Balance testing release r4297

[The Dark Lord]

That's not the way a balance discussion works. Everyone is more than welcome to present his or her opinion, but you must be willing to provide arguments as well.

So all in all you say that the boosted units are now too powerful. Then why do you think so? I understand why Matt is asking for tests or replays: how can you say something is imbalanced when it is not made visible?
If you want to convince Lewin and Krom (or anyone else) you will need to come up with 'evidence' that supports your theory, otherwise there is no reason to assume that your theory is correct.

[-George Stain-]

That's not the way a balance discussion works. Everyone is more than welcome to present his or her opinion, but you must be willing to provide arguments as well.

So all in all you say that the boosted units are now too powerful. Then why do you think so? I understand why Matt is asking for tests or replays: how can you say something is imbalanced when it is not made visible?
If you want to convince Lewin and Krom (or anyone else) you will need to come up with 'evidence' that supports your theory, otherwise there is no reason to assume that your theory is correct.

ok I understand. I am just telling my opinions.. I consider it as my duty my evidencs are maybe vissible only for me.. becouse of my bad english.. so it's no problem.. it isn't that much important for me.. I just tried give another angle of wiev.. bu how I said, I have already nothing to say.

[Lewin]

I don't see a problem in boosting units without making them less powerful in another aspect. I don't think the original game was well balanced for online play, so in order to make it balanced we need to make changes. For example we made wine much more useful by making it restore 30% condition instead of 20% and making it require less fields. There was no disadvantage given to wine when we did this, it was just a boost. Everyone seems to like that change, and I think they'll like the shields bonus too.

I don't think the original bonus for axefighters (stronger attack than lancers) was enough to justify their extra cost (shields) so I think another bonus (defense against arrows) is needed.

I also don't think you can properly judge balance changes simply by saying "logically that sounds like too much of a bonus", you really need to play a lot of games and do tests to see how it effects balance. Just thinking about it can give you an idea of what effect it will have on balance (e.g. shields bonus will make axefighters be used more often), but it can't really tell you whether it will be too powerful or not.

Regarding your test of lancers+xbows vs axefighters+xbows, the axefighters should always win that fight because they cost more (shields) and they are generally more powerful than axefighters. Remember rock paper scissors?:
Axefighters beat lancers
Lancers beat scouts
Scouts beat axefighters
Last time I tested it these results still worked with the shields bonus, e.g. 20 lancers+20 xbows beats 20 scouts+20xbows.

And yes as TDL says, Krom and I will be more convinced by good evidence than just "heresay".
Cheers,
Lewin.

[-George Stain-]

ok Lewin, I understand. For me is funny, that in old relase I saw more axefighters than in new relase candidat lancers. isn't it strange? And btw don't think that I haven't enought experience. this candidate is mabye better than old relase, but I think it may be even more better.

I am sorry to all, if I am too officious

only time will show it.

[EDMatt]

ok Lewin, I understand. For me is funny, that in old relase I saw more axefighters than in new relase candidat lancers. isn't it strange? And btw don't think that I haven't enought experience. this candidate is mabye better than old relase, but I think it may be even more better.

I am sorry to all, if I am too officious

only time will show it.

Bullcorn :S
Axe fighters more popular on previous than this release? Not at all!

[-George Stain-]

ok Lewin, I understand. For me is funny, that in old relase I saw more axefighters than in new relase candidat lancers. isn't it strange? And btw don't think that I haven't enought experience. this candidate is mabye better than old relase, but I think it may be even more better.

I am sorry to all, if I am too officious

only time will show it.

Bullcorn :S
Axe fighters more popular on previous than this release? Not at all!

no omg.. I said axefightes were more popular on old relase, than lancers are on relase candidate.. (maybe it's wrong in eglish.. but try to understand it) axefighters are ofc more usefull now..

[dicsoupcan]

ok Lewin, I understand. For me is funny, that in old relase I saw more axefighters than in new relase candidat lancers. isn't it strange? And btw don't think that I haven't enought experience. this candidate is mabye better than old relase, but I think it may be even more better.

I am sorry to all, if I am too officious

only time will show it.

Bullcorn :S
Axe fighters more popular on previous than this release? Not at all!

no omg.. I said axefightes were more popular on old relase, than lancers are on relase candidate.. (maybe it's wrong in eglish.. but try to understand it) axefighters are ofc more usefull now..

do you mean axefighters are more popular on the testing release then on the official release where lansers are very popular?

[sado1]

No, he means "there's more axe fighters in old, than lancers in new". Meaning: the less used unit in a release, is now even less popular. Not sure if you get it, it's a bit complicated.

