CBA 2015 - Bug List

 [xCs]PLO_Style


Join Date: 17 December 2011
Posts:1258
Posted 20 December 2014 - 9:59 pm
here's a random thought:

why not reduce frank's castle age time to 250 or 200, and increase the imperial age time to 500 or something
Link | Reply | Quote
 T3nchy


Join Date: 30 June 2007
Posts:151
Posted 20 December 2014 - 10:35 pm
Because franks are already a pretty powerful civilization if they are used correctly.
Link | Reply | Quote
 [xCs]PLO_Style


Join Date: 17 December 2011
Posts:1258
Posted 20 December 2014 - 11:02 pm
T3nchy wrote:
Because franks are already a pretty powerful civilization if they are used correctly.

They are uniquely powerful in imperial age due to paladins having extra HP, however they are weak in feudal age and they are slightly above average in castle age (since they are one of the civs with bloodlines). So reducing their castle age time and increasing their imperial age time seems like a reasonable change.

What do you mean by used correctly? Any ranged unit (except mamelukes) can easily beat throwing axemen with some simple hit-and-run micro.
Link | Reply | Quote
 Barsta


Join Date: 31 July 2011
Posts:2719
Posted 20 December 2014 - 11:15 pm
They are uniquely powerful in imperial age due to paladins having extra HP, however they are weak in feudal age and they are slightly above average in castle age (since they are one of the civs with bloodlines). So reducing their castle age time and increasing their imperial age time seems like a reasonable change.

What do you mean by used correctly? Any ranged unit (except mamelukes) can easily beat throwing axemen with some simple hit-and-run micro.

Axemen counter both elephants and mamelukes, thats nothing to sniff at.
Link | Reply | Quote
 [MM]Gallas


Join Date: 25 May 2011
Posts:2751
Posted 20 December 2014 - 11:18 pm
Funny how many complains after he show up with some changes ;whistling
Link | Reply | Quote
 [xCs]PLO_Style


Join Date: 17 December 2011
Posts:1258
Posted 20 December 2014 - 11:59 pm
Barsta wrote:
Axemen counter both elephants and mamelukes, thats nothing to sniff at.

Yea maybe in a 1v1 setting... throw one archer civ behind the elephant and the axemen are practically useless. The best thing an army of axemen can do versus an army of archer units is hope to kill 1 for 1. Hence why franks should have a lower castle age time and a higher imperial age time (possibly even 600 for imperial age or something)

Link | Reply | Quote
 [xCs]PLO_Style


Join Date: 17 December 2011
Posts:1258
Posted 21 December 2014 - 12:00 am
[MM]Gallas wrote:
Funny how many complains after he show up with some changes ;whistling
.

who is complaining? i just made a suggestion lol
Link | Reply | Quote
 [dv8]OrangWuTang


Join Date: 21 August 2012
Posts:1419
Posted 21 December 2014 - 12:08 am
Aztecs: Squires is good but wont change that much imo.

Byzantines: imp should stay at 600 because
1) Cataphracts are often used as shield/runners and in that case you will have a hard time getting kills, especially in late game
2) They are usually one of the last civs that razes because they suck at razing and
3) Their units overall are pretty bad. Theyve got a large variety of different units but they dont have any really good units. Theyre the only civ aside from celts that has camels or paladins but no bloodlines. Theyre also lacking Blast Furnance.
Instead of focusing on balancing the map by changing the age up kill amounts, you may pay some attention to the spawn-speed or max pop. For example making the cataphract spawn 1 second slower would be perfect imo.

Chinese: imp at 550 is a good change.

Franks: I have to agree with totoro here. Theyre one of the most useless civs in feudal but one of the best in imperial. So lowering cage to 200 or 250 will get them out of the useless feudal age sooner and on the same time increasing the imperial age to 600 or 650 will get them their strong paladins later and they have to stick around in cage with their average units longer.

Mayans: imp at 500 is a good change.

Mongols: Their spawn speed is definatly too fast. Youre pretty much constantly at the pop limit. Making it slower is really necessary imo, 1 second should already balance them a bit.

Persians: I feel like they got a bit too much pop. Reducing it by 4 or 8 will
1) make them less of a "kill the infantry or weak archer neighbor by just patroling them from your spawn over in the other base"
2) probably make some (more) people consider making units in castle and imperial instead of just sticking to elephants. Keeping the pop constantly capped at 200 is already more useful in most cases than keeping those 60 elephants but keeping them is easier to play + saves recources in case your allies need some later on. So lowering the pop slightly should do good imo.

Saracens: imp at 700 is a good change.

Spanish: imp at 700 is a good change, might even consider going down to 650 (same as mongols should be fair).

Teutons: imp at 500 should be a bit better since there are usually only a few minutes between cage and imp and considering their imperial is pretty strong, they should get imp a bit later.

Turks: imp at 650 is a good change, might even consider going down to 600.
Link | Reply | Quote
 JustTesting1234


Join Date: 30 April 2012
Posts:304
Posted 21 December 2014 - 1:51 pm
* AZTECS *

# tactics:
- camp in base
- do runners
- xbows/rams in cage (eagles only feed)
- pray to get to imp

# jaguar warrior
- the only meele unique unit with 0 pierce armor
- the only meele unique unit that doesnt increase hidden attacks with the elite upgrade
- the meele unique inf unit that has the lowest attack against buildings/eagles

squires is not a solution, unless u want to keep them as runners

proposed solution: blast furnace at start. this way their infantry wont [You must login to view link] before imp
Link | Reply | Quote
 [BH_]lnIghTzl


Join Date: 9 June 2010
Posts:9155
Posted 24 December 2014 - 7:51 pm
if you reduce pers pop, you should reduce their imp as well imo in terms of fairness,

and i think huns should imp at 450


Link | Reply | Quote
123[4]
Displaying 46 - 55 out of 55 posts
Forum Jump:
1 User(s) are reading this topic (in the past 30 minutes)
0 members, 1 guests

Temas más activos de la semana: