What? I always use all my numpad key for managing military and eco. In castle age I may dedicate some of them to monks, but for sure not all of them, and for sure not in the late game, when I focus more on macro then on micro.
If you think that this is a good strategy, fine, you should do what you find fun.
But you can state that this is meta, that it’s what most people do. Because it’s not true. The majority simply don’t play that way. And for sure you can’t state that this is the best way of paying the game. (especially not on a game that have a community that defined the meta by so many years…)
Ergo you can’t ask balance changes that revolt around the play style of just one player (or few ones…).
That’s not how most players play on a medium-high elo level. Probably not even most players in low elo levels…
No. All YOU need to recognize is the fact that no serious game has ever been played like this. Not a single one. If you want to be taken seriously, play that strategy and show the results. Show us beating a real player in a real game, because of that strat.
You were asked to do just that times and times again and you didn’t - because you can’t. Im not sure if you even tried, but if you did use that strategy against someone who has even a basic understanding of the game, you got smashed. It would probably even lose to meme strats like spanish vills.
There is no reason to get aggressive, if he likes to play with the fortress strategy, it’s fine. It’s enough that he doesn’t suggest balance changes based on that strategy.
I dont have any problem with people suggesting funny meme strategies. But i do have issues with people derailing other threads by shuffling their meme strats into the conversation without admitting they are pure meme.
Im not playing AoE 2 now, but Byzantines are always in my heart. And yes, they still need something in early game. I was very happy when I saw cost reduction for Cata upgrade, but it is still too late. So my propsitions:
Free Town Watch moved to Dark Age and free Town Patrol. This will help them early find sheeps and other stuff.
Faster construction of palisades and Walls/Faster repairs/cheaper repairs. One of them. First will be interesting, because Devs recently nerfed walls.
Remove their Castle Age Tech Greek Fire give them for free as civ bonus. can be even in Feudal, giving Byz chance to catch up other civs faster on water.
Replace Greek Fire with tech Varangians +20 HP for Militia line.
I have shown games.
I have not perfected my boom.
I do not have a computer that can play beyond HD anymore, and just barely the scenario editor in DE.
I do not have internet at home atm.
And thus I cannot upload further games until I fix my own situation.
I do not have any single game currently that shows the fullness of my own strategies nor have I mastered them to be able to show them in high level play as of yet.
I have shown games, however. And yes they are riddled with a lack of a solid boom foundation and lack of knowledge of how to properly raid in early games.
Knowing all of this, I can tell you that I am personally not qualified atm to give the show you need to prove myself beyond what I am telling you. My strategy is good and solid. My personal execution of it is in the rough and needs polishing however.
That would make their fires more even efficient on killing fishing ships in feudal. I think that the greck fire UT is fine. Maybe it could be a little bit more cheaper.
I don’t really see a use for that. Considering that basic champs are used mainly for counter EEW and goths, both situations where the cataprhact shine.
So probably this would disincentive the use of catas even more.
A bit overlapping with the chinese bonus, but it’s fine, it could work.
I read you topic, you showed images of the editor.
He is asking that you show a recorded ranked game where you use your strategies and the opponent use the standard meta.
And no one is blaming you for this, if the editor is the best that you can provide to us it’s ok, but you have to understand that this cannot be a proof.
We don’t care about the execution, we are arguing against the strategy.
Let’s apply the scientific method:
Now there is an already existing paradigm (the meta) that is known and accepted by the large majority of players. It works and it have its rules.
You are suggesting a new paradigm, a different one, to substitute the present one. And it’s fine, it’s your right, but you have to sustain your paradigm with solid proof that not only sustain one or 2 affirmations (game scenarios like super late game, to name an example). You need to prove all the possible contexts, like for example, if you don’t know how to manage early rush, then your meta is flawed, and you can’t affirm that the logic is solid. You can’t state that the late game works if you don’t know how to get there.
Us, on the other side, we don’t have to give any proof, because we are just “defending” an already established and accepted paradigm, so it’s you who have to oust this one and substitute with yours, but this will never happen until you manage to make it complete, and prove that it’s better in any, or at least most cases.
I showed recorded games.
It was in a different topic, and unsure of the quality cause at least one of them is of a game I’m unsure of where it’s from.
But anyways, here, I still have them on discord so I’ll transfer them over here too.
These do not show the full strategy but, most of them provided they’re the right ones show parts of it. If I remember correctly, the one vs japanese was a misupload. Same with the teamgame, if I looked at the correct recording,
2.4mb should be a decent showmatch for an endgame army but shouldn’t be the main example and can be improved on in terms of micro and positioning.
The general idea rn is to hit feudal early enough to build a minimum of 2 towers, 1 for the woodline, 1 for the stoneline, before enemy troops might arrive. And a maximum of 3-4 towers, 2 for woodline, 1 each for stone and gold, if gold is to be mined.
2-4 scouts while on the way to castle be built or have a total of 3 scouts to help ensure capture of relics and slight aggression while early building of 2 monks to help with as many relic captures as possible, building of a castle, right beside the original town center if possible and a building of 1-3 additional town centers to boom and an 4th(5th) town center when appropriate all near the castle for safe defensive farms.
Building of up to 10-20 knights and 2-5 mangonels
and 8-20 teutonic knights for early castle military
Increasing monk numbers to 5 for decent heals which may be paired with 13 of the teutonic knights for forward aggression alongside further teutonic knights that can support the knights in their attack against their counters and mangonels for the sake of anti archers.
And up to 4 watch towers on the outer rims to counter castle drops and so on.
