Problems registering at AoCZone?
You can try resending activation email. If that doesnt work you can send an email here. If you forgot your password click here.

Wololo Kingdoms Balance Dicussion

Take part in AoFE discussions, share strategies and gaming experience
Advertisement from Google 
 

Re: Wololo Kingdoms Balance Dicussion

Postby  Rorarimbo » Mon Oct 16, 2017 1:11 pm

  16 Oct 2017, 10:54 GMT » eliz82 wrote:
  09 Oct 2017, 20:26 GMT » Cysion wrote:
We've had Viking galley wars dominating the meta for 17 years, seeing the Italians on top now for a few months won't be the end of the world. ... it's important to make the right decisions, to make sure we're not just blindly passing on the water crown to another civ.

You are right, no mater how you will balance the game you will end up with some civs dominating into some areas.

Old aoc had some part of historical accuracy into it. Vikings really dominated water for some time because they had used longboats to navigate both oceans and the interiors rivers (european navy didn't had this type of ship); Sarazin won battles vs armored european knights; Mongols had largest land empire in history; Mayans where very good lightweight barefoot runners, huns had a very mobile army they often used fire to burn everything (so very strong vs buildings), turks used gunpowder and build massive canon guns, goths appeared (out of nothing, spamming military units) and finishing the Roman empire domination in the world, etc

But making:
-italians strongest on water ... i din't remember this civ ever dominating water
-berbers replacing mongols at the most efficient land unit ... never heard by berber empire, or malean empire, or etiopian empire. why are you making strongest in the game civs that nobody heard?
-paladins not being used anymore in tournament games (i don't think you intended this ... but this is the result). short range armoured horse cavalry was used in almost all major battles from roman empire up to first world war. probably most important military unit in history.

So I must say I find awkward some power balance changes to this game.


Venice, Genua ( Italians) were dominant Naval forces of the mediteranen competing with Spain and The Ottomans despite being only "City States "they were Naval Empires with the other Italian States having decently sized and strong fleets themselves. Most Notably this is seen in the Battle of Lepanto ( Part of the Battles of the Conquerors campaign) where the coalition of Italian States and Spain crush The Ottoman fleet and end its dominance in the Medditeranean.Despite Venice and Spain being the big partners in the coalition it is mainly Italian with the Spanish having only 80 of the more than 300 ships "The Holy League" had.

It may not be very historicly correct but the Berbers are the West part of the Arab Khaliphate that dominted North africa and SouthWest Eurpe (Iberia and South France) in the Middle Ages. While The Khaliphate originated in The East the Berber Tribes of North Africa adopted Islam fast and assimilated easily with the Arabs. In Medieval Europe It rarely made difference and they were reffered as Arabs or Saracens alltogether but for AOE we differanciate th Berbers originating in North Africa having some differences with the Saracens the Crusaders fought in the East. But It is the same Empire that rose with Islam and was further devided into kingdoms.

With the exception of the American civs and Indians all civs in the game have heavy cavalry. I dont understand You here may be you want it to be stronger well its matter of balance.

As for The Malians and the others its maybe not bad idea to have a read and educate yourself. I personaly have investigated the origins of all those new civs we have in the game.

Basicly no need to mix up game balance with historic acuracy. AOE civs always were historically inspirations nothing more nothing less. If you start bother yourself wtith comparing them inm historical acuracy its a sea of problems You will see. Most could not meet. Some even did not excist in the same time period. And Still Italians were a great naval force while berbers hand exceptionally stronmg cavalty indeed. Unfortunatelly they never faced the Mongols the Huns and Italian City States never meet the Viking naval dominance from few centuries earlier.
 Rorarimbo
 
Posts: 310
Joined: Jan 10, 2016
Location: Bulgaria
Age: 35
 

Re: Wololo Kingdoms Balance Dicussion

Postby  Redeagl » Mon Oct 16, 2017 3:40 pm

  16 Oct 2017, 09:18 GMT » Framack4 wrote:
  16 Oct 2017, 09:00 GMT » Redeagl wrote:
  02 Oct 2017, 17:27 GMT » dogao wrote:
No offense but opening a topic where everyone can talk about balance is just useless.
Make a group of experts/people who have a lot of knowledge and make a sub-forum for it that will be much more useful.

