If they implement this nerf to the jpk i will be so sad. Devs could we just get a simple .25 or .5 speed upgrade and reverting its multiplier vs shock infantry back to x2 from 1.6? That’s it, nothing drastic like nerfing it’s hitpoints and attack.
Based on the current pup, a batch of 10 Jaguars will be 300 less food, but the batch of 10 will also have 350 less hitpoints and 40 less attack, which isn’t a fair trade tbh, just buff it’s speed and multiplier vs shock infantry a very small buff that wont make it op or completely destroy the unit. Thanks for the hard work devs, let’s get this right. Btw I’m lvl 131 with Aztecs on all three games. WC, AD and DE. I’d like to think my opinion isn’t over the top.
2 Likes
Light Infantry (now called shock infantry) are not skirmishers, they are runners as coyotes.
1 Like
People, it’s a buff. they perform better against muskets, which is by far the most important if not the only important match-up for them.
None of these demonstrations take into account actual unit control, which has one common upside and one common downside.
The upside for musket control is kiting. The muskets are going to get more free hits in a real fight, and they’re going to use their ranged attack more frequently in a real fight. The new JPK are more efficient in absorbing ranged fire.
On the flip side, the vast majority of players target inefficiently while controlling ranged units. Overkill factors are huge in aoe3. Having more, cheaper units tends to be stronger than having fewer, stronger units until very late in the game, once population limits and heavy cannons start to factor in. Again, new JPK is more efficient.
We should not encourage the devs to make huge swings with their new balance changes. This is a nice conservative buff that might push JPK over the edge of viability, or it might not. We’ve waited 16 years for a viable JPK, we can wait another month or two.
5 Likes
Agreed. I’m glad there’s a voice of reason in this thread.
1 Like
-35 hp and -4 attack isn’t drastic? This suggestion is better, 205 hp and 20 attack with x3 vs cav, x2 vs shock, x3 vs heavy and 5 speed since Aztec doesn’t have any speed techs or cards.
This doesn’t change the fact that melee units do better scaled up rather than scaled down.
The only buff right now is speed, the hp and attack reductions are nerfs. Even if the price is scaled the same. No where have I said that the speed isn’t a buff.
Please prove this is some way at all. Look at my videos and this is not the case. The difference becomes more pronounced with larger populations, but it still exists in small populations. For melee units, this will always be the case.
One additional note that hasn’t been brought up: even if all your melee units could attack at once, there would still be an issue with attack diminishing more rapidly with weaker melee units.
Scenario 1: 2 100 HP units with 20 attack. After losing 50 HP, still have 40 attack.
Scenario 2: 8 25 HP units with 5 attack. After losing 50 HP, have a lower 30 attack.
Except it isn’t the only important match up. JPKs are the Aztec’s only response to massed halbs/dopps/samurai/etc. They don’t have cannons so they rely on weak ranged infantry and JPKs. The PUP changes will make them worse at facing these enemies.
2 Likes
Melee heavy infantry in general is almost always obsolete once you reach fourth age. Speed could make them not cannon fodder.
The results will be similar to the proposed videos, but perform a little worse than the proposed JPKs.
I went with 25% since the same resource armies were the same (+25% cost to PUP = 150) as current patch JPKS
+20% is also 144 resources, which would make the test groups a little weird. 144, 120, and 100 make it a bit hard to have equal resource armies. You’d be looking at partial units.
Only by looking at the exact number of hits it takes units to kill one another can you determine the effective change.
An extreme example that demonstrates my point: If a steppe rider had 1 more HP up to 151, hussar would take 6 hits instead of 5 to kill it. 1 HP is akin to a 20% HP buff in this important matchup. Meanwhile, an actual 20% HP buff for the steppe rider would put it to 180 HP, and a huss would kill it in 6 hits regardless. +20% cost and +20% dmg/hp for steppe rider would probably be a nerf, but a 1% increase in cost for 1% increase in hp/dmg would be a massive buff.
The only way to determine whether a generic % quality change for like % cost change is a nerf or buff is to look at individual match-ups. These cases are not all-inclusive since there are many variations of muskets and hussar, but in the most common practical match-ups, JPK has improved per cost.
You say this so confidently 
Aztec can answer heavy infantry with slingers, JPK, probably skull knights, or best of all ERK. With decent unit control ERK answers pretty much everything TBH. The only reason JPK matters in the slightest is b/c of the big buttons and their potential to be trained in age 2 before ERK are on the table.
