I hope they consider our proposals because I don’t notice a big effect on the changes they made
DeMuslim lost this game for not making a second Tc
I still favor any idea that would provide counterplay! Not just some raw stats (Buff X, nerf Y).
Rework or including a new mechanic, that is also “noob” friendly.
I suggested an togglable ability where the TC goes auto target fire and on cd it behaves with the old TC fire mechanic again.
It would auto-active when a ram hits the defensive structure (to be more noob friendly).
Another one would be the TC fires inaccurate, so you could try to dance with a knight around the Tc or let a focused melee unit wiggle left, and right to avoid some of the shots. While it is also very cool, and every AoE 2 player knows it, it is not as easy to pull off efficiently for a casual player.
But yeh this could be also combined and included together with an other mechanical rework.
I would rather see mechanics in place, that provide some entertaining games if executed correctly and is not perfectly balanced on the first attempt of the devs, then to simplify something that could be cool.
Counterplay options, are also easy to get right … Lets take water as an example, they did a great job there, by introducing a classic rock, scissor, paper mechanic. Is it pitch perfect!? Ofc not … it does not have to be perfect to work well. Does it need adjustments? For sure it does, but it will provide an more interesting gaming experience by default.
You would be able to get rewarded by outplaying the static defence mechanics. This could be balanced also through out 30% hit always and so on …
All what a aggressive player needs, is an option to protect the rams and apply damage while under the TC! This time can be limited, but not as much as it is now!
The time window for an attack is and always was there, it is big enough …
This game shows exactly why 2 TC is meta and hard to apply pressure.
And now a video 5 month ago …
For me a mix of both worlds would be great to see … I want to see 2 TC still viable as an opening strat in feudal but i also want a fair chance to punish it.
Devs:
Sadly the devs tend to oversimplify things for us immortals too much 
.
Just some examples, Arrow homing missiles (i thought a lazy oversight when i first started playing the game at release), but everyone that saw arrow ships, missing its arrows shows it is intentional. There was a ship, that got reduced damage when it got hit in front (was a cool “bug”, that could have been also this, it is not a bug its a feature thing, with some notification “That it has different armor stats from the front side” and rebalanced slightly). They decided to just fix it … Im always for simplifying things if needed, the macro game is becoming continuously easier to play, mostly thanks to better hotkeys and it is great, no one likes to press more buttons than needed to get the same task done … But when it comes to gameplay mechanics, they on purpose simplify them to a degree, that mainly stats clash on each other
They are doing a good job and most things they reworked or did are good.
Especially with the Malians and the water rework, they showed they really want to deliver an exciting gaming experience. It feels just inconsistent like they are not all on one page and still experimenting.
I changed my review (that was btw the 3. most voted negative review since release) to positive …
The game became quite balanced, but it is still lacking diversity … not enough landmarks or techs are viable, it could be great, not just “good”. But that’s another topic
1 Like
I find it interesting, that most experienced, what we had 5 month ago and now. But everyone suggests to keep it and just change some stats. Buff X, Nerf Y
the siege nerf changed the meta, before you couldn’t stay behind without having mangonels that had a lot of hp and more area of damage
I agree, I am not interested in making double Tc unfeasible, because double production speeds up the game, but that strategy must have a risk and not a Meta that favors the defender
1 Like
True u gained so much military advantage through castle age. This also shows how broken they were before. Im glad they reworked the siege completely and buffed the horsemen as a effective counter.
1 Like
Just out of sheer curiosity, I counted the TC killed a total of 21 Javelin Thrower / Donso during the 4 minutes long push 
(~2200 resources).
Malians vs Mongol TC
Keep in mind, javelin throwers with +1 have 4-piercing armor.
He should have tried to get use out of it by parking them as closest to the TC. This would have been a ~2,5 times better unit to tank the TC fire if u compare cost and survival ability. But IMO the outcome would have been the same.
This was single TC, blacksmith + techs(piercing armor and damage, siege engineers), vs double TC, castle age at the 12 min mark! There was no better timing also to strike for the Malian player, yeh the 2. TC already paid off at that time, but castle age a minute after it payed off!? not even close …
Totally agree …
From what I read and heard so far the community is mostly on one page here, just the attempts are different.
The devs got quite a lot of input already from everyone discussing it. It is up to the devs now
listen to his analysis
I think it’s time to consider removing the siege engineering requirement, plus other proposals we’ve made.
Here I develop the idea considering the new cost of the ram
If i would have watched this game non casted as an replay, i would have also predicted the outcome after the ~7 min mark, when the eco was splitted with cattles and no sign of an all in push and no additional TC … When he started to build his 1. ram, at 10 min, there it was already over
You just continue to watch, even tho u know what is gonna happened from now on
They got feedback from all kinds of sources now, that this is something the community likes to be changed. It reminds me a bit of the Horseman (Worsemen) topic
I’m sure we will see a patch after the tournament. Before the big tourney would be risky and could throw over the meta.