You already have reddit with 10 topics per day with this same subject. :P

Your addition to the discussion is really useful, Mr elitist.


go back to reddit noob

Oh god, someone thinks that they are inherently better because of their ability to play a videogame. It is always funny when that happens. Dude, grow up. Don't make yourself a laughingstock. Also, please learn punctuation.
 Redeagl
 
Posts: 32
Joined: May 22, 2017
 

Re: Wololo Kingdoms Balance Dicussion

Postby  SouFire » Mon Oct 16, 2017 6:46 pm

Basicly no need to mix up game balance with historic acuracy. AOE civs always were historically inspirations nothing more nothing less. If you start bother yourself wtith comparing them inm historical acuracy its a sea of problems You will see. Most could not meet. Some even did not excist in the same time period. And Still Italians were a great naval force while berbers hand exceptionally stronmg cavalty indeed. Unfortunatelly they never faced the Mongols the Huns and Italian City States never meet the Viking naval dominance from few centuries earlier.


:? Ensemble studios did an amazing job balancing civs according to history, magudais were OP in real life, when aoc came out that amazing job started to tearing apart, FE at first was careful with the balance at the start, but with Ak and RoR nothing makes senses all those new civs were never that strong or got all the technologies and units that they are getting, this is a RTS game based on historical facts.

I can't imagine a second war based game with mexicans having nuclear warheads just because they are selling mexican as a DLC lol, thats is what happened to the new civs.

So there is no logical reason to give those civs such strong units and tech tree other than selling, for example Indians and Persian should get battle elephants added to their UU's :| but they are not getting them because that would be bad for sales.
User avatar
 SouFire
 
Posts: 2504
Joined: Mar 11, 2011
 1873 (52%)
 

Re: Wololo Kingdoms Balance Dicussion

Postby  Cysion » Mon Oct 16, 2017 8:18 pm

To be fair, if balance was historically accurate, the Aztecs would die from a Spanish landing after researching "Smallpox". :P Units are never OP or UP based on their historical background, it's just how the meta shakes out. Certainly, civs are designed with historicity in mind (e.g. Vikings, Spanish, Portuguese and Italians on water), but that's where it ends. It's not like Eagle Warriors were incredibly strong infantry units compared to their western counterparts, or that Plumed Archers even existed :D


TL;DR: Design is always approached from a historical angle, balance is always approached from a gameplay POV.
Image
Cysion Tripping: cysion.be/blog | Aocbox: cysion.be/aocbox

Life is short. Kiss slowly, laugh insanely, love truly and forgive quickly. Happiness is the travel, not a destination.
User avatar
 Cysion
AoFE developer
 
Posts: 2524
Joined: Apr 30, 2010
Location: Belgium
Age: 30
 

Re: Wololo Kingdoms Balance Dicussion

Postby  IvIaximus » Fri Dec 01, 2017 6:58 pm

Huh.. I just spected a TG and it seems Elite Mameluks recieve NO attack bonus against Imperial Camels.
Emin:
Not going to write one page down to explain how nonsense evolution is. lol
---
[19:10]<BielySokol>What happen?
[19:15]<+[ByT]Poxo> sorry, **** up start and cat starting throwing up in the table
---
[17:01] +[_SY_]Fengxin_ says:
wp maya
 IvIaximus
 
Posts: 3285
Joined: May 16, 2010
Age: 27
 2000 (55%)
 
Advertisement from Google 
 

Re: Wololo Kingdoms Balance Dicussion

Postby  DraXieN » Fri Dec 01, 2017 8:20 pm

  01 Dec 2017, 17:58 GMT » IvIaximus wrote:
Huh.. I just spected a TG and it seems Elite Mameluks recieve NO attack bonus against Imperial Camels.


You're 15 years late to find out that Mamelukes have no attack bonus vs camels :roll:
TheKkeif » Fri Jan 05, 2018 6:07 pm

I'll come on Thursday, what time in Moscow?
 DraXieN
 
Posts: 1004
Joined: Jan 05, 2016
 

Re: Wololo Kingdoms Balance Dicussion

Postby  IvIaximus » Fri Dec 01, 2017 9:39 pm

Sheeeeeit
Emin:
Not going to write one page down to explain how nonsense evolution is. lol
---
[19:10]<BielySokol>What happen?
[19:15]<+[ByT]Poxo> sorry, **** up start and cat starting throwing up in the table
---
[17:01] +[_SY_]Fengxin_ says:
wp maya
 IvIaximus
 
Posts: 3285
Joined: May 16, 2010
Age: 27
 2000 (55%)
 
 
Previous

Return to General AoFE Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

Legend: Global moderators, News posters, Tournament moderators

cron