I have no idea what you talking about LOL… sorry.
If 55%+ winrate is fine to you ok, end of discussion.
The changes I suggested tells what I think.
1 Like
How could this prove that Frank, Celts and Mayan deserve to be nerfed without any mention for Goths (since they should be nerfed too according to this logic right?) Also you chose the 1250-1650 bracket which bears no particular meaning besides having those winrates inflated when compared to other ELOs.
5 Likes
People were already talking about Goths, that’s why I didn’t mention them. And because I have no solid opinion on how to balance them.
I just posted additional changes besides the ones already posted by the OP, I didn’t mean that the 3 civs I mentioned should be the ONLY changes of the patch.
I only choose to post one photo, that doesn’t mean I didn’t check the 1650+ bracket…
The 1250-1650 is the best bracket to look at right now (1650+ would be ideal if it had a decent sample size).
Below 1250 elo data is pointless… People there are new to the game and do not really play the civs properly.
2 Likes
This bracket includes both people like Ornlu, an experienced caster who organizes tournaments, and some like me, your local green-icon scrub. Allow me to doubt of its relevance.
3 Likes
Instead of nerfing balanced civs we should focus on balance more weak civs, especially if your goal is to see more civ variety.
9 Likes
Fully agree on your celts and mayan proposal and also winrste are the best metric we have to find unbalanced civs. These civs need nerfs.
But I don’t agree with your Frank’s proposal of removing crop rotation. Didn’t Karl the great the founder of the frankish empire himself oversee the introduction of crop rotation? Somewhere in the back of my find I thing I remember something about it from middle school a long time ago.
Instead I suggest nerfing that stable train time unique tech.
1 Like
Well according to lot of people here in this topic we should just ignore winrates and base our balance changes on “bird signs”.
And I agree that removing a farm bonus from Franks is not historically accurate. 
The unique tech “Chivalry” is indeed pretty strong but it’s also pretty costly. Not sure if nerfing that would help a lot but could be an option instead of removing Crop Rotation.
2 Likes
After having played a lot of aoe 3 where train time reduction cards are a things and one can even get instant production in some cases.
The power of these kind of bonuses can not be underestimated and I think nerfing the tech wouldnt go unnoticed.
1 Like
Winrates are not equal to the chance of a civilizations winning against an avarage civ.
Do you even know how to interpret or analyze winrates? Because higher winrates surely don’t mean better civ. In fact, nobody is smart enough to actually precisely calculate how balance affects winrates. There is always some randomness (for examle map generation or civ matchups), there might be people who always play a certain civ and win, etc etc. How does this concept that everything should be balanced around 50% winrates even come up in some people’s mind, that’s one thing I’m very interested at.
It is much more safe to base balancing on players’ experiences.
1 Like
Is the plan to axe anything that is above 50% or what?
Friendly reminder that Huns get half of this for free and that it’s pretty cool that time and ressources eventually net the Frank player a better bonus.
Anyway, it’s not like you nerfing Celts would prevent Hoang from tryharding all day long and inflating the stats by himself lol
2 Likes
This is imo the best way to address the GC TT problem. Maybe progressive along the ages as 30/35/40%.
Still Italians would remain weak imo, but at least with a signature decent bonus before imp.
1 Like
i think 40% faster training time would be a bit much for free.
5 Likes
Progressive along the ages makes more sense. It is very good for GC, decent for ranges. In imp is not that huge, since you can just build more ranges. In the early stages it helps, but Italians do not have the eco to sustain such a production. In feudal a 30% is definitely fine if we have a team bonus making 20%. Also, it would be a bit less than 3 ranges even with 40%. 3 feudal ranges cannot be sustained even by civs like mayans or celts, with a much superior eco… so there is no possibilities italians can.
In castle age idk, it does not affect the research of TR, it could be helpful but probably a civ with a better eco can afford the 3rd range…
Overall this seems to indicate that 40% can be balanced even as a flat bonus, but a progressive bonus is nicer to play imo.
Would you change it as 25/30/40 or 30/35/40?
even then its a bit much. think about it this way, the team bonuses are 20%.
1 Like
20% affecting also the research time. A civ bonus/UT is stronger ofc. So I would say in feudal it has to be more than 20%. Especially since this is almost all the civ would have.
Would you put different percentages?
i don’t know what i would do, but to put it in perspective, the only civ with anything close to that for a bonus, for production time only, is Cumans and its a tech for them.
It would be curious for sure, but I guess we can agree that mayan discount, Ethiopians rof, and briton range are superior bonuses. Tbh I even think this may be not enough for them, but it would make them better than they are now…
Maybe off topic but I found this discussion about Leitis in AoeZone, do you agree with this?
i agree with some of what they are saying and disagree with others. one dude suggested making them basically a light cavalry with minimal armor (0/0 and 0/1) and 120 health with bloodlines. all i got to say to that is, that unless the unit only costs food, it would be an utter waste and would get wrecked by archers hard.
I do agree that maybe reworking the UU could better help balance the civilization, but if the Leitis gets nerfed in such a way they definitely need compensation for being nerfed, as they aren’t an overbearing civilization at the pro level.
3 Likes
That is exactly what a “winrate” is… Win percentage of Franks vs any civ.
Right now we still have few data of this patch for certain civs (not Franks imo, 2000 games with Franks is already fine).
Anyway last patch was running for almost 2 months, thousands and thousands of matches and Franks still on top, same result. But I give up from this topic anyway. GL HF all.
2 Likes