Before TC auto target, i saw not a problem in it, that an aggressive player has to pre-invest and also “tells” the defending one, im going for a heavy feudal push. It was warning you that your opponent is investing into feudal and prob want to rush you.
But that was at a time when i was scared if i can hold
If they really want to nerf town centers without touching the mechanics of it, then honestly idk, there are a bunch of options that would do the job to pick the best one of all of them … Prob would be a mix of some of them. In the best case scenario, we don’t “lose” something in return and it also addresses keeps directly with it.
I will wait now what they gonna do about it and come back on this topic after they addressed it.
I don’t think that Drongo video is a good example of the multi-TC meta being too strong still. The Malian player just wasn’t equal to DeMuslim in his macro and resource use. He was fighting 1 TC vs 3 TC in feudal and yet did not have much of a stronger military force - he was floating 900 gold for some reason during his push - if all those resources had been put into feudal army instead, the outcome could’ve been different. He didn’t even have a chance to attack a TC - just a Rus tower.
3 Likes
Yet these are the only two that actually directly and consistently impact the TC meta
Because many times it isn’t actually the TC that doesn’t go down that’s the problem. It’s how quickly the investment pays back, and how quickly the eco grows, meaning the opponent has such a small window to punish the boom
That’s why I think additional TCs need longer training times on Vils. Regardless of any other buffs to aggression (like siege damage or better rams)
As an example: Chinese player drops 2nd TC very close to main, with Barbican, their defensive capabilities like that are so much higher than another civ dropping an exposed TC on a boar, it becomes almost irrelevant if there’s an hp nerf
Double production speeds up the game, I don’t want a slow game either
Disagree, there are always a bunch of viable options …
We all saw a non-TC meta …
Would u think, that so many greedy TCs would be still a thing with the old fire mechanic?
You are right it pays off quite fast and u cant punish it before it pays off, not a good combination
The one thing i like about this idea is, that it would give 1 TC vs 2 TC a bigger chance, not directly of taking it down, but to make up for it with Age up Time, relics, sacred sites and map control …
It would take longer for the booming player until he has a villager lead, that is so significant that it outweighs, all the benefits of having more relics, sacred sites and such …
It has also downsides if two players are booming it potentially stretches out the game.
The other one is, 1 TC vs 2 TC could be also stretched out. 2 TC player managed to hold and takes off now, but it takes just longer to do so, it delays something that would happened sooner otherwise. You can argue it grants comeback potential, but yeh it could lead into games taking longer in avrg …
regarding the time window, it sounds more effective than it actually is … (it would go up from ~350 to 450 seconds) for a generic civ, if u would double the production time of villagers from 20 to 40 seconds … if your main goal is to grant a bigger time window to punish it, it would be one way … u could also shorten the time it needs for the aggressor to attack (reduce cost of rams, no tech or blacksmith required), build time, increase effeivenes, reduce effectiveness of TC and such … but even then the time-window is not the biggest problem! …
To illustrate the effectiveness of a TC at its current state.
Lets assume it will never pay off, lets say u build it and never qued up a villager, there are just 10 villager that build it, using it as a safe drop off point …
You want to take the TC down in feudal.
Even then it is a big investment for you to take.
To have a good chance u need min 2, better 3 rams (most with just 2 fail). The blacksmith + tech … Cost: 1075
You had to invest more into it, but the defending structure is super effective in killing ur army.
The defending player doesn’t have to kill the rams if he kills ur army and loses its TC and kill the rams afterwards all fine.
Now u put 1075 resources to have 3 rams, that mainly just exist to kill the TC asap.
The TC on the other hand directly increase your army strength more efficiently.
It is not as simple as put these two side by side, bcs his eco is idling, but the aggressive player’s eco is off balance thanks to the big amount of wood he needs to build the rams, he can’t produce army as effectively as he could.
You can bring up more pros and cons who might be favored here. But even to have the TC just as a defensive structure, it is not clear which side is favored here and this is without producing any villagers at all …
Lets compare it with the old towncenter fire mechanic …
You build 2 rams, but now u can also protect them, you have the army lead and invested 825 resources.
You can fight way longer under the TC and his eco is idling more. Your army size gets not reduced as fast as it is now, so u can retreat and retry to apply damage again, after u build more ##### ### could start to apply pressure with a single ram and snipe villagers or attack other buildings(way more viable), the defensive player is struggling way more and longer to find a solution with his smaller army size and maybe even income (assuming they are idling more now). When u now cut off also food (that is mainly used for the 2. TC), u cut off the main resource that allows the defending player to build more army … The total fight under the TC is dragged out way longer… The fact that the aggressive players eco is also wood heavy oriented now, is not anymore an big disadvantage, because he might loose the rams, but the TC did not killed the units of him that effectively.
