Inform yourself

Dave you need to inform yourself about the scen community first of all same thing can be said about competitives whining about start changes but lets not go there. there are so many things wrong with your statement first of all not all factions have units economy and land to go none start and work some factions excel with a certain kind of starts i will give you an example of this Aremenia in RoR7 is supposed to go GW since it offers cheap archers and allows for a better expansion another example is Genoa or Venice in LoR9 their main asset is their naval capabilities so NC whould be the way to go and buff their ships which are of higher quality then the regular ones so that they can use their main unit i can give you tons of examples such as this saying that none start fixes balance in scenarios is ignorant

Stop with your desires to start a flamewar every god damnit chance you guys get.

What logic is there in the fact to base strategy nerfs/boosts on freaking scenarios/maps. Almost every map/scenario has a different gamestyle, a different goal, different playingfield, different units, different fundins etc. How do you expect an admin, in fact, the whole game, to keep adapting around scenarios/maps when it comes down to strategy changes. I shouldn't have to remind you that the scenarios/maps are made by you guys, and therefore could be edited, by YOURSELVES. Instead you want the special treatment and want the strategy nerfs/boosts taking every goddamn map/scenario in mind.

I mean after talking to 2 days to you guys on forums and in game, I am bound to say that you guys do not even deserve such treatment based on the attitude you guys show. Its outrageous.

作者： Waffel, 30.01.2019 at 18:11

Stop with your desires to start a flamewar every god damnit chance you guys get.

What logic is there in the fact to base strategy nerfs/boosts on freaking scenarios/maps. Almost every map/scenario has a different gamestyle, a different goal, different playingfield, different units, different fundins etc. How do you expect an admin, in fact, the whole game, to keep adapting around scenarios/maps when it comes down to strategy changes. I shouldn't have to remind you that the scenarios/maps are made by you guys, and therefore could be edited, by YOURSELVES. Instead you want the special treatment and want the strategy nerfs/boosts taking every goddamn map/scenario in mind.

I mean after talking to 2 days to you guys on forums and in game, I am bound to say that you guys do not even deserve such treatment based on the attitude you guys show. Its outrageous.

Scenarios are the future the competitive scene is death new players do not want to play a same boring bland flavourless EU+ map that has a huge skillgap the map editor releases new maps that are balanced fun and creative unlike EU+ which is the same overplayed map that the competitive playerbase thinks is going to keep AW alive the competitive scene is dying as it should and i will say the scen community is the only growing part of aw that gets new players

作者： Brsjak, 30.01.2019 at 18:32

作者： Waffel, 30.01.2019 at 18:11

Stop with your desires to start a flamewar every god damnit chance you guys get.

What logic is there in the fact to base strategy nerfs/boosts on freaking scenarios/maps. Almost every map/scenario has a different gamestyle, a different goal, different playingfield, different units, different fundins etc. How do you expect an admin, in fact, the whole game, to keep adapting around scenarios/maps when it comes down to strategy changes. I shouldn't have to remind you that the scenarios/maps are made by you guys, and therefore could be edited, by YOURSELVES. Instead you want the special treatment and want the strategy nerfs/boosts taking every goddamn map/scenario in mind.

I mean after talking to 2 days to you guys on forums and in game, I am bound to say that you guys do not even deserve such treatment based on the attitude you guys show. Its outrageous.

Scenarios are the future the competitive scene is death new players do not want to play a same boring bland flavourless EU+ map that has a huge skillgap the map editor releases new maps that are balanced fun and creative unlike EU+ which is the same overplayed map that the competitive playerbase thinks is going to keep AW alive the competitive scene is dying as it should and i will say the scen community is the only growing part of aw that gets new players

this surtr guy a fucking idiot

引句:

引句:

Scenarios are the future the competitive scene is death new players do not want to play a same boring bland flavourless EU+ map that has a huge skillgap the map editor releases new maps that are balanced fun and creative unlike EU+ which is the same overplayed map that the competitive playerbase thinks is going to keep AW alive the competitive scene is dying as it should and i will say the scen community is the only growing part of aw that gets new players

Stfu scenario commnity is cancer and no skilled, your opinion doesnt matter too, only comp deserve to grown.
Heil comp community!

Scenarios can be changed in order to adapt. Strat changes are universal, and therefore need to have a baseline. That baseline is necessarily the World Map. That's the bottom line. That's the fact of the matter. That's the reality of the situation.

