Yeah, that’s the whole point I’m talking about. There are civs that are good in the late game and others that are good at the beginning. That’s the beauty of this ancient game that is older than a lot os its players. That’s why there is a lot of ways of playing.
Otherwise, people would only play with what? The opposite of what you pointed out, bazingaaaa!! Civs that are only good at rushing!!! And the other civs would be never used.
Ranked was created because this game needed to be revived. The new generations can’t stand a 2-3h game like the old times. Ranked games are all about choosing a build order + rushing strategy (that you saw in YouTube) and almost nothing else (until really high elo).
People usually disconnect either the first time they got low gold and have to use trash units or when the strategy fails or when the opponent get pass by the first defenses.
Most of the players don’t even know all the civs, all the counters, all the techs. And will never know in this kind of match, because they are most of the time not useful in this type of game.
I’m tired of defeating people that are bad at the game, but good at rushing because of YouTube tutorials. They can’t stand pressure, can’t change the strategy once it’s failed. Don’t even know how to counter units properly.
“High level” it’s only played by pros. And they can play rushing or booming. Ranked or not. Of course they prefer rushing, because it’s usually WAY more dangerous when you really know how to play.
I don’t know what game do you all play. This game was never unbalanced in any kind of match besides infinite resources. There is no such civilization unbeatable after booming.
My experience playing almost everyday. Once the game gets “too hot” and difficult, when you have to play rebuilding many times, people just disconnect. I have won a fairly amount of unbalanced matches by only giving a hard time to be defeated.
got a hot news tip for you - it requires a significant supply advantage in pikes/halbs to beat war elephants, so if your opponent is coming at you with around 50+ war elephants, you’re pretty much dead.
It all depends on the time of map. The civs you and the team have. How good is your team. And the more important, how did you manage to let the other player build 50+ elephants, because it’s not easy to have that amount of resources.
and you know what is likely to back up those war elephants? archers. so good luck with your pikes even getting close to them.
furthermore - what about in 1v1 games? what do you do then?
and i agree with you, if you let your opponent build up to a composition like 50+ fully upgraded elite war elephants, you absolutely deserve to get flattened. - but this heavily conflicts with what you said earlier.
if 50+ war elephants is enough to make you answer with “well what did you do while he was making them” I have to say, your argument is sounding awfully wishy washy atm.
except you literally just said…
furthermore - non death match tournament games aren’t mirror matches - they are almost always civ pick. so what gives? was the game never unbalanced? if death matches are played mirror match to be 100% balanced, why aren’t the rest of tournaments played that way? literally real life tournaments discredit your own argument.
and you know what is likely to back up those war elephants? archers. so good luck with your pikes even getting close to them.
You will have to use meat shield and kill the elephants one by one with other units, maybe siege, a lot of archers picking one by one. In this kind of matches, you usually win by having more deaths than kills.
furthermore - what about in 1v1 games? what do you do then?
I said up there I was not mentioning 1v1.
and i agree with you, if you let your opponent build up to a composition like 50+ fully upgraded elite war elephants, you absolutely deserve to get flattened. - but this heavily conflicts with what you said earlier.
I said about longer games, booming gamings, not infinite resources games. Actually I mentioned that infinite resources can’t be balanced.
if 50+ war elephants is enough to make you answer with “well what did you do while he was making them” I have to say, your argument is sounding awfully wishy washy atm.
Again, you misunderstood the type of game I’m talking about. It’s not infinite resources and I don’t need to make the calculations to you about 50+ elephants.
furthermore - non death match tournament games aren’t mirror matches - they are almost always civ pick. so what gives? was the game never unbalanced? if death matches are played mirror match to be 100% balanced, why aren’t the rest of tournaments played that way? literally real life tournaments discredit your own argument.
One more time you are taking my words and make them up for your terms. I NEVER said that any civ can defeat any civ. I said that there is no GOD civ that you can’t defeat.
but balance impacts 1v1, whether you like it or not. as a matter of a fact - the game is largely balanced around 1v1.
and 50+ war elephants isn’t infinite resources. its just a lot of resources. a single war elephant doesn’t cost much more gold wise then a knight does. food? yeah its expensive their but lets face it, most maps have hordes of wood to turn into food.
except i’m not talking infinite resources. you can do that with the resources on the map. would it be hard? yeah. but doesn’t require unlimited resources.
again. they don’t balance the game around stuff like 300 population games.
do they occasionally tone down stuff that is too excessive? yes. they do. but for the most part death match and team games don’t see balance changes too much.
same reason they nerfed the lords of the west civs - nerf something that is frustrating to deal with, but buff them elsewhere. so my guess is hussite wagons and slaztcha (spelling?) get nerfed, but both gives get buffed elsewhere.
I’m not in the mood to have to explain all this to you only to justify why I think Bohemians is unbalanced in a kind of match you don’t play. Just create a looby, invite good players and play something like BF, Arena or Amazon. You can even play CBA, no economy needed to see the wagons are tough.
The same thing they did with Lithuanians. There was no counters to massed Leitis. Halbs were dead with 2 strikes.
Hussite wagons are absolutely broken in cba thought.i don’t play that but many people are. It’s a significant part of aoe2. Wouldn’t hurt to get the unit stats nerved some, can even make them cheaper, just not the most pop efficient ranged unit by a long shot. Can be the best, but with ws smaller gap then to war wagons or elegant archers or Khmer ballista.
You see, all the really strong pop efficient uu aren’t seen in pro games, but that doesn’t mean that they can’t be really strong if the sitsruion allows them to mass them. And these situations do matter and need to stay reasonable. That’s why hussite wagons need nerf.
Best case all these units would cost 2 pop and in return become cheaper. Would make them more use able in Pro games and more balanced in massed sitsruion
As a first step, just make hussite wagons 2 pop and observe