Match for 3rd place could be quite competitive this time as Beasty has already qualified for Red Bull Wololo due to his N4C victory. With both, first and second place in Golden League, qualifying for Red Bull Wololo the player placed third would qualify if Beasty made it to the final.
I just watched viper vs marinenoob, like how on earth Chinese is allowed to be picked in a tournament haha…Chinese is a civ made OP on purpose to sell a lot in China, bombards, grabadierd are walking godss, like is real stupid, age IV tournaments are a joke
Grenadiers needs nerf ASAP. How on earth a range unit described as light can have 165 hp with splash damage. That unit ruins teamgames - 4 vs 4 where boomy style is more popular (and on certain map you cannot just rush your oponent, like on BF its very hard).
What unit you can make to counter this ■■■■? Mangonels dont work, even if china has broken siege. Siege in this game is already broken (6 elite knights couldnt snipe a bombard) and chines ■■■■ has more hp. I dont know, but if devs think that making civ which is total ■■■■ in feudal and total borken in imp, is balancin, something just gone wrong…
Yes, I am angry and I am salty, but how I cannot be seeing ■■■■ like this?
Games last forever and siege still feels like it has too much presence. Maybe it is time to increase the population cost of siege from 3 to 5. The fact that you can have a massive amount of siege, an army strong enough to protect it and an insane economy all at once just doesn’t work for me.
Y’all salty about China when it only has the 5th highest winrate in >plat. China’s strong in the lategame, no doubt, but that’s cause it’s pretty weak in early-mid game. So if you want to nerf grenadiers or siege, you gotta provide a compensatory buff somewhere
You misunderstand. I am not - fumdementally - opposed to a grenadier nerf (tho I do think siege has been nerfed quite enough already). What I am saying is that any grenadier nerf or other nerf to Chinese lategame needs to be accompanied by a buff elsewhere to China. Because by winrates, China is balanced and even a little on the weak side, so if you remove its strengths (the lategame) it will be bottom tier with no compensatory buff
Why are people so upset because MarineLord won one game with China? Marine Lord won decisively 4-1 including a victory against Viper’s China.
How is China this absolutely broken OP civ that people keep complaining? im not against balancing grenadiers and barbican rush but the civ has plenty of weak spots while English and French are a way more consistent civs and i don’t see as many people complaining.
espera espera, como una unidad como una unidad va a hacer así de potente? tanto en el age 2 como en el 3 existen unidades con ataques potentes, pero por defecto son o cañones de cristal mucho daño y poca vida, muy caras o en su defecto unidades lentas a la hora de moverse y atacar
I’m not sure people are necessarily upset with the result in terms of which player won, Mlord is amazing. I think it has to do with both how unappealing late-game is in general and how unstoppable Chinese late game seems where their massively bulky siege is protected by an extremely strong unique unit. Generally speaking, people don’t like strategies that seemingly have little to no counter play (English are possibly the best late-game civ vs Chinese). Grenadiers completely melting large horsemen armies before they could even kill any siege didn’t feel quite right. Basically they obliterated every unit except the longbows which 1 are countered by the siege the grenadiers are protecting and 2 unique to the English. Personally I’d like siege to cost 5 population instead of 3 so you either have lots of siege with questionable army numbers defending it or a lesser siege mass defended by a larger army, not both. It felt like there wasn’t really any trade off. Mlord had a huge siege mass and a giant blob of grenadiers all backed by a massive economy with 14k gold in the bank. That said, I completely agree that the Chinese have plenty of weak spots as a civ overall.
As people have already mentioned, chinese civ is not OP, the stats clearly show that. It’s not a well balanced civ imo though. They should do something to avoid siege balls and give china some other options instead.
Could people atleast bother trying to do some investigations on the statstics instead of jumping into the forums whenever they feel something is imbalanced/OP? Sorry, but this really starts to become annoying. We have got the stats so use it.
Thanks for the in-depth response, i see how i could be frustrating to see that late game state but if i remember correctly Mlord had a mass of grenadiers protecting the mongolian heights crossing. That and also he had a huge gold economy based in trading, so as i see it its mainly the map enabling that kind of late game.
I would like to see changes to the Chinese civ so its no longer is the one trick pony lategame siege, but as it is right now its pretty much all it has and only when it gets to that win condition is seems unstoppable. As the comment above says, the stats implies that most cases china just loses before getting to that point or even loses in late game.
No problem. Yeah, Chinese are definitely not a broken civ overall. They are very underwhelming on most maps and extremely good on closed/chokepoint maps. The gameplay on those types of maps seems pretty stale and predictable since it is really hard to do any damage in the early game. I think a lot of people would just like there to be a little more counter play and just more strategic options overall in the late-game. A game with asymmetrical civs will never be perfect and certain civs will always excel on certain maps more than others but hopefully they can balance out the powerspikes a bit