They need a completely different farm bonus, otherwise yeah everything else is fine.
1 Like
Yes it is a decomposition of trushes as a whole not Inca trushes. The problem with mirroring is balance amounts to one of two options: pick winners and losers or have no civ with an advantage. Neither changes the fact that players have very few strategic options hence the mirroring becomes the meta response.
I think the devs are just prioritizing balance first and game design second which is fine. If the sicilians design ends up being bad once itâs balanced theyâll have to deal with it.
Plus they have to balance for all Elos and I think itâs a consensus that lower Elos have a way harder time dealing with trushes than using them.
I still think the reason people hate them is youâre fighting towers and vils with towers and vils which just feels like a counter should exist which is missing.
For those unhappy with the Incas nerf, if you have AOE2 HD or wololokingodms on Voobly you still can do the Noburu rush here:) as the towers are still the same before DE 11
Yea true, probably going to migrate my 1v1 play back to voobly, because I dont mind rushing and dont mind getting rushed, but still shame that the game is devolving
Not every strat work with walling up early. Its just the easiest one. If we are just going to take down stuff because it is difficult lets just make all the rank games full tech tree. Then civs wont matter. You can see viper beat a inca rush a few times on line. No one is saying that any on strat works 100% of the time. It os just an example of many different options you have. I dont even play with inca. I still like beating them. Its just kinda seems like a gimmick can exist in this game so long as its not viable.
The rock-paper-scissors do not apply to Inca tower rush. The best way to defend it is by making towers of your own⊠And thats why its about to be nerfed.
Thatâs really not why itâs being nerfed, itâs being nerfed because of people who donât like feudal pressure
1 Like
This is obviously wrong. The SAME PATCH has another nerf to walling (alltough civ specific), so very obviously devs are not trying to nerf feudal pressure.
wall nerf this patch coupled with a buff to serjeants and you think they are trying to nerf feudal pressure?
They are buffing both new civs, because they were pretty weak upon release. Burgundians were only good while they were carried by a broken UU.
The cuman nerf is a bit of a hard one for me to analyze. The civ itself doesnât have a very high win rate, so Iâm guessing that someone found some combination thatâs a bit broken in TG, but Iâm not sure what it might be, as I havenât seen or heard of anything personally.
its simple. they want to nerf walling. they have been nerfing walling for almost a year now. walling being less good means that offense is better.
and yet you sit there and say they are trying to nerf feudal pressure.
they also reduced the number of woodlines around your starting tc in arabia from 4 to 3. which makes the map more open and leads to more offense.
and yet you sit there and say they are trying to nerf feudal pressure.
theyâre literally removing a big feudal pressure bonus from a civâŠ
Cumans werenât a good civ already, so nerfing them doesnât make sense from any win-rate analysis. They barely have a window where they really shine. My guess is some TG shenanigans, but someone who plays this civ more often than me will probably have a better idea.
Nerfing walling AND nerfing towers together doesnât make any sense either way: the best response to walls is towers. So at this point I donât expect much good to come from further balance changes.
yes they NERFED ONE thing. that even some pros said was problematic. food for thought.
how many times have they nerfed walls?
they also buffed a feudal unit that could lead to more aggro. so yeah.
iâd say theyâve made more changes to ENCOURAGE aggression then they made to DISCOURAGE aggression, and thatâs just during this patch, not including the past years worth of changes.
but keep pretending otherwise.
Yes, but as you mentioned over the past year⊠well, when DE came out, it came out with a nerf to towers, as you might remember. Theyâre going back and forth, and some of the changes just donât really have any sense.
so they nerfed tower rushes and then nerfed a civs whose tower rushes were problematic.
meanwhile they have buffed aggression by opening up maps, making walling harder, etc, and they even just buffed the serjeant.
iâd say they come out ahead on making the game more aggressive early on.
That is subjective. If itâs problematic, ask a team mate/someone to help you practice. (I dont mean this to you personally, but as general advice)
Yes, but the imperial buff is the significant one really. The donjon isnât really intended as a tower rush building, it just really isnât suitable for it, not that itâs impossible to pull it off, but just worse than a regular tower rush.
Maybe the reason some people want the Incas to be nerfed is that they struggle to defend against a tower rush. Instead of nerfing, maybe the devs could add a taunt that would trigger the AI to tower rush so that players could practice against it.
Exactly. I donât specifically care about tower rushing with Incas, if that were the only thing. But I do care that yet another creative option is being removed.
yeah sorry but, but even some of the pros are saying its hard to deal with.
there is a difference between - being creative and "this build is too strong for how much investment goes into it.
1 Like
Would you please tell me the name of that webpage?
Admittedly, team games are a bit of a different beast than 1v1, but even so, what we are talking about here is nerfing a civ that is bad enough that Iâve watched it be listed as, effectively, one of the ten worst civs in the game consistently in Two Pools.
1 Like