You miss torp and I forget to put kancha too.
1 Like
We already got it that you want Japan to get nerfed. Stating everything 100 times isnt going to magically make it happen.
1 Like
South Africa wont be going to win a treaty match, at least >40min, when other civs get all military cards.
Don’t worry I also know dev won’t change and I didn’t expect anything unless they magically figure out.
But please remind that I am not the only guy stated shrines (or eco houses) are a problem in the game, just most of them gave up to comment anymore due to useless, don’t be so forgetful just say that sounds only me.
I don’t see any issues with shrines as the Japanese don’t get factories. I know shrines you get at the beginning of the game but they don’t generate resources that fast until farther into the game after you upgrade them
1 Like
You heard what I and now you say?
This should say enough.
I never said its just you, but you are one of the few that keeps going about it when we already know.
Shrines give nice boosts early game, but mid to late game when you have all upgrades they wont keep up with regular vills and settlers.
So just nerf them early game and buff them late game.
The suggestion I showed to you mentioned.
4 Likes
You need to play either 3vs3 or 4vs4 or any treaty (20min +) or FFA. This is where the Wall spam exists
1 Like
Then you forget that your comparing the gather rate of a 75 wood building that supports 10 pop and gets any resource you want to a 700 resource building that gathers only gold, I think both banks and shrines need small nerfs, for banks to gather rate, to shrines for hp.
2 Likes
I’ve seen those long games with tons of walls, it’s always going to be needed more in those large games just because the maps larger and there’s more units, in a 1v1 you could garrison your villagers a few seconds until your cavalry arrive and it’s not a huge deal, in those large maps it’ll take a very long time to bring your units back to stop a raid so i understand why walls are needed and used more.
I don’t see the issue with walls, they’re easily destroyed by artillery and take longer to build once bastion is in, plus mortars can destroy a lot of buildings without even passing the walls, just don’t think they’ll nerf walls based on a small minority of players doing 3v3 or larger games, the vast majority play 1v1 or 2v2.
1 Like
There is no minority playing team games. And there is an issue with walls if you make more than one row close to each other (as they do not actually die easily to cannon).
You said it yourself that you dont experience that problem (hence your input is very limited) (and i am glad that you dont experience it, but more and more i see players with 600elo or more making that and unless you have Opri, you cannot attack their base in a timely manner).
There is a problem if a player can make a bloody maze with triple walling in the late game. There, micro will not help and you begin a TEDIOUS (very TEDIOUS) procedure of killing walls one by one. And your opponent can build walls faster than you can destroy them. In a FFA you can cockroach this way.
What i am suggesting is for walls to have a radius like torps that doesnt allow double or triple walling in the same place. Not nerfing the walls themselves (and it will not affect 1vs1 or 2vs2 in aly way, and will make team games and treaty and FFA more combat focused and less wall mazing)
1 Like
i think there’s a minority playing 3v3 or 4v4, most team games are 2v2. You can easily see because if you search 3v3 you get people way beyond your elo as there’s so few players in queue, 2v2 seems to have many more and in 2v2 I don’t see many walls, often there’s none and at the most 2 layers.
3v3 or 4v4 are always going to have more walls and base building because with so many players it’ll be a longer game, I just don’t see why people don’t just play 2v2 if they hate the walls so much, what you say about opri is probably why people wall in the first place because if you don’t wall you’ll have your factories destroyed in an instant by someone spamming opri, or your vills getting idled and killed by raids from cav/chimu. The same players complaining about walls are probably the reason they’re being built.
2 Likes
The 75 wood building is only achievable via cards and upgrades. That way I can use upgrades on my settlers and villagers to getting even more profit then from a single shrine.
A bank has 2.75 c/s without upgrades. A shrine 0.33 c/s (if you have it with animals). That means 8 shrines produce the same amount, this is 1000 wood. A bank is better thus than a shrine.
