So you can take down a tower. If the tower had the same range only way to beat it is the trebuchet and sometimes not even that.
You would be kind of right and kind of wrong for medieval gunpowder tech.
The bullet Will start faster than an arrow or Bolt, but the bullet is round so the speed Will drop way faster and the Range Will be shorter
I didn’t made mention to range, but I agree anyway. The evolution of range units is almost the same from bow to crossbow as crossbow to handcannon.
I would like to see this in the Post-Imperial archery ranges… Don’t like how foot archers disappear so quickly in the game
YOu can micro with the BBC, and it is ok if the tower cost much more than a BBC, and force you to research SE
I didnt mean cost i thought it asked why bbc out ranged cannon tower
I see someone has yet to face mass bombard tower spam
1 Like
The most IMPORTANT thing is the SPEED… It is normally if a unt is at longer distance, it to have a chance to survive.
But at that pictute, I see units who use similar weapons as Bombard cannon, Elite Cannon Galeon and Turtle ships, who have DIFFERENT speed of projectiles…The projectiles of Turtle ships are 4 times faster than Elite Cannon Galleon and the Turtle ships bombs are 2 times faster than Bombard cannons. I don’t know any battle where the Korean Turtle ships had faster bombard cannons, than all other civs.
I think, they must be EQUAL - projestiles of Turtle Ships, Bombard cannon and Elite cannon Galleon… May be - about 4.
Your “trap” is not well setup’d, “most likely leave the game unaffected” is a pointless statement, any change is 100% likely to leave game balance affected, by definition, as long as the unit is made at least once. Your change would nerf turtle ships, so it will worsen game balance, which does not qualify as “will improve game balance”, hence I voted no like 80% people for the turtle ship, and in fact this is the only correct choice. If you expected people to vote “yes”, I would say it’s you who interpreted your sentence as “which change won’t affect game balance much” but it’s not what you wrote.
Do you know BBC and bombard canon are the same thing right?
Yes, I know. Really great aport. Thank you very, very much
The speed of a projectile only has a causal effect on game balance through the units that can or cannot be hit while attempting to evade said projectile. Tell me which units can the turtle ship not reliably hit with a ~10% slower cannonball that it could reliably hit with a 7.8 tile/sec cannonball given that it only has 6 range and is a water unit? This list is vanishingly small for turtle ship, possibly empty. For other units its quite long because they all have longer range or a larger change.
Tons of game changes are likely to leave game balance unaffected. Give swordsmen +1 ram damage, decrease the cost of war elephants 5 food, give war elephants +10hp, make trebs 1% more accurate against units, etc.
If 99% of the time a unit is built it performs the same then that is likely to leave game balance unaffected.
Literally not, you say it yourself, it will affect 1% of games.
“Affected by a tiny amount” does not mean “Unaffected”.
Anyway if a change truely leaves the game unaffected, then why bother?
Affecting game balance requires a change of some minimum magnitude. If the change isn’t big enough it can’t be detected in normal play. If it can’t be detected in normal play (through human intuition or otherwise) then how can you argue it affected game balance?
Just because it would affect 1% of the games doesn’t mean it would affect any measure of game balance (unit v unit performance, win rates, strategic placement/execution, unit feel, etc).
Your claim amounts to: I know it’s a party and it’s a loud room, but I can likely hear a pin drop. Like that might be true for 1 person but for it to be true for almost everyone? It’s hard to take that seriously.
To verify people are using similar internal metrics when providing answers to the poll. Otherwise from the perspective of interpreting the poll you have no idea if people are just voting for what they want buffed independent of any consideration of balance.
No, that’s not what “affect” means. That’s your (reasonable) interpretation of the sentence in the context of your post. But due to the way your post is phrased, one can also interpret “not affect game balance” as “not affect the game negatively”. Nerfing an underused unit, while breaking recorded game compatibility, qualifies as such.
Not going to argue that this is likely a negligible change, but just saying, your trap is not capturing whether people have read your post, it’s capturing how people interpret the (very vague) question you asked.
Of all these, I think BBT needs this the most. BBTs are such an investment and miss so much at fast units even with ballistics. Whenever I see them in my games or in pro games, they always underperform for the presence they are supposed to provide. They also could use some extra damage vs rams like other gunpowder units do. Maybe not BBC territory, but a watch tower shouldn’t do more damage to a ram than a BBT (Faster fire rate).
1 Like
That’s literally the point of it.
Clearly people ignoring the word “balance” and interpreting the question as “Does this affect the game negatively” in the question totally screws with interpreting the results. Which is why in surveys you include questions that allow you to verify if your interpretation matches their interpretations. As it stands I don’t know what criteria people used when answering which makes the poll results kind of useless.
Regarding an interpretation of ‘affect’ if I made a separate post and titled it “Setting projectile speed of turtle ships to 7 will probably affect game balance” I bet almost no one would agree with me. People intuitively require a minimum threshold for those kinds of claims.
??? How you can conclude this blews my mind. The poll results are very valid as-is and tbh they match perfectly with my expectations. People did not ignore the world “balance”, they just have a definition of it that differs slightly with yours in the one extreme case where you make a tiny change to a underused unit.
No, it’s for all intents and purposes, the same question as what you’ve asked. Nobody really cares whether a change will “leave game balance unaffected”. We care about whether a change is good for the game as a whole or not.
Even if people were answering “Which of the following would likely improve game balance if set to 7 tiles per second” I find the ordering a bit implausible. Bombard towers receiving a 133% buff being more likely to improve game balance than everything else except hand-cannons? I could see them being middle of the pack, but to be almost tied with hand-cannons is really suspect.
So maybe a reasonable interpretation is: “Which of the following would improve the game if they had their projectile speed buffed?” But now I’ve removed 3 key parts of the question and have fit the data to my conclusion rather than drawn a conclusion from the data. This is extremely bad practice.
So yeah the poll should probably be re-done with a different wording and structure (like individual numbers for each unit separately).
i think the following buffs would make sense:
- buff the bullet speed of BBT and Elite Canon galleon to match BBC (spanish and non elite cannon galleons stay the same)
- BBT arent affected by Ballistic anymore (currently they benefiting from the tech but wit faster bullet speed it would be OP)
- Increase small gunpoweder projectile (HC, organ, Jans, COnqs) bullet speed to match arrows.
Lastly tutle ships stay unchanged.