used to use Medicine with Russia, which was giving me settlers at an amazing rate. So would Medicine bring settlers now below the rate in aoe3 or still slightly slower?


Thanks to all those that signed the petition to get me unbanned here.
And special thanks to smashnbash for making it.
Walker_5
Skirmisher
posted 03-10-07 07:53 AM EDT (US)     412 / 445       
@James Lock

The Medicine card is bugged, it doesn't do much for Russia.

How would you outboom with Ports?
They have 1200 wood free until age 3 (two TC's), and start with one villager more.

Already at 5:30 they will have "batch" training villagers at 50% the time a normal civ and at 7:30 they can have "batch" training villagers at 33% the normal time villagers train from one TC.
Ship Medicine with ports and ITS fast.

Until Russia has two more TC's up don't you think the port player should have a fair advantage in villager count?

I have seen players stating that its not a huge advantage for Portugal having three TC's in Age 3 since its hard to keep up with house production AND food for all villagers.

That is the same for Russia, if not worse, since if you have 250 food you cant commence traning a batch.
And if you are at 8 villagers you need another house to commence training.

James Lock
Skirmisher
posted 03-10-07 08:05 AM EDT (US)     413 / 445       
I think you may have messed up your wording there. You seem to contradict yourself.

Quote:

How would you outboom with Ports?

saying Russia can outboom them

and then...

Quote:

Until Russia has two more TC's up don't you think the port player should have a fair advantage in villager count?

.

I think you mean to say that Portugal gets its tcs faster so it can get ahead. This may be true, but if Russia makes its TCs in age 3 as soon as he gets there from FFing, he should still reach 99 before the port (I'm guessing based on these training times). Especially if oprichniks are included in the equation :P


Thanks to all those that signed the petition to get me unbanned here.
And special thanks to smashnbash for making it.
GreatViet
Skirmisher
posted 03-10-07 10:36 AM EDT (US)     414 / 445       
the goons is on the other side of the equation... lolz
Jumbalaya
Skirmisher
posted 03-10-07 11:27 AM EDT (US)     415 / 445       
But the Russian player decides where his oprichnicks can go, the Portugal has no choice where he sends his dragoons, so you are in complete control!

lol im jumby
Sundalo50
Skirmisher
posted 03-10-07 11:49 AM EDT (US)     416 / 445       
I thik they call this "the race to the bottom"

we are trying to figure out which civ is suckier?

Big thing about ports: No vill shipments and no way to generate economy other then making vills/boats. Those so called extra TCs are what keeps portugal even in colonial. Its not till fortress with 3 Tcs that ports usually go ahead.


Big thing about russia is that instead of getting an early pay off from your vill, ie. I make 1 vill and that vill goes to work, you have to wait to get 3.

So civs that make 1 vill at a time get an earlier payoff.

[This message has been edited by Sundalo50 (edited 03-10-2007 @ 11:50 AM).]

DBGT44
AoMH Review Team
posted 03-10-07 12:47 PM EDT (US)     417 / 445       
Point taken Russia is slow. What about German uhlan bug pop?

Well I can't say much about Ottomans since they are so imprevisible with either a fast land map rush but a slow water general...


Reconcile not with the fear of the snake, but embrace it as your own...
exc4libulz1022
Skirmisher
posted 03-11-07 03:10 AM EDT (US)     418 / 445       
imo brits and russia need more of a boost than that to get competitive but well see.

might be interesting to see how germany does w/o the bug and with slightly better free uhlans...i dont think it was enough but cant be sure.


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

"I accidently drop kicked someone once"
~george_uk

Adam42
Skirmisher
posted 03-11-07 09:03 AM EDT (US)     419 / 445       
Russia is one of those civs that seem all good in theory with their 16.5 vill age up and strelets, but you really need to play them a bit to know just how slow and horrible they are now. They get out-ecoed early on by nearly all civs (otto, sioux, aztec, iro, france, spain, dutch) which forces them into a turtle... and russia really are a terrible turtling civ. They need so much food (=map control), they don't have a turtling bonus, their troops no longer train fast. Against native civs their 40% faster vills don't matter in a boom war because they have fertility which makes their boom much much better than russia's.