And if you want to compare it with cost reduction it means one upgrade and a card. There is a card for banks to also be cheaper. Then 8 shrines cost 600 for 75 wood and 1 bank costs 590, and even then you didnt pay any resources for an upgrade as dutch.
A bank is better then a shrine, and still, a shrine doesnt do the same as one villager, meaning Japan technically misses more then 5 villagers compared to other civs. A bank is about 4.5 settlers. You have a base limit of 5, meaning that even then you miss ~25 settlers compared to other civs.
Banks dont need a nerf, shrines neither. The Japanese shrine is best when you are age II, as soon as other civs get their second tc’s up the shrines effect is basically gone pretty soon afterwards. Banks have initially a big cost which also set back the dutch, setting up banks costs more time and usually takes only effect age III, but then you still dont really outproduce other civs much more.
2 Likes
So essentially when both get the cost decrease, they are equal resource gather rate wise, and a shrine supports population and can gather whatever you need it too, but without the cost reduced a bank is better, so safe to assume that shrines are slightly better by a very small margin, as for rather or not banks need a nerf, I think the nerf deserves to be very small for both bank and shrine, for bank i would say 2.60would be fine, a small nerf that in the long run will hurt Dutch a little, I also believe that Dutch should naturally get the bank gather rate to 2.75 as soon as they hit age 4, for shrines I think a simple hp decrease to the same as a house would be fine.
A shrine can only produce 1 resource at a time aswell. Yeah you can adjust to whatever you want, but coin can be used to buy other resources and Dutch can just use their settlers for other resources and not coin.
Why nerf bank btw? Dutch are one of the weaker civs.
A shrine is needed for Japanese as they have 75 villager limit. Besides that its their only (maybe one more?) resource bonus really.
You have to put your production and pop space in danger to use the shrine. It needs hunts in 1v1 it means you have to place shrines mid map, which are harder to defend. Reducing their hp is like forcing civs to build their houses mid map and put their settlers next to it.
1 Like
I have said a unreasonable card for shrines.
An age1 card that can increase shrine gather rate and reduce their cost lower than general house = totally remove shrines penalty also enhance efficency.
This is similar if Otto has a card that can make free vils training with less time than general civ and also enhance their gather rate.
Moreover, the problem of booming civs is their speed too fast. Both Dutch can finish 5 bank and Japan can finish all shrines in 7 mins. Not only stronger eco but also more stable. In 1v1 this is comparative ok but team game is a mess due to much larger map.
I also showed a twitch record in a requiring nerf Japan topic before (record no longer available), a France player 1v1 Japan player even his first army was pikes to siege shrines, Japan player still could build 160 pop shrines in 6 mins and sent several ashi caught all his pikes. In 1v1 we already can see this situation, so in team game how mess it can be?
I don’t object they buff shrines at late game due to missing factories and vils limitation, but their the most stable eco and strong mid game is OP.
4 Likes
Really? you must be lucky. Even pro games now have walls spam. They are just very effective, it takes far more resources to take them down than it is to put them up.
1 Like
I do not know how profitable a sanctuary is, but for many that I destroy, they immediately replace them elsewhere on the map knowing that they cost more wood than generic houses. It’s like it doesn’t matter if they were destroyed. Also, the Japanese always have their villagers close to their base because they don’t need to hunt and they don’t need map control this early, so early in the game the core of their economy is not threatened. However I don’t think this is the problem with Japan. The problem with Japan is that after reaching 4 it is very difficult to deal with. The only viable way to beat Japan is with a very strong rush.
1 Like
Dutch certainly aren’t as strong as japan or Spain, but they are definitely on the stronger side with civs like brit for example, I think as a whole Dutch are weak in late and strong in mid, while decent in early, maybe it’s just me but I feel like nerfing bank slightly would make up for Dutch being able to age with 14 villagers, then again maybe the weak late game of Dutch is enough, all I know is that Dutch seem like the most picked civs in tournament games and that’s really what I’m going off of.
I think banks should be less profitable in the beginning and give more priority to mines.