EBOT 2011 June

[The Celtic Viking]

Edit: forget this post. I'm tired. Look away.

[Burebista]

I think we are missing the factional lists for Pavlava & Sauromatae.

Any chance of modifying the merc limit for sauros? all their cav has missile so it's pretty much impossible to form a steppe army without more than 5 mercs.
Or just inlcude some getai units as factionals .

Just my 0.02$

[The Celtic Viking]

Combine them with mine and that's 0.04$. That was the reason why I didn't go as the Sauromatae in the last tournament, as I had originally planned to do. That coupled with the fact that their non-steppe quality is naturally lackluster makes it a rather gimped faction in need of attention.

[Burebista]

I managed to do a competitive army with sauros , with 5 xerudonzes , but i could not touch the roxolani or sarmatian nobles , and that is rly sad

[vartan]

Yes, I'll be putting those up not this weekend but the next. Also, you guys figure Sauro could actually have a decent civ composition army? I thought they were mostly horsemen and foot archers. Anyway, factional units are almost always the ones from the EB site. So after looking at the Sauro page, tell me what units you guys think should be added as 'factional' and why. And of course they must be on the MP roster, so check that first.

[The Celtic Viking]

I'm not saying that they should have it, I'm just saying that they don't, which means the injury they suffer from the current regulations is all the more painful.

[vartan]

I'm not saying that they should have it, I'm just saying that they don't, which means the injury they suffer from the current regulations is all the more painful.

They don't suffer any injury. The regulations account for steppe armies.

[The Celtic Viking]

They don't suffer any injury. The regulations account for steppe armies.

They do suffer an injury because they don't have non-missile cav which means that

a) instead of having a max of 12 cav as other steppe armies, they effectively have a max of 8 because of the limit on missile units
b) Bringing foot archers costs you a cavalry slot/unit

[vartan]

They do suffer an injury because they don't have non-missile cav which means that

a) instead of having a max of 12 cav as other steppe armies, they effectively have a max of 8 because of the limit on missile units
b) Bringing foot archers costs you a cavalry slot/unit

Just took a look at the SAC. What would upping the total 'archers' number from 8 to 12 do? Would that resolve the issue, do you suppose? I'm guessing this is where the main gap is coming from.

[Tuuvi]

hmm I'm thinking I might sign up as Saka Rauka.

[gamegeek2]

Right, I will be signing up as Sauro, fo sho.

[vartan]

I'm igning up with my trusty, old Arverni.

Can't believe I didn't notice the typographical error until now.

hmm I'm thinking I might sign up as Saka Rauka.

Right, I will be signing up as Sauro, fo sho.

Gotcha.

[The Celtic Viking]

Can't believe I didn't notice the typographical error until now.

It is hard to see, isn't it? I didn't catch it either until I returned to this thread the day after.

Just took a look at the SAC. What would upping the total 'archers' number from 8 to 12 do? Would that resolve the issue, do you suppose? I'm guessing this is where the main gap is coming from.

Yes, that would resolve the issue. The question is if this should be applied to all steppes or just the Sauromatae, as it's only the latter that need it. I'm guessing the 8 max archers was set there for a reason after all, and it seems to work well for the rest.

[gamegeek2]

I'd say up it to 10 for Sauromatae only, because IIRC Sauromatae received an increase in the cost of metal armour that other steppe factions did not. Sauromatae have access to Scythian Noble Cavalry which are highly efficient for their cost. They can also use Germanic light horse which got quite a bit better in the new EDU.

[Burebista]

Upping the 8 archer limit would be too powerful for Parthia and Saka rauka .

4 solutions: a) Special rule for sauros ( too complicated in my oppinion)
b) Addind some melee only cav in their roster (best option IMHO)
c) upping their merc limit ( only partial fix)
d) Downgrading the Scythian heavies from Hcav to Medium Cav( somewhat OP )

[vartan]

I'd say up it to 10 for Sauromatae only [...]

Let's do this...

Upping the 8 archer limit would be too powerful for Parthia and Saka rauka.

Really?

b) Addind some melee only cav in their roster (best option IMHO)

Like the Scythians that gamegeek mentioned? They're in already.

I have to take a look at that faction when I get a chance...

[Lazy O]

Wait, which EDU is going to be used< the new one or the regular old one ?

[vartan]

Wait, which EDU is going to be used< the new one or the regular old one ?

If GG2 gets it finalized for this year's tourneys almost a week before June starts, then we'll use the new one. We need to do this in order to have a comparison study. Not simply for the sake of having a distinct EDU, distinct from the SP version.

[antisocialmunky]

Its good that we actually have some EB support this time around and balance decisions and rule enforcement aren't done by me rage quitting and yellling at people.

[vartan]

Its good that we actually have some EB support this time around and balance decisions and rule enforcement aren't done by me rage quitting and yellling at people.

But we've always had a Jury even if it was my lonesome self!

[Burebista]

Vartan , maybe add goidillic units to casse factional? Also Milnaht? I dont think there is a risk of getting Casse overplayed :))

Also please remove the 10 archer special rule for sauromatae. It's so OP. Or if you don't agree , change my faction to Sauromatae.
Looking at the rules , i can actually have with Sauros 4 roxolani nobles & 6 Aorsi nobles . U try to deal with that while being Barbarian.

[gamegeek2]

Goidilic isn't factional for Casse? Oops, violated that rule several times :)

Looked at more above Sauro comments. Sauro civ is viable, if you know what you're doing that is.

