Question 1: why did he need so much time to come up with an UU and why did he say the ballista ele is “famous” when it’s only famous for being bad
Question 2: when he explains that they think of unique mechanics, why did Burgundian end up with both coustillier and castle age cavalier? That’s two mechanics for cav.
3 Likes
Question 1: why did he need so much time to come up with an UU and why did he say the ballista ele is “famous” when it’s only famous for being bad
As I understood it it was an example of a unique military thing that was used historically - that it ended up being fairly situational in-game is not really related to that. If you mean historically, several other unique units are also mostly famous for losing - the Sassanid War Elephants were mostly ineffectual in the Rashidun invasion of Persia, and Genoese Crossbowmen are mostly famous from battles they lost such as the siege of Constantinople. I don’t think military success is a huge criteria for inclusion.
3 Likes
Balista elephants is bad? are you serious? nothing can counter massed balsita elephants. Especially if you have an ally who has paladins there is nothing to do. Khmers are so versatile. They have strong eco bonus which translate in strong early game and they have super strong lategame too.
Mass ballista elephant also costs an insane amount of resources and time to build. If mass ballista elephant was as good as you say it is, why isn’t it meta?
1 Like
I can see this unit being powerfull on maps like BF, where you can wall and boom, so you can get to the stage of an insane amount of resources and time.
On most maps, like Arabia, Balista elephants are not really a thing because of your points.
He was referring to historically cool and unique units.
I have actually said about the best lategame UU in the game. Its expansive, but uhh less gold expansive than that useless mamelouke. A mass balista eleephant kills mameloukes in about 10 seconds. Khmers have access to strong early options and have one of the best lategame options.
So they want all civs in all ELO ranges be between 45%-55% winrate, but also consider the Pro feedback about certain OP units, bonuses or strategies.
Then why are here people complaining about Bulgarians being at barely just 51% winrate which is balanced? Or Burmese being at something like 47% winrate?
And yet how often do we actually see mass ballista elephant as a go to strategy? Unless you’re talking black forest or the like it isn’t happening
That unit is even utterly crap in BF, where everyone picks Siege Onager civs if they wanna have fun
Armor classes
-2 Cavalry,
-2 Elephant
-2 Siege
Hard countered by magyar Huszars because of their anti siege bonus totalling to 21 attack vs Ballista elephants.
Pretty well countered by scorpion, with full upgrades on both sides totalling to 20 dmg for heavy and 13 for normal scorp, while having much higher range.
Or just Paladins, who will only receive 3 damage from the elephants.
All of these work against a mass of Ballista elephants, and if you dont get them massed halbs work wonders too.
Arena as a pocket player, amazon tunnel, there is plenty of those maps. So khmers are super good early, mid and late. They also have houses for emergency protection against raid. It’s a dope civ
not disagreeing that khmer is a good civ, but i hardly ever see pros go mass BE. even on those maps.
He is talking about TGs, where Khmer always go Elephants.
battle elephant yes. ballista elephant? rarely see that
BE usually means Battle Elephant, I missunderstood u 11
yeah that was my bad, but if you followed the discussion you would see we were talking ballista
People have their own experience and they consider there own experience as superior to the global experience aka winrate. People just lost some games with a certain civ and then ask for buffs. Or they lose some games in a row and ask for nerfs. I think many balance threads are based on this and are useless. That is for the reason why i mostly just ignore all these balance threads.
1 Like