I've made some scenarios of my own - I know it is not a trivial thing to make such a change after all that time and effort - but the fact remains that scenarios cannot be the controlling factor for strat changes.

Make custom strategies for scenarios possible and problem is solved. What Surtr is saying, he is right in some way. Some countries are best played with certain strategy types. If u disagree, u either havent played them or have a too young of a mind to understand this. Just saying that no strats will balance out the game is not a wise suggestion. And attacking Surtr just because he is giving his toughts displays what kind of community this is. Come with contructive arguments instead of just attacking him.

I have only been active in the forum for the last few weeks, and i only see that many just keep on attacking others instead of convincing others through arguments.

And to Waffel i can only say to play the game atleast, before commenting on active players who play the game. You dont even play the game and have your comments always ready, let alone comments on scenariomaps. Before u feel offended. I can be wrong and u indeed play the game only to leave everygame instead of finishing them. But your game history suggests otherwise.

作者： ITSGG1122, 31.01.2019 at 02:45

Make custom strategies for scenarios possible and problem is solved.

Yup! Custom strategies would solve so many problems! Definitively a to-have thing.

引句:

Just saying that no strats will balance out the game is not a wise suggestion

I'm not sure about that. I get that the gameplay will be more boring and there will be fewer possibilities, but the countries should not be built to fit a specific strategy, to begin with. That would be limiting the diversity available in the map. A country should at least do fine with None vs None's.

It may be boring, but not a bad solution while we're getting the custom strategies, or is it?

Sorry to inform you Waffel, but EU+ isn't the only map out there. I do agree that strategy changes should be based on the world map, since it's the basic map. But molding strategies so they can fit one specific setting (3vs3 on Europe+ 10k) is senseless in my opinion.

Surtr maybe doesn't have enough writing skills to express his opinion nicely. But he is making a point, and you are just trying to ignore his ideas, with no basis for it.

Nerfing GW, DS or LB doesn't only impact scenarios, it impacts the world map aswell. For example, the lower-income settings such as SA, LA, Africa, Mid East or even Eurasia, have GW as one of the two basic strategies. Even on the EU+ 3k or 5k. "GW Ukr is too OP pls nerf", "DS Ukr is too OP pls nerf" or "LB Ukr too OP pls nerf" is not a reason to change the game for all players.

作者： Guest, 31.01.2019 at 06:41

strategy changes should be based on the world map, since it's the basic map; molding strategies so they can fit one specific setting (3vs3 on Europe+ 10k) is senseless

end of discussion

作者： Guest, 31.01.2019 at 06:41

Sorry to inform you Waffel, but EU+ isn't the only map out there. I do agree that strategy changes should be based on the world map, since it's the basic map. But molding strategies so they can fit one specific setting (3vs3 on Europe+ 10k) is senseless in my opinion.

Surtr maybe doesn't have enough writing skills to express his opinion nicely. But he is making a point, and you are just trying to ignore his ideas, with no basis for it.

Nerfing GW, DS or LB doesn't only impact scenarios, it impacts the world map aswell. For example, the lower-income settings such as SA, LA, Africa, Mid East or even Eurasia, have GW as one of the two basic strategies. Even on the EU+ 3k or 5k. "GW Ukr is too OP pls nerf", "DS Ukr is too OP pls nerf" or "LB Ukr too OP pls nerf" is not a reason to change the game for all players.

Like it or not every game carve their updates judging by the competitive gameplay.
And like it or not main competitive setting is still eu+.

You've become quite vocal lately.

A good example of this is that LB nerf has made LB unusable now in 95% of all scenario games.

作者： clovis1122, 31.01.2019 at 06:04

I'm not sure about that. I get that the gameplay will be more boring and there will be fewer possibilities, but the countries should not be built to fit a specific strategy, to begin with. That would be limiting the diversity available in the map. A country should at least do fine with None vs None's.

It may be boring, but not a bad solution while we're getting the custom strategies, or is it?

Custom Strategies would fix the issue entirely, assuming the mapmakers decide the recreate the old strategies like Imperialist, Lucky Bastard, Iron Fist, Naval Commander, Great Combinator and Guerilla Warfare etc and perhaps even expand upon them (improving the quality of scenario strategy diversity). However, until this is implemented, this is not a possiblity for scenarios since there is only one scenario balanced around no income, which is the 2nd Punic War.

Basicly, the more strategies are tampered with, the more maps lose balance and become unplayable. Which is highly undesirable for those who prefer playing scenarios.

