[EB] How to make Western barbarian factions more balanced against Hellenic and East

Originally Posted by Lazy O

People, you are talking about a avery small community, I say we let this topic rest, I will try to Introduce EB to the RCC then we see what the results are when it gets noticed by the larger community

We never did have a PR department, but would definitely love to take you on that offer.

P.S. What's the RCC?

Originally Posted by The Celtic Viking

Now, if you did this and thought that you still could just sit around and play with your prick while the enemy bombards you with missiles and perfecting his own positions, then you truly deserve to lose. No, this choice is of course dependent on you playing a very aggressive style; it's all about taking and making the initiative yours. Naturally, if you succeed, he will not be able to fight the way he wants, but will be forced to simply react to your moves instead.

Well said. That brings up a question, do you see a pattern between factions and the styles of play that bring the most success to those factions? I read your post and I infer that you mean that as a Gaul you must keep the advantage from the get-go all the way to the end by maintaining the initiative and playing aggressively. Can other factions afford, indeed benefit mostly by playing rather passively and defensively? attrition is perhaps the word? Is the success of EB's factions in online play, when you think about it, style-dependent?

Originally Posted by VikingPower

3. Even that the Gallic infantry is much better than the infantry of the enemy then the main problem lies in that how infantry clash 1v1 takes so much time, for if the enemy has better cav and archers then it will always be them whom decide the outcome with their interferance.

This has been the case since Day 1 of Rome: Total War. The game seems to have been made to inherently require the user to make use of a diverse army. Now, one may certainly take all the same unit in vanilla online, as Rome for example, but that EB brings such a vast variety of troops and that Rome has a system of differentiating troop types from light to heavy mounted, dismounted and missile, speaks to the fact that success almost depends on your bringing more than a few types of units onto the field.

RomeClanCentral. A meeting place for the clans of RTW.

fret not, while my appeal went unnoticed in the larger public, my recruiter Max heard it, and says wel do something during summer time.

Aside from that, considering the very good question that infantry battles take too long, how many players here played on normal unit scale? I know I didnt.

@vartan,From what I see, the reason factions like Rome/Carthage are superior, is that they have the missile power which many dont. Along with infantry that is ridiculously cheap. Carthage infantry is a bit more expensive but more easonably balanced with cavalry, meaning, you can sit all day long while the cretans do their work.

Originally Posted by Lazy O

@vartan,From what I see, the reason factions like Rome/Carthage are superior, is that they have the missile power which many dont. Along with infantry that is ridiculously cheap. Carthage infantry is a bit more expensive but more easonably balanced with cavalry, meaning, you can sit all day long while the cretans do their work.

Thanks. And it's not a problem if they're in certain ways superior, because when this came up, it was similar to the issue of the inappropriately and verbally abusive player: the answer was simply, the choice of opponents is yours. It was in the hands of the player whether he wished to play with the abusive player, just as it was in his hands whether to play against a certain faction. Don't know if this helps, just pointing it out since it was/is the case.

Vartan, you didnt answer my question, how many people actually played normal scale? Since youre the one who managed all the replays.

Originally Posted by Lazy O

Vartan, you didnt answer my question, how many people actually played normal scale? Since youre the one who managed all the replays.

I don't think there are any normal scale games that I can recall. This is why I hope a replay analyzer is made. Anyway, if there are any normal scale games, then they must be either more than 2 players or players who played on normal as they feared laggy gameplay.

Originally Posted by Burebista

That is why smart gaulish & sweboz players use infantry spam with sotaroas just as annoying cannon fodder.
Main problem i've encountered with those 2 factions is the guard mode. It puts you in the position that you cannot take initiative vs a guard mode roman/hellen and expect to win. else was great , rly rly enjoyed the MP tournaments.

The effects of the guard mode feature reach beyond simple mechanical dynamics (i.e., it isn't simply a matter of telling the troop not to follow a retreating unit, but rather that the guard mode affects actual casualty outcomes; see Guard Mode: Imperial Roman Cohorts and Classical Greek Hoplites). Unfortunately, one cannot alter the effects of the guard mode, and thus we must live with it (not only is it very difficult to enforce such rules as guard mode feature restrictions among players, but I find such rules as unscrupulous).

Originally Posted by Lazy O

They dont even need guard mode. THey can just refuse to engage you and youre toast.

Not entirely and not necessarily. If you have in mind that some states in EB can field men that are on average more armoured and durable than the men of other states, then that is a reflection of (a historical interpretation of) the ancient armies of the respective states.

I think rethinking budgets for greek/roman/barbarian/nomad will get us where we need to be. Simple to understand and apply.
Propose 35 k for barbarian & nomad , 32 k greek , 30 k roman

Originally Posted by Burebista

I think rethinking budgets for greek/roman/barbarian/nomad will get us where we need to be. Simple to understand and apply.
Propose 35 k for barbarian & nomad , 32 k greek , 30 k roman

One option is to say that all money amounts are accepted for tournament play, because, after all, each side gets the same budget since that's how the game was programmed. Your proposal isn't new. Some have even proposed specific budget modifiers, such as extra money for elephants. Superficially and at some intuitive level, it is understandable to appropriate less of a budget to inherently stronger factions in order to balance online play since competitive play does not aim to reenact, and this I agree with, but it's always been tough drawing the line between too much of a budget cut or too little.

Originally Posted by Lazy O

RomeClanC
@vartan,From what I see, the reason factions like Rome/Carthage are superior, is that they have the missile power which many dont. Along with infantry that is ridiculously cheap. Carthage infantry is a bit more expensive but more easonably balanced with cavalry, meaning, you can sit all day long while the cretans do their work.

That is why smart gaulish & sweboz players use infantry spam with sotaroas just as annoying cannon fodder.
Main problem i've encountered with those 2 factions is the guard mode. It puts you in the position that you cannot take initiative vs a guard mode roman/hellen and expect to win. else was great , rly rly enjoyed the MP tournaments.

They dont even need guard mode. THey can just refuse to engage you and youre toast.