[EB] Whats Wrong?

[Lazy O]

Straightforward question, why do certain people (name begins with G but I wont take it, you get the idea) have a problem with Steppe armies? I have fought against them alot, I do not complain, I lose, yes, But I do not tell the other guy to stop doing it, what is the problem with people complaining about certain types of armies?

It went to a point where SOME people stopped playing me for some time, after which I thought lets just ditch the idea and go carthage next month....

[antisocialmunky]

A single game takes like 1 hour long.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

I was wondering if maybe the steppe rules could be modified a wee bit as it just seems easier as steppe, even for me when I am not as talented with cavalry as some other players. The cavalry rules are fine imo, but maybe limit the infantry you can bring for steppe armies. Possibly a limit on heavy infantry if anyone would be willing to classify infantry types for those factions which can go steppe. It makes little sense that you can bring a steppe army with a full contingent of heavy infantry as well.

[gamegeek2]

(Applying to tournaments) - Impatience is not a good excuse not to play. It's more of an admission that you're just a dick, who committed to this tournament but decides to rob people of their opportunity to have fun because you're impatient. Besides, I find that against many factions, steppe players actually should not bring steppe armies, but people will refuse to play you anyways.

The exception is probably western barbarian factions, which (except the Getai) actually have almost no chance of beating a steppe army. If victory is not possible than the point of the game is moot - because one-sided slaughters, regardless of player skill, aren't fun. That's actually probably the only impossible matchup in the game. That's why I typically bring CAC against barbs, to have a - sort of - "fair fight."

Robin, there IS an infantry limit, it's 10. And have you read the Indo-Saka unit descriptions, where the Sakas' Indo-Greek vassals brought their heavy hoplites and Agema infantry to fight with them?

[The Celtic Viking]

Impatience is not a good excuse not to play. It's more of an admission that you're just a dick, who committed to this tournament but decides to rob people of their opportunity to have fun because you're impatient.

Well, that's a fatuous argument. If you're too impatient to fight against steppe armies, then chances are you won't have any fun fighting against steppe armies. Why should anyone be forced to fight a battle they won't enjoy just because... uh... someone else wants you to?

No one is trying to rob steppe players from their opportunity of having fun, but you are trying to guilt trip players to fight battles they don't enjoy playing. If someone doesn't want to play against a steppe army, then that's fine. He doesn't have to, so respect that decision. If no one else wants to play against a steppe army either, then that sucks for the guy playing steppe, but c'est la vie.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

Robin, there IS an infantry limit, it's 10. And have you read the Indo-Saka unit descriptions, where the Sakas' Indo-Greek vassals brought their heavy hoplites and Agema infantry to fight with them?

I have. I also thought this would refer to a CAC rather than a SAC. After all, the Saka had to evolve their style of fighting once they moved into the mountainous terrain of the Hindu Kush and eventually into India itself.

[Lazy O]

The argument of western factions being crap against steppe is stupid, Kival2 came extremely close and was only stopped by an incredibly stubborn unit of indian Longbows.

[Kival]

The argument of western factions being crap against steppe is stupid, Kival2 came extremely close and was only stopped by an incredibly stubborn unit of indian Longbows.

I did not see it that way. I think I should review our replay...

[vartan]

I've thought about the following, but haven't asked anybody their thoughts on it. So, consider the following, if you will.

Think about this situation. Unlike how I do tournaments now, imagine I took all the names of people who signed up and created a single or double elimination tournament bracket. By the way, when signing up, not only would you have to state which faction you are playing as, but also whether it is CAC or SAC (if applicable), and you have to stick to it no matter what. Think of it as if you had one single army, and you were its general. I'm not saying you pick the same units, but rather the same faction and AC. Pros of single elim that apply to me is one: that it would end quickly and one loss = you're out. Double elim is good in that 'losers' still get a chance to get back in the game. You have to lose twice to be 'out'. Disadvantage of either? Simple: we have one month to get all of those matches played. That means unless we actually tell people you have the following amount of days to play against your opponent, we're going to have trouble finishing that monthly tourney. And one piece of consolation is that the matchups would be completely random. I assure you.

Anyway, thought I'd spill that finally.

[antisocialmunky]

The argument of western factions being crap against steppe is stupid, Kival2 came extremely close and was only stopped by an incredibly stubborn unit of indian Longbows.

To be fair, I made the Steppe rules by pulling reasonable numbers out of the air for the vanilla EDU. It was NEVER tested extensively but it kinda worked for vanilla but steppe was somewhat OP. Since the archer ammo nerf, you may want to give civ an extra archer or something to deal with it. 2:1 cav to archer ratio feels better. I mean, the HA damage nerf should have fixed it but infantry still gets shredded by arrows in the back so it really didn't make HA that worse. It just makes them worse at shooting from the front.

[Lazy O]

But you managed to beat it, thing is, I have always fought against 8 archers in vanilla, so I am used to skirmishing and knowing how to deal with it, so that is why I choose steppe in the first place.