Custom strategies won't solve a thing because all map makers are inactive and the scenario community is unable to create its own maps.

作者： Brsjak, 30.01.2019 at 18:32

Scenarios are the future the competitive scene is death new players do not want to play a same boring bland flavourless EU+ map that has a huge skillgap the map editor releases new maps that are balanced fun and creative unlike EU+ which is the same overplayed map that the competitive playerbase thinks is going to keep AW alive the competitive scene is dying as it should and i will say the scen community is the only growing part of aw that gets new players

"Competitive scene is death". The same can be said about scenarios. The scenario community is pretty much in a stagnant/ dead state as well, no map makers have motivation to make new content and as a result people just play the same thing over and over to the point where they get map burnout and can't play it again. People just assume scenarios are "the future", because a lot of people play them, but that is in fact not the case. The map makers are the heart of scenarios as much as you would like to disagree, they make and develop the content that keeps scenarios going. Yet none of them have the desire to do that, so what's the chance of there ever being a revolutionary map in the future like ww1 ever cropping up again?

作者： Mr Tyler, 30.01.2019 at 23:10

作者： Brsjak, 30.01.2019 at 18:32

作者： Waffel, 30.01.2019 at 18:11

Stop with your desires to start a flamewar every god damnit chance you guys get.

What logic is there in the fact to base strategy nerfs/boosts on freaking scenarios/maps. Almost every map/scenario has a different gamestyle, a different goal, different playingfield, different units, different fundins etc. How do you expect an admin, in fact, the whole game, to keep adapting around scenarios/maps when it comes down to strategy changes. I shouldn't have to remind you that the scenarios/maps are made by you guys, and therefore could be edited, by YOURSELVES. Instead you want the special treatment and want the strategy nerfs/boosts taking every goddamn map/scenario in mind.

I mean after talking to 2 days to you guys on forums and in game, I am bound to say that you guys do not even deserve such treatment based on the attitude you guys show. Its outrageous.

Scenarios are the future the competitive scene is death new players do not want to play a same boring bland flavourless EU+ map that has a huge skillgap the map editor releases new maps that are balanced fun and creative unlike EU+ which is the same overplayed map that the competitive playerbase thinks is going to keep AW alive the competitive scene is dying as it should and i will say the scen community is the only growing part of aw that gets new players

this surtr guy a fucking idiot

Prove me wrong

作者： Brsjak, 31.01.2019 at 13:37

作者： Mr Tyler, 30.01.2019 at 23:10

作者： Brsjak, 30.01.2019 at 18:32

作者： Waffel, 30.01.2019 at 18:11

Stop with your desires to start a flamewar every god damnit chance you guys get.

What logic is there in the fact to base strategy nerfs/boosts on freaking scenarios/maps. Almost every map/scenario has a different gamestyle, a different goal, different playingfield, different units, different fundins etc. How do you expect an admin, in fact, the whole game, to keep adapting around scenarios/maps when it comes down to strategy changes. I shouldn't have to remind you that the scenarios/maps are made by you guys, and therefore could be edited, by YOURSELVES. Instead you want the special treatment and want the strategy nerfs/boosts taking every goddamn map/scenario in mind.

I mean after talking to 2 days to you guys on forums and in game, I am bound to say that you guys do not even deserve such treatment based on the attitude you guys show. Its outrageous.

Scenarios are the future the competitive scene is death new players do not want to play a same boring bland flavourless EU+ map that has a huge skillgap the map editor releases new maps that are balanced fun and creative unlike EU+ which is the same overplayed map that the competitive playerbase thinks is going to keep AW alive the competitive scene is dying as it should and i will say the scen community is the only growing part of aw that gets new players

this surtr guy a fucking idiot

Prove me wrong

people like you need the ban hammer

作者： Sultan of Swing, 31.01.2019 at 07:16

作者： Guest, 31.01.2019 at 06:41

strategy changes should be based on the world map, since it's the basic map; molding strategies so they can fit one specific setting (3vs3 on Europe+ 10k) is senseless

end of discussion

but thats how strategies ARE balanced, everything is taken into consideration whys does njab think otherwise?

作者： Mr Tyler, 31.01.2019 at 14:45

作者： Brsjak, 31.01.2019 at 13:37

作者： Mr Tyler, 30.01.2019 at 23:10

作者： Brsjak, 30.01.2019 at 18:32

作者： Waffel, 30.01.2019 at 18:11

Stop with your desires to start a flamewar every god damnit chance you guys get.

What logic is there in the fact to base strategy nerfs/boosts on freaking scenarios/maps. Almost every map/scenario has a different gamestyle, a different goal, different playingfield, different units, different fundins etc. How do you expect an admin, in fact, the whole game, to keep adapting around scenarios/maps when it comes down to strategy changes. I shouldn't have to remind you that the scenarios/maps are made by you guys, and therefore could be edited, by YOURSELVES. Instead you want the special treatment and want the strategy nerfs/boosts taking every goddamn map/scenario in mind.

I mean after talking to 2 days to you guys on forums and in game, I am bound to say that you guys do not even deserve such treatment based on the attitude you guys show. Its outrageous.

Scenarios are the future the competitive scene is death new players do not want to play a same boring bland flavourless EU+ map that has a huge skillgap the map editor releases new maps that are balanced fun and creative unlike EU+ which is the same overplayed map that the competitive playerbase thinks is going to keep AW alive the competitive scene is dying as it should and i will say the scen community is the only growing part of aw that gets new players

this surtr guy a fucking idiot

Prove me wrong

people like you need the ban hammer

Yep you cant prove me wrong

作者： Brsjak, 31.01.2019 at 14:58

作者： Mr Tyler, 31.01.2019 at 14:45

作者： Brsjak, 31.01.2019 at 13:37

作者： Mr Tyler, 30.01.2019 at 23:10

作者： Brsjak, 30.01.2019 at 18:32

作者： Waffel, 30.01.2019 at 18:11

Stop with your desires to start a flamewar every god damnit chance you guys get.

What logic is there in the fact to base strategy nerfs/boosts on freaking scenarios/maps. Almost every map/scenario has a different gamestyle, a different goal, different playingfield, different units, different fundins etc. How do you expect an admin, in fact, the whole game, to keep adapting around scenarios/maps when it comes down to strategy changes. I shouldn't have to remind you that the scenarios/maps are made by you guys, and therefore could be edited, by YOURSELVES. Instead you want the special treatment and want the strategy nerfs/boosts taking every goddamn map/scenario in mind.

I mean after talking to 2 days to you guys on forums and in game, I am bound to say that you guys do not even deserve such treatment based on the attitude you guys show. Its outrageous.

Scenarios are the future the competitive scene is death new players do not want to play a same boring bland flavourless EU+ map that has a huge skillgap the map editor releases new maps that are balanced fun and creative unlike EU+ which is the same overplayed map that the competitive playerbase thinks is going to keep AW alive the competitive scene is dying as it should and i will say the scen community is the only growing part of aw that gets new players

this surtr guy a fucking idiot

Prove me wrong

people like you need the ban hammer

Yep you cant prove me wrong

prove what wrong? no one supports your point no need if it was a good idea you would have support lol.

作者： Guest, 31.01.2019 at 06:41

Sorry to inform you Waffel, but EU+ isn't the only map out there. I do agree that strategy changes should be based on the world map, since it's the basic map. But molding strategies so they can fit one specific setting (3vs3 on Europe+ 10k) is senseless in my opinion.

作者： Sultan of Swing, 31.01.2019 at 07:16

end of discussion

Honestly i want to punch both of you in the face. Repeatedly.

Imagine being r11+ and making a post like this in 2019.

作者： Mr Tyler, 31.01.2019 at 15:10

作者： Brsjak, 31.01.2019 at 14:58

作者： Mr Tyler, 31.01.2019 at 14:45

作者： Brsjak, 31.01.2019 at 13:37

作者： Mr Tyler, 30.01.2019 at 23:10

作者： Brsjak, 30.01.2019 at 18:32

作者： Waffel, 30.01.2019 at 18:11

Stop with your desires to start a flamewar every god damnit chance you guys get.

What logic is there in the fact to base strategy nerfs/boosts on freaking scenarios/maps. Almost every map/scenario has a different gamestyle, a different goal, different playingfield, different units, different fundins etc. How do you expect an admin, in fact, the whole game, to keep adapting around scenarios/maps when it comes down to strategy changes. I shouldn't have to remind you that the scenarios/maps are made by you guys, and therefore could be edited, by YOURSELVES. Instead you want the special treatment and want the strategy nerfs/boosts taking every goddamn map/scenario in mind.

I mean after talking to 2 days to you guys on forums and in game, I am bound to say that you guys do not even deserve such treatment based on the attitude you guys show. Its outrageous.