Why i also dislike just buffing rams or reducing TC HP for example, it would help but not in a nice way … Lets assume u always can take a towncenter down with just 2 rams! current cost 825. But the TC payed for itself allready … It forced u to build 2 rams and until the tc dies, it produced villagers, now u have to kill also all the villagers that this tc produced and maintain an army lead.
If u reduce the rams also in its cost and everyone can build them on the field? lets say 2 rams cost 400 wood… that would certainly help to execute a push in time … but even then, he can spare villagers …
The fire mechanic that stupidly reduces the aggressive player’s army size and make the rams though to defend are IMO such a big factor, that it outweighs “smaller” adjustments on other parts …
You are right, that an TC HP nerf alone would be disappointing to see …
If i could change something, it would be the fire mechanic (that would also help with keeps/towers…) You could start to pressure ur opponent just with a single ram already … then see if the changes on the pup where granting an big enough time window to deny the 2. TC, if not increase it slightly more. (just to open up an viable strategy/counter to not let him place it or at least not at an exposed position).
Add extra damage to the TC when it builds up.
If it is still a dominating meta, give TCs -5 torch damage resistance, to allow units to help out more effectively to bring down the TC.
Besides that, i would compare a booming player to someone that goes fast castle. If necessary i would then increase the villager production time slightly and start with 5 seconds, to allow single TC → Castle Age, Map control to be more on an even level with a booming player …
For everyone that is interested in where the numbers are coming from.
Interesting to see is, that it takes quite some time until the production of the villagers pays for itself.
Also interesting is, that you are most behind at around the ~100 second mark, after you build the TC.
I will make it public, when i have time, so everyone can see and play around with dif civ boni and gather speeds.
If you see any mistake, let me know
If TCs do end up needing further nerfs, then maybe they should add a food and/or gold cost to them.
1 Like
So to increase its total cost.
Imo what the devs need to deliver:
1.) Open up a Time Window to deny / delay it
2.) Grant players options to punish it
3.) single TC → fast castle, should be also viable
1 Like
There is a way to balance that but it might be too harsh all of the towncenters will have less range except landmark towncenter and they will have a increase range tech at castle age
I want the TCs also to be useful and be able to protect us.
If u reduce it by 2 tiles, longbows outrange the TC, IDK if that would be nice to see.
Towers would need then also reduced range, or u could tower the TC more effectively.
Cutting someone off resources would become also very efficient.
In some matchups and unit comps, the TC would become very inefficient to protect early aggression.
But yeah that would also help, personally not the best choice, if it just gets reduced slightly, it would help overall.
Another idea, would be it does less damage on big range, everything that is in 4+ tiles, get less damage (MB -1 or -2) and everything that is 4 and below, gets current damage. That would help also to protect the rams and unit comps with range units would become stronger under the TC. But yeh weird mechanic overall and performs inconsistently
There was this bigger rock, scissor, paper thing in place
How it was before in feudal
TC > units > villager > rams > TC.
And now:
TC > units > villager > rams … “Am I not a threat to you? And why the hell I’m alone …”
What bothers me also since launch is:
A TC is strong dark / feudal age and underwhelming in the castle age and above.
When u have ur first M@A or Knights, they have a much better cost / survive ratio.
Standard TC Garrisoned 10 villager
M@A non-upgraded has 4/4 armor, TC no upgrades 6 dmg / garrisoned unit + 8 TC.
A single M@A survives 15 seconds (8 resources / second surviving) … if 10 villagers are idling, assuming u have some eco upgrades and gather with 45/min, u lost over 112 resources (+ walk idle time) to 120 which the M@A cost.
If M@As have the armor advantage they can survive ~27 seconds (~4,5 resources / second surviving). Now a single M@A does more eco damage to the defending player, just by making the TC idle until it dies …
Compare it to standard feudal age units:
Spearmen die after 5 seconds (in best case scenario the first volley is on cd and tc does overdamage) = (16 resources / second surviving)
Spearman could also die in ~2,5 seconds if he just walks in
Horsemen = (16 resources / second surviving)
Archer = (32 resources / second surviving) (can be also 3,8 seconds in best caste scenario) (22 resources / second surviving)
Right now I’m happy that this is the case, it let us flood the enemy’s base with a stream of units and give us a win condition in AGE 3 … What I dislike about it, is that armored units in ur base overperform if u compare them to other popular unit compositions
The problems that u face in feudal age and TCs, gets replaced in castle age with keeps
i know thats why i said its a harsh choice the other choice is giving rams more health or when units garrisoned inside rams will hit faster like in aoe2 for every unit it attack speed will increase %1-2 for example but this could destroy the advantage of TC totally
this is a must change they must needed to repaired with wood and stone it was like that in aoe2 too
1 Like
… thumbs up (20 characters)
1 Like