That would be a general brief overview of a possible early game that starts the build towards the endgame provided you take care to ensure everything stays alive as well as you might.
We don’t recognize the usefulness because it’s not use useful ata decent level
Yes, you have shown games and I’m the one who watched it. The strategy is bad and you make a lot of mistakes anyway. At that level people could win by going full japanese man at arms in feudal because there are so many mistakes made by both players it almost doesn’t even matter what you are going for.
Your boom will not be perfected because by going for what you go you’ll always be behind in eco and you’ll never arrive to your healing fortress formation.
And even if for miracle you arrive to that formation, you’ll mostly be dead to someone who managed his eco and army better.
I get it, you have fun playing that way therefore you should play that way, but it’s not a great strategy, that’s it. There’s a reason people go for one of the viable build orders and there’s also many reason why your strat is not viable
Yeah, then I don’t think I’ll see them, I barely have the time to play the game and I don’t have HD installed.
But it is, if your execution is flawed, then your strategy is too.
You can’t call this proof.
A general idea isn’t enough. You can’t make a loose hypothesis and call it a theory. And you can’t have an general idea of how the late game works (without any details on various situations or an idea on how to get there) and call it a strategy.
it’s what I’ve poured many hours into with actual gameplay and have learned through experience that I am trying to begin to convey. It’s not loose theory crafting over nothing. Take note of the castle age aggression and feudal age defense example in the earlier post.
Byz dont have Dark Age bonus, so they are behind on water, because other civs hit Feudal earlier, so they need something to catch up.
And no, GF isnt fine. In time when is available, bulk of fleet already is Galeys. Fires are good as meat(wood?)shield for them, but even with this they cannot be main warships.
This is just because I would love to see Varangian reference But this can be literaly anything. I also made proposition to add effect to Greek Fire, additional damage vs Siege (13% of base dmg) for Trebs, towers and castles.
But still it’s not enough, you can’t oust the current meta made by hundreds of players during the past years with 4 gameplay.
Also, your strategy have flaw, you can’t justify them only affirming that it’s because you can’t perform it perfectly, there are flaws in theory itself.
And for sure you can’t proposed balance changes on a working progress years.
Not all civs need a dark age bonus, and bizzantines are fine, their fire are already better as they hit feudal.
Look at this game, bizz vs huns (a civ with a dark age bonus).
No of course it won’t be you main ship, I don’t think that the UT is supposed to make your fires your main ships, you have galleons for that.
But still this will make your fires a lot more better.
Yeah I would love to see other historical references too, for example I would love to see the “arsenale” reference for the Italians, but I don’t think we will ever see more than one or 2 references for civs…
I watched a game (maybe it was boa 2) where there was a surprising aztec monk play in the late game. It was actually unique. That strategy worked. Btw, the only time I saw this.
Its a bit weird. You dont have the experience nor the hardware to actually play your strategy. No pro plays according to that strategy; not even close. You suggest not just using a different style, but playing the game completly different than it was played for 20 years. Based on…an idea that despite everyone telling you otherwise, you think will work.
So lets look into that strategy a bit.
I realized this got a bit long, so TL;DR: You invest ressources into towers your opponent will invest into his economy, meaning you lose the game even without getting attacked.
You want to go to stone while aging up, without delaying your age up. This means you will be very short on wood early on. Arriving in feudal, you cant afford everything you would want, so you probably have to cut horse collar. Its not that big of a deal, but it goes to show that even before the first enemy unit came close to your TC, you weakend your economy a bit.
Even with 2 towers, you will still need full walls and invest some wood into repairs. Your opponent does not. Again, you fall further behind in eco. If the enemy goes scs/maa, he will just stop creating military once he sees defensive towers and click castle age. If your opponent goes archers, he will probably mass them and try to break in. With more walls and towers you can defend just fine, but you invest more ressources into things that will not be of any use later on, while your opponent invests his ressources into a valuable archerball.
After hitting castleage, you want to invest into scouts, monks and a castle. You could as well just type GG. Even if you have had a perfect game so far, you are behind. By creating defensive units and building a defensive castle you delay your boom heavily. A castle is as expensive as 2 additional TCs, so again, you take away important ressources from your economy. Your opponent wont. Dont hope for too many relics either: Your opponent had map control, you didnt.
Next, you finally start your boom. Its late, but its also wrong to cluster up all your TCs. You not only need farm space, you also need 2-3 woodlines, 2-3 golds, 1 stone. Your eco, already way, way worse than your opponents, takes another hit because you play way too defensive. However, you finally decide to make units. But its the wrong units. Mangos, monks and TK are all very slow. They cant attack without a forward base. But you cant get a forward castle either, because you dont have to military to get it down in the first place. You write about “forward pressure”, but that will never happen. If your army moves out, it dies before it crawled across the map (e.g. by 2-3 mangos your opponent built at home while your army marched). Your knights wont do anything either, as 10-20 are way too few; in late castle, you need 30-40 to contest anything. So you are still stuck in your corner. Your opponent will now hit Imp way before you, because his boom started earlier. He will treb down your defenses and the game is over.
I hope this helps you understand WHY everyone calls your strategy bad. Every ressource you invest into something is not invested into anything else. So every slow, defensive unit you build at home is not pressuring your opponent. Every tower you build in your base is stone that could have gone into more TCs. Your opponent will not suicide into your castles. He will instead pick of vills, contest your expansion, but most importantly, he can boom on 3, 4 or even 5 TCs and there is nothing you can do about it.
But this can be literaly anything. I also made proposition to add effect to Greek Fire, additional damage vs Siege (13% of base dmg) for Trebs, towers and castles.