Hi Toaf. Deadlyinterval here. Thats not true Lol. Majority of players are Supremacy dudes and Ranked Queue players.
21
Sup nerfs are not the best way to go buuuuuutttttttt There are some Mexico strats hard to counter if they gather some res and revolt all of a sudden. Soft nerf on cost good enough for me
In fact, the majority of players are supremacy players, treaty players are a minority. Plus, in the treaty, it is possible to stack a lot of team cards and native updates. [Which are available for all players in the match, not just Mexico ones] So letâs say, what should be balanced are those updates instead of nerfing specific civs.
Thatâs why developers always focus on balancing 1v1, where Mexico performs poorly.
even so, in sup mode, mexico when you pass age 3 is unbearable to deal with.
in FFA too because he can reach age IV where things go wrong
But yeah it doesnât make sense to balance civs for dudes who only play non standard game modesâŠlike FFA, 2v2v2v2, and treaty. You should expect unbalance when playing those modes. Those are just for some fun not for serious playing or winning.
Also the main factor that determines who wins FFA is who get double or triple teamed. It has nothing to do with player skill or civ balance.
As a major FFA player, and a pretty good 1v1 player I think I can say a few things hereâ
the problem is not the game mode, it is the supervalues ââof units and sustain that the civ has in certain things, the problem is not the mode and the lategame of the civ.
late game in theory exists in every game mode, if in supremacy the games hardly reach age Iv ok⊠but the problem is still there, it cannot be ignored because in theory this problem is in civâs lategame.
The problem is most definitely game modes. To get to their op stages would take too many cards to be good in 1v1.
Well supremacy late game and treaty/FFA are very different. You bring different cards into the game. The game pace is different. In supremacy even if you reach late stage but usually you donât have a lot of OP late game cards for eco and military. Usually you have a lot of unit shipments that already used. So supremacy late game is not much a balance issue.
In treaty/FFA you can have a full deck of upgrades and get to full eco and full military without dying. In supremacy team or 1v1 you cant do that you will die before reaching late game.
You know I hear everybody arguing Mexico is insane in team and late game,but we never see recorded games to understand what they mean
I insist the problem is not the civ itâs the players and situational scenarios where they might lose a fight because of not making the right counters or not even trying to micro, etc. There are many games in which a wrong step tilts the balance too much and the match becomes unrecoverable.
Would be nice to see what the ones arguing mean.
So you see no problem with Chunacos countering heavy cav and Infantry while being able to be build in age II?
i usually watch twitch 1v1s and also rec games but tbh the issue here often if the defenders will just move the goalposts by saying said player should do X etc instead of earnestly assessing that in a game with so many variables, there is limited ability for 2 players to be 3k iq on every matchup. Civ, play preference etc all play into things. The recs, with your already caveat of âwell enemy should probably just play perfectlyâ makes it devolve into blame game instead of the actual debate of âgiven 2 equal players, over many games, does 1 civ pull ahead significantly?â if i play an ff into CA, is it op? well thats where the rec can give some ideas on timings, mass, res gathered. But in aoe3 most things break down here as the very strong asymmetric design usually boils down to: did my opponents have enough signs to recognize and counter in a reasonable timeframe,; and same for me in my decision making was i giving and taking in tempo, unit comps, and give and take in the battle? as the CA vs baja example, its the exact same macro and often same federal cards and even the same decks 90% of the time. how am i to know which is which to come from a mid map hacienda? or which comes after the inital 10 piki wave? where does the opponent get to feel out the revolt in age2 and scout it? there is a reaosn all old revolts were locked to 4 btw, because the devs recongized this is too much coin flip if not extremely balanced. Precognition is not developed at least publicly yet, and should probably not be the meta we strive for.
Its why the 2 things are often used are the more simplistic, not always great to represent things, use of values and stats, as well as win rates. As it stands, the Mexican win rate is right on the cusp of underpowered (47% avg, with some surges and dips across elos) and res to res most their shipments outstrip other civ equivalents by a solid margin in multitudes. The rest will always come down to more subjective evaluations unless someone is willing to comb through 1000s of games.
So what can I conclude? Iâd say the win rate is bound to get back up. Nerf wiplash is real and one objective fact is how DE civ players pretend to know their civ, yet even legacy civs can take years to master in this complex game. There is no way mexico is explored fully at this time. As for nr20, 40 and beyond, its been proven in events over and over its basically beyond cheese in power with known builds. For 1v1 supremecy, well how does a low but not cratered (see malta at 41% at times and that is a crater) civ with overvalued shipments and options and a massive xp curve do so poorly? maybe nothing here will prove anything to you or others but clearly the cards are somehow completely shit (unlikely) or the civ is needing to not go piki/skirm>CA>FI>the same 3 or 4 age 4 shipments every single game. Youâre no longer otto in your ability to play the same build over and over (maybe not if bajaâing)
Still, Iâd wager, just like i felt for italy before the super buffs people called for âdead civâ italy that started to climb right before it was soaring in win rates then buffed, or usa, or hausa, or Ethiopia (ded civ my butt) that mexico with its extremely strong options, is 1 new pro showcase away from terrorizing everyone aggain. once mexico players realize there is infact an age3 to 4 option, or baja is still bullshit .check discords fwiw of baja games or youtube, I think its the new botto to 1500+ elo strat since it requires like 0 macro or micro past 530min) at a minimum if just not completely busted. And while you and I dont play much treaty, if they can balance something there late late game why not? doesnt effect us.
Anyways, again I dont expect anyone to have their belief changed here. Just give it time, a civ with cshipments often more worth 1.2x most other civs, uber eco buildings, access to up to 60 something cards in a game to pick from all waiting for the right meta shift or other civ to get hammered to rear its head. or for a unneeded buff to send it into overdrive. again.
I agree with the part saying revolt is impossible to scout. You cannot know if opponent is going to revolt or not, which revolt it is, by scouting or looking at opponent deck. Because they all look the same. There is a reason why it is allowed to see opponent decks because you need those information to decide what strategy to counter opponent strats. Then mexico revolt completely change the deck and he doesnât need any pre revolt cards anyway, so there is no clue of what a mexico opponent is doing. Thatâs just unfair.
Chicaco bonus vs heavy infantry should be removed. They are uncountable for some civs.
Well yeah either that or the bonus vs heavy cavalry, having both is a absolute no go.
Here we go againâŠ
Chinaco vs Hussar age 2 [Equivalent resources]
Regular Plain Musk vs Full Age 3 Chinaco [Equivalent resources]
Well⊠this pretty much will solve the issue. It is to know if the problem is civilization or just the lack of skill of the players.
In the event that one player/s is very skilled and the other/s is not, the player who loses always accuses the civilization of being âOPâ before seeing what he did wrong.
