Based on the stats on aoe pulse, range opening has <50% win rate, including MAA opening, while the scout opening has generally 54% winrate. Other than that, 4 out of top 5 civs are horse civ. There’s no way we need to nerf archer line play.
I saw many hate to archer play on this forum. Maybe that’s the reason devs being biased and making such disappointing decision
It is mostly because of 2000+ elo
no it’s not. I select ELO > 1600
Your elo range is 1600-1900. I selected 2000-3000.
I do find this odd. The data clearly shows that if anything archer civs are under powered for >95% of the player base, nerfing them for the sake of the top players only feels like a bad decision for the enjoyment of the game for the majority of players.
That being said I do think the way the nerf has been done will likely not be that noticeable by the majority of the player base who don’t run such tight builds
In the end, the resource cost increase is not that big, especially for Crossbows. A more average player might not feel the effects of it. Most of the top players, at least from what I’ve heard, have agreed that the Archer-line powerspikes in each age are too strong.
The data you show still favors scout opening. If you check opening match-ups, you still see Scouts Any vs Range Opener Any has 53% winrate. So for high level player, I don’t see the need to nerf archer play
By saying “nerfing archer”, I imply both the upcoming upgrade fee increase and the previous “attack move delay”. I personally plays archer for many years, and I just don’t get it why so many patches nerf archer generally
Why do you always feel the need to try and make others feel worse about themselves? It doesn’t benefit you or them, it’s just really toxic, like you want everyone to get the opinion you are a better player than them, despite the fact that the way you go about it is totally unnecessary.
I’m not sure if this statistics is trustworthy. For instance, let’s count games (play rate column):
MAA Any (34270) < MAA No Feudal (2401) + MAA Range (33586).
Seems weird to me.
Same for scout openings.
And what does “range” mean in this statistics? Is it archers or skirms?
It makes sense to me to nerf archers, because it feels like 80% or the castle age openings are xbows or knights.
They need to nerf knights too to keep it balanced, but even if they don’t this nerf will probably increase variety.
no Knights and no Archers, what is the opening gonna be then? 3 TC boom vs 3 TC boom every game?
sure. how do you plan to nerf knights?
They are nota directly nerfing archer civs. Thet are nerfing archers (the unit) because infantry and cavalry civs also use them very often.
Web nerd status about the pick rate of units regardless civ to discuss the necesity of the nerf
Personally I think I would either raise the cost of the second armour upgrade or give tc’s some bonus damage against Cav to make diving more expensive (and also reduce the effectiveness of late game hussah raids which may games devolve into). If you then gave elephants an exemption to said bonus damage it would also give them a bit a niche albeit a minor one. (Disclaimer haven’t run the maths on any of the above)
That could be a secondary effect of heated shot so that tech becomes useful in land maps
Do knights reallg need that big a nerf? Archers got a slight upgrade increase and knights get lasting nerfs?
In my head I figured this would be the sort of nerf that only minimally impacts pros but has a bigger impact on lower elo players giving them more of a safety net if they fail to maintain walls or quick walls. It doesn’t change any of the existing unit v unit meta’s so thought it is quite clean in that regard.
But yer idea was to nerf knights more for lower Elos without really affecting them for pros. Same way to how archer upgrade cost increase will affect pros more than it affects mid Elos.
On that note one of the big differences I see between mid Elos and pros with regards to knights is the ability to save your economy via quick walking.
Edit: also knights are kinda getting a permanent buff via the improvements to pathing in theory
which other unit can both force a fight vs Knights and is pop efficient enough to not be insta-loss when the Knights player switches army composition? Pikeman is good and all until the Knights player mixes Handcannons/Onager/whatnot.
I am confused. You support nerf of knight?