That's why they suck.. and that's why nobody plays them.

GreatViet
Skirmisher
posted 03-11-07 09:09 AM EDT (US)     420 / 445       
as someone mentioned.. just take 1 food crate of russia and give em a settler ( cost 90 food..), british should be fine now.. since wat troubled them most was fast halberdier .. and rod, i think port is pretty ok atm .
Walker_5
Skirmisher
posted 03-11-07 01:07 PM EDT (US)     421 / 445       
@James Lock:

Just to clarify, I don't think you will outboom ports using Russia.

1) They start with one villager more then Russia.
2) At 5:30 they can start producing villagers from two TC's, essentially the same as batch training two villagers at a time (50% faster then normal), only more flexible.
3) At 7:30 they can have three TC's spawing villagers in 33% of the time of one TC normal spawn rate.

Now, every civ can get three TC's, but the Port bonus is 1200 wood and the time it takes to collect that (and the time it takes to construct one TC).

Also, the medicine card works for ports.

Lets look at Russia:
1) Start with 5 villagers and age with 14 - age to colonial with 1 villager more then ports do usually, and the inflexibility of villager batch training means you have lost seconds towards the first age.
2) When they reach age3 they are behind in time (ports using fast age up dude is in age 3 at 6:30)
3) When Russia do reach age 3 Ports will have three TC's up spawning villagers and russia will still need 1200 wood.

Besides, WHEN Russia do have three TC's its hard to keep three TC's busy at all times, not to mention housing (strelets takes some too).

James Lock
Skirmisher
posted 03-11-07 03:47 PM EDT (US)     422 / 445       
In a normal game, where the Russian rushes the Portugese player, he's going to be ahead economically, keeping hte port off hunt. Once the cassadors arrive he should have cossacks to deal with them. So keeping pressure would be enough to stay ahead economically.

Thanks to all those that signed the petition to get me unbanned here.
And special thanks to smashnbash for making it.
YouHeDad
Skirmisher
posted 03-12-07 03:27 AM EDT (US)     423 / 445       
Question: Does this patch only affect the Warchiefs expansion? Are similar issues going to be addressed for those that choose not to play TWC? Are they even still patching AOE3, or is all ES's concentration on TWC. It seems that AOE3 and TWC are seperate games in WCG, so I'm assuming there needs to be balance fixes for both, as if they are indeed seperate games..

Can someone elaborate on the raw differences in this area?

Thanks.

[This message has been edited by YouHeDad (edited 03-12-2007 @ 03:28 AM).]

Walker_5
Skirmisher
posted 03-12-07 06:08 AM EDT (US)     424 / 445       
@James Lock:
If Russia is better then Ports or not, was not the discussion here, it was russia slow start because of the delayed spawn rate.
You used ports as an example of a civ that Russia could outboom, and I disagree.

I like playing Russia as well as Ports, and I feel that russia in TWC are as weak as ports.

My personal statistics with these two civs are 57.38% winning with russia and 57.69% with ports.
Not a big difference IMO.

I would like to see a bigger boost to both these civs, but I suppose we will just have to wait and see until after the patch how they will play.

L_Clan_Socrates
VIP
posted 03-12-07 09:50 AM EDT (US)     425 / 445       
With Russia you can FF, drop a fort and TC as soon as you reach 3rd, and constantly boom out of both TC's. (this is around an 8min. FF)

[img]http://www.aoe3-arena.com/sign2/WaCkO,3,0.png[/img]
« Previous Page  1 ··· 10 ··· 15 16 17 18  Next Page »
You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Hop to:    

Age of Empires III Heaven | HeavenGames