How did my tests fail this? I did the tests on your recommended unit - musketeers. They aren’t veteran, but you can see that the scaled up JPKs do better than the PUP JPKs. This proves my point using almost your exact requirements.
How can you refute my tested evidence above? Based on the clicks next to the links, it looks like you haven’t even watched it.
I did mention ranged infantry. But it is also weak with short range and really wants a melee counterpart.
I didn’t say just heavy infantry. I’m talking about massed heavy infantry. Yes, in small numbers ERK can micro into beating them, but when both numbers are massed the ERK lost their edge. Aztec treaty players constantly complain about the inability to handle massed samurai.
Skull knights can’t be created at the same rate as the super heavy infantry, so it’s not reasonable to assume it can counter.
2 Likes
I did watch your videos.
you said yourself the new JPK’s are performing better. I don’t see any evidence that the 5.5% speed boost is the cause of this improvement, especially when the muskets don’t even kite. I really doubt that the 5.5% speed is reducing the number of shots each musket takes.
Then I’d like to circle back to what we’ve been arguing about. I think we might be talking past each other.
-
You’ve stated that more, weaker units are better than fewer stronger units. In my video posted above PUP JPKs vs Proposed JPKs mp4 I show that PUP JPKs scaled up 25% perform better than PUP JPKs. In the other video, PUP JPKs and Proposed JPKs vs Musketeers mp4, I show that they perform a little better versus musketeers. These units have the same cost efficacy (and speed), but the more expensive ones perform better.
-
You are basing the fact that this is a buff based on the match up with the musketeer. The JPK is used by the Aztecs in more than just this role. They are needed to counter mass heavy infantry, and they are useful for countering cavalry (when combined with slingers). The PUP change makes them worse at fighting in melee, as shown in the video above.
I agree that in that against ranged units, they do better the PUP JPK does better than previous patch. I have a feeling this is due to the domino effect that happens in RTS battles. The sooner you can clear the gap as a melee unit, the sooner you can lower dps from the enemy. Additionally, the speed helps compensate for bad pathing to the next target.
However, my argument is still to keep PUP JPKS scaled to 150 resources. This allows them to stay around their current efficacy versus melee damage while giving them an overall buff. These would remain at the same cost efficacy, so I don’t see it as a crazy buff.
Aztecs are officially now S+ tier OP.
The speed buff on JPK is completely unnecessary.
Spain has no chance vs Azzies now whatsoever. An army of coyotes/jpk mixed together literally steamrolls anything Spain can muster now, and there’s no chance of retreating because they’re so fast. Rods RIP, Pike RIP, Musk RIP, so much for being able to have a meat shield for skirms. Not easy adding a stable for goons when you have no access to quartermaster politician. Spain is the most UP and unloved civ seeing as every other civ is getting reworked and made insanely OP.
2 Likes
cough…Logistician…cough
they had their fun
1 Like
spain was s++ for a while iirc?
i think spain usually would want a good musket+ falc combo vs spain anyways, no? idk its funny because jpk seem to always be useless or op and never a middle ground
1 Like
I don’t think they S+ tier, more like A/B still. They were at the very bottom of civs.
What about Fast Fortress? Spain can easily do that and yet get skirmishers/cannon (the only things you need to beat aztecs).
Agree, Spain now is weak, log now sucks, only ok in water, for a decent eco u need spanish gold (now worst) + 1k wood, recently i saw games of pro players and spanish (probably samwise, not remember) lose all the games.
Spain need a few buff, and many card of old civs need a rework.
Probably tier B-C?
1 Like
Only their Logistician was S++ which was stupid OP. but Spain only has 1 viable strat and it’s the FF, which isn’t as fast as other civs, it’s predictable, requires 2 cards to get a decent eco (SG,& 1000w)… they have terrible and slow FI now (thanks to SG nerf) and Age4 xbow pike politician is useless… Spain gets wrecked in many matchups and it’s really frustrating to play tbh. They are -B at best, but probably C+.
SG is barely worth sending now, I’d like to see Spanish Gold restored to 400c, Papal Guard politician grant vet xbow/pike tech for free on top of the discounted Guard tech. And maybe buffing rod or lancer HP by +5.
1 Like