[-Stormrage-]

I hate Steppe to be honest, but i dont beleive they're OP even though i lost against them 3 times in a roow. I Beleive there IS a way to beat them. I mean Steppe is basically a bunch of Horse archers, who btw have less men and less damage then foot archers. and some 3 catas with light infatry. All you need to beat it is a spam of heavily Armoured Infantry which wont take damage from archers. just wait for him to finish his arrows and come to you a 20 cohort roman army would be perfect for beating steppe armies , the Flimsy Arrows would do no damage to heavy armor .

[Kival]

All you need to beat it is a spam of heavily Armoured Infantry which wont take damage from archers. just wait for him to finish his arrows and come to you a 20 cohort roman army would be perfect for beating steppe armies , the Flimsy Arrows would do no damage to heavy armor .

You do not have that possibility with barbarian armies because they lack cheap armoured units. It's not impossible but if both players are equally skilled I cannot see a barbarian faction winning against steppe.

[-Stormrage-]

yes, if your units dont have armor they'll get turned into shish kebabs

[vartan]

You do not have that possibility with barbarian armies because they lack cheap armoured units. It's not impossible but if both players are equally skilled I cannot see a barbarian faction winning against steppe.

Not all matchups were meant to be. Simple as, if you ask me. There's only so much you can do, because this entire issue is like most: it's like a hydra. You fix one spot, ten other issues arise.

[-Stormrage-]

an example of the above statement would be : Saba were Never meant to Fight Romans. like wise , Barbs were never meant to play with Steppe (Due to their lack of armor). I suggest you should Avoid Steppe players *cough* Lazyo *cough* at all costs,that is if you dont have the guts to face them.

[vartan]

Not necessarily. See Getae/Sauromatae and Augustus' campaigns into Arabia against the Sabaeans.

[gamegeek2]

Getai are probably the only barbarian faction that can take on the steppes.

Well, that's a fatuous argument. If you're too impatient to fight against steppe armies, then chances are you won't have any fun fighting against steppe armies. Why should anyone be forced to fight a battle they won't enjoy just because... uh... someone else wants you to?

No one is trying to rob steppe players from their opportunity of having fun, but you are trying to guilt trip players to fight battles they don't enjoy playing. If someone doesn't want to play against a steppe army, then that's fine. He doesn't have to, so respect that decision. If no one else wants to play against a steppe army either, then that sucks for the guy playing steppe, but c'est la vie.

I would actually prefer a Swiss system, but that would take a long time to organize, and people aren't always available. Lacking such a system, I intend to name and shame people who won't steppe outside their comfort zone, especially for impatient people - or people who just never try. I don't know about LazyO but personally I want to play against every faction (well not western barbarians necessarily), to test my own skills and the strengths of the steppes against the best everyone has to field, and I find people who take such attitudes extremely frustrating.

[Kival]

I would not discourage to use steppe at all but one should not hope for a barbarian faction to fight six times against you only to loose. I've a general "homerule" not to play against a player in tourney anymore if one got 2 (or perhaps 3) points out of this matches.

Not all matchups were meant to be. Simple as, if you ask me. There's only so much you can do, because this entire issue is like most: it's like a hydra. You fix one spot, ten other issues arise.

I do not have a problem with it. It's just a fact. One could consider not to allow steppe vs barbarians but that could be quite harsh so I would not really propose it. If one wants to play more often against a player refusing to play against steppe anymore, he could fight non-steppe. I don't see the problem. Is any player here who had problems to get some matches in this tourney so far? If it is just about some changes for horse archers... one can propose them in the edu-thread. If one has viable points I think it will be changed accordingly.

Getai are probably the only barbarian faction that can take on the steppes.

They can use steppe themselves and have some trustworthy archers, so that's not really suprising.

[gamegeek2]

I would not discourage to use steppe at all but one should not hope for a barbarian faction to fight six times against you only to loose. I've a general "homerule" not to play against a player in tourney anymore if one got 2 (or perhaps 3) points out of this matches.

Same thing, unless the other player loses and wants to keep trying :)

I deliberately choose non-steppe against Western barbarians. It's almost a matter of historicality to me, sort of like roleplaying when Attila the Hun and his many infantry from his Germanic allies invaded Western Europe.

[vartan]

Historicity*

[-Stormrage-]

just to change the subject, whens EB: NOM coming out?

[gamegeek2]

We aim to have an alpha like the Nusantara alpha by December.

[Kival]

That's really really OT. You can discuss that in the proper thread, will you?

[Lazy O]

Ive already been discouraged enough to drop the steppe idea, seems most people here do not have the guts to face it after all. To avoid this, I would have gotten a system where you could have chose 2 factions for the tourney or just played as anyfaction :/

[antisocialmunky]

Actually the counter is counter intuitive. You need a ton of cheap large sized but decent morale units and just RUSH the steppe army. If you can isolate and kill the kata, you basically win.

That's how to deal with it as Baktria or an eastern faction. Celts have a even better time of it since they have all those druidic units and access to Iberian ambushers (240, high morale, high javelin count death units).

I mean, it kinda abuses the red line but :\ It also is only REALLY feasible on huge unit sizes.

[-Stormrage-]

what do u mean abuses the red line, does that mean we can put units past the red line?

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

No he means that he traps units at the red line.

[-Stormrage-]

oh so he spreads out those ambushers all along the red line so the HA's wont be able to flank, good move

[Kival]

Yeah, but as we are mostly playing large that does not work. And I would not really like to use this tactic.