[-George Stain-]

No, he means "there's more axe fighters in old, than lancers in new". Meaning: the less used unit in a release, is now even less popular. Not sure if you get it, it's a bit complicated.

yeah sado, that is what I mean

[Lewin]

I can't remember ever seeing axefighters in the old release (I think once a guy tried it as an experiment and it didn't work well for him), and I've seen quite a few lancers in this release. I think lancers will always be used a bit because they are cheap but still powerful (e.g. they're good against militia or if you don't have enough wood for the shields). And obviously if your enemy is using lots of mounted units you'll definitely want some lancers/pikemen (hopefully mounted units will be used a bit more often with the fixes to shared cornfields).

Could other people comment on George Stain's comment about axefighters now being overused and lancers now being underused? I'm interested to hear other opinions.

[Weekend]

i like this release because this spam of lancers stopped now and axefighters are balance ( costs and power )

but i have to say i prefer milizia before lancers because in a battle mit bow or xbow it seems that lancers are dieing as fast as milizia and they have not more power than milizia but they are cost a leather armor and in that time you spend on leather buildings you can build some milizia more

In my opinion lancers are useless in this relase ( only aggainst knights and scouts)

[Nissarin]

My army composition in the current (stable) version consist of axefighters (and militia in the beginning) and xbows, supplemented by some lance/pikes as "rear guard" and some scouts (typically in the mid game). That being said the only reason to use axefighters is because I want to, they are not that good in the current meta (xbows FTW), since they cost more I'm typically outnumbered by lance carriers but they are good enough for militia (but in the end it's the xbows who do the "kills"). There is also problem with towers, someone with lots of lances/militia can just walk in and don't care about losing units but players opting to make more expensive units (sowrd/axefighters) will think twice before charging at the enemy. Lately I did some experiments as kind of preparation for the next version - swordfighters + bowman - well, that was a disaster (both times ).

Anyway you don't see many axefighters in most of the games (at "average" level of gameplay), less experienced players go for militia, more experienced ones for lances (both supplemented by some pikes). In the mid/late game players with good eco tend to make axefighters instead of militia but in the end it's all about numbers - you need some unit to protect your real army (xbows) and lances are cheap.

In my opinion melee units should be the core of the army (i.e. deciding factor in the battle), which means that you should see many sword/axefighters, lances and pikes are meant to counter cavalry, period. Right now players spam xbows and lances because they can make cheap units with half-assed base and it will work, while someone with better base building and more expensive/stronger units should have the advantage.

[-George Stain-]

I can't remember ever seeing axefighters in the old release (I think once a guy tried it as an experiment and it didn't work well for him), and I've seen quite a few lancers in this release. I think lancers will always be used a bit because they are cheap but still powerful (e.g. they're good against militia or if you don't have enough wood for the shields). And obviously if your enemy is using lots of mounted units you'll definitely want some lancers/pikemen (hopefully mounted units will be used a bit more often with the fixes to shared cornfields).

Could other people comment on George Stain's comment about axefighters now being overused and lancers now being underused? I'm interested to hear other opinions.

I saw many axefighters when started talking about future shield units change.. that was just reaction of pro players, they shifted on highest skill level.. I hope you are right with those horses..

[Mulberry]

I can't remember ever seeing axefighters in the old release (I think once a guy tried it as an experiment and it didn't work well for him), and I've seen quite a few lancers in this release. I think lancers will always be used a bit because they are cheap but still powerful (e.g. they're good against militia or if you don't have enough wood for the shields). And obviously if your enemy is using lots of mounted units you'll definitely want some lancers/pikemen (hopefully mounted units will be used a bit more often with the fixes to shared cornfields).

Could other people comment on George Stain's comment about axefighters now being overused and lancers now being underused? I'm interested to hear other opinions.

Strange to hear that, Lewin. I am using axefighters since r3252. But it didnt worth it.

George is right in 2 things:
1) Lancers is the most rare unit now (havent seen someone used them efficiently). I think lancers will be used if we would have chance to build more cavalry.
2) You can not afford decent horse production in 60 min pt if you have leather. You can afford it only if you go militia-iron spamm.

I will work on the list of all combo's and strategies used now so you can see how it goes. But i need some time to do it. I'll post it as soon as i have time.

Nissarin, how many games have you played in balance test? Havent seen you yet
I was just wondering, no offence.

[Nissarin]

Because I didn't played any games in RC, Lewin asked about "old" release and my post is about it.