Scenarios are the future the competitive scene is death new players do not want to play a same boring bland flavourless EU+ map that has a huge skillgap the map editor releases new maps that are balanced fun and creative unlike EU+ which is the same overplayed map that the competitive playerbase thinks is going to keep AW alive the competitive scene is dying as it should and i will say the scen community is the only growing part of aw that gets new players

this surtr guy a fucking idiot

Prove me wrong

people like you need the ban hammer

Yep you cant prove me wrong

prove what wrong? no one supports your point no need if it was a good idea you would have support lol.

No i mean really prove me point wrong tell me if you put some scenario map lets say Rome next to EU+ what map do you think people that dont play aw whould like to play and prove me that EU+ isnt dying when it clearly is and EU+ players have said it multiple times

作者： Permamuted, 31.01.2019 at 15:23

作者： Guest, 31.01.2019 at 06:41

Sorry to inform you Waffel, but EU+ isn't the only map out there. I do agree that strategy changes should be based on the world map, since it's the basic map. But molding strategies so they can fit one specific setting (3vs3 on Europe+ 10k) is senseless in my opinion.

作者： Sultan of Swing, 31.01.2019 at 07:16

end of discussion

Honestly i want to punch both of you in the face. Repeatedly.

Imagine being r11+ and making a post like this in 2019.

worst of all, they arent RP fags or scenarists...disgrace.

作者： Permamuted, 14.04.2017 at 14:51

I've explained this before. But i am just going to write out a complete description so i can copy/paste it at the future morons who say i nerf strats only based off eu+ or the turk ukraine meta. I don't think i have ever provided a full breakdown. But have objective facts and evidence on my side. It is why I like tophats was able to convince the admins to alter the strategies when all the dissenters failed. It is also why these people are reduced to spamming me with insults and silly troll posts.

The strategies were created and originally balanced around the default units and specifically the world map. Custom maps don't come into the equation unless some change drastically affects a large number of them. Clovis for example complained about the nc change however the mapmakers themselves(the handful that were affected) did not and simply made some alterations themselves to counteract it. It didnt seem to be as big of a deal as he made out so it wasnt reversed.

You've 3 tiers of strategies. The is a pretty basic breakdown since theres quite a bit of crossover with some of the strategies into the other tiers. Perfect defense for example can compete in all 3 tiers which is why it often tops popular strategies lists as we see in this thread. However it shines in the mid range tier so i am placing it there. The militia defence change arguably makes gw more of a midrange strat. But i am leaving it in the economical tier due to its' costs.

Power Strats(high cost):

Sky Menace
Master of Stealth.
Lucky Bastard

Mid-range strats:

Desert Storm
Perfect defence
Great combinator.
Lucky Bastard
Relentless attack
Hybrid Warfare
Blitzkrieg

Economic strats:

Imperialist
Guerilla warfare

When balancing strats there is so much to consider. You've to test them across the board on a range of maps of different settings and incomes. Their versatility also comes into play which is why there has been many "nerf pd" threads over the years. For example Europe+ is indeed a great indicator of balance due to it's diversity of city densities and incomes. However it does not provide a complete picture of the effectiveness and capabilities of the power strats or the economic strats and indeed some of the midrange strats. For those you need to look at 15k+ settings and maps like africa, latin america or big maps where players are spread out.

There needs to be a comparison across the board on unit costs, att/defence power, range, expansion capabilities, hp and versatility. To address the much complained about ra example. Amok accidentally overboosted it giving it 5 defence 9 attack at 90 cost. The math of this in comparison with other strats pretty much speaks for itself. Ra became a nightmare on both the low to midrange starting income settings. Poor imp players on 3k were getting crushed before the game even started. Stating this was only an ra ukraine problem is spectacularly ignorant. There was also the skill argument regarding boosting the games beginners strat which only requires you to build 1 unit and spam attack with it to win but we wont go there.

Then there was blitz. After tophats boost it gained significant defensive abilities. He literally removed half the original nerf of the strategy from -2 defence to - 1. And this was still a very popular strategy even then. On attack it is strong and able to bring more units to the battle front than most strats due to its range. But its' defence sucks. A significant weakness given the overall nature of the game and often why players complain about it. However this fails to acknowlege the strength of blitz's unmatched range and expansion capabilities and the importance of these strengths. I can point to the Pve tournament as just one example. Anyone who duels will often encounter blitz across many settings.

The overall idea of altering the strategies is to give all the strats a niche where they are strong. If you make 1 or 2 strats overpowered then you alienate the players of the others.