[vartan]

Is that a yes on switching to Sauro Burebista? The Sauros already pay more for armour, and they don't need any melee only cav that they don't already have, am I right?

[Burebista]

Is that a yes on switching to Sauro Burebista? The Sauros already pay more for armour, and they don't need any melee only cav that they don't already have, am I right?

Look , reading from your rules , as Sauro i get 8 Mercs & 10 archer limit & SAC & a non heavy classification for Sauromatae nobles /Aorsi nobles.
That means that with 36 K i can afford 4 Roxolani nobles , 6 sauromatae nobles , 8 komatai (Merc rule) and 2 vojinos . + some chevs.

If you can tell me any barbarian composition that can stand up to that many missiles then i give up .

But if not , please sign me up as sauromatae bcz this will be the most OP shit i've ever done.

[vartan]

That's a good point. I appreciate it because I didn't know what Sauro could purchase with 36k. GG2 told me Sauro nobles need to be put back on as heavy. I believe that we need to do more. Let us look at armor levels.

1. 10 - Lonchophoroi Hippeis (Hellenic Medium Cavalry)
2. 10 - Baktrioi Hippeis (Baktrian Medium Cavalry)
3. 9 - Aursa Uaezdaettae (Aorsi Noble Cavalry)
4. 12 - Skuda Uaezdaettae (Scythian Noble Cavalry)
5. 12 - Rauxsa-alanna Uaezdaettae (Roxolani Noble Cavalry)
6. 10 - Ragon Sauromatae Uaezdaettae (Sarmatian Noble Horse-Archers)

There are several reasons I am citing these examples. Firstly, EB Online (and its prototype predecessor July 2009 tourney) has traditionally (and perhaps infamously?) deemed heavy two key cavalry units that were deemed "medium" cavalry by the EB Team. These are units #1 and #2 above (Lonch and Bak Hippeis). They have a turning point value of 10 for armour. So we have also traditionally held units #4,5,6 as heavy cavalry units. The Aorsi in #3 haven't been considered heavy ever in our tournaments to my knowledge.

Now I'm not saying there aren't discrepancies and problems with this approach. When various of us members came to this ambiguous conclusion that for whatever reason #1 and #2 must be heavy, we did not apply a certain take-off value for armour or armour+shield after which point the cav was heavy. Look at Prodromoi:

• 11 - Prodromoi (Successor Medium Cavalry)

The Prodromoi cavalry has never been considered heavy. It has always been considered non-heavy. If I remember correctly (feel free to correct me antisocialmunky), we had it non-heavy because it would fall so easily to missile fire. The thing was simply shock hit-n-run and no staying power (is that what it's called?)

So what do you think? As of this writing, #1 through #6 except Aorsi nobles are heavy, and Prodromoi is still non-heavy. How do we call a cavalry unit "heavy"? Can we systematize this?

[Burebista]

Well , i think it's not so much a problem concerning defence as it it is a matter of cost efficiency. If a cav unit with 22 defence is melee only , it's ok to clasify it as medium , but when it's multi-functional , and i mean HA-Charging-melee resistant , i think it's better to clasify as heavy for balancing reasons as that unit in spammable quantities would provide the user with a much too greater avantage , especially with factions susceptible to steppe which will try to survive the initial onslaught of arrows and hope for the best later.

When complaining about the Sauro's roster , i was doing so bcz of the inability to use many of their units. Getting a special merc rule fixes that i believe. The redo of Reidonez, available to sauros , furthers that impression too. But when it comes to 10 archer limit upon a faction which has the best HA per money cost , well , i feel that it gets too OP .

Keep in mind that phalanxes are now susceptible to arrow fire , which further boosts their capabilities.

In short , i believe it to be balanced if you put Aorsi nobles(6 missile attack , 30 charge , 2500mnai) as heavy , keep the 8 merc rule and remove the 10 archer special rule for them. i think this game should be about skill too , which is completely negated in the case of meetings such as Casse vs Sauros today.

[antisocialmunky]

I did the heavy cav classification for cavalry that had really heavy armor + defense + lance attack of 4 because NOTHING CAN KILL THOSE except other heavy cav economically so the only way to beat them was your own heavy cav. I'm not sure how much better the medium cav is but if they can beat the heavy charging cav in melee than I wouldn't mind relaxing the limit.

My personal criteria is that if the unit with 1 chevron can't take out 75% of a Companion Cavalry unit using melee before it routs, its not a heavy cavalry.

I have no idea how the new balance works out but I do know that hippies are worse than prodromoi now by a huge margin. They weren't that bad previously so I'm not sure how it was rebalanced. I really have no idea. On the other hand, cavalry seems a bit weaker on the charge over all. I'd play some serious games before making any further judgements.

[Lazy O]

Why is balance being discussed in this thread? there's a separate thread for the EDU.

[vartan]

Because this one issue has become all too important and controversial. And it's not related to the EDU.

Burebista, you can't expect any two-faction Matchup (MU) to be one that starts on equal inherent chances for either side. This will never be the case because of 1) faction-inherent factors and 2) player-inherent factors (some players are more skilled than others). Each MU has its own advantages and disadvantages. This is why many players carefully select their opponents.

We could of course make the game entirely rock paper and scissors but it wouldn't be EB (this is already a very dead horse).

How can we make some horses heavy for one faction while keeping some other horses of another faction as non-heavy when those 'non-heavy' cav are actually 'heavier'? Shouldn't the system be universal? If cost is a matter, we can change costs. But the heavy status must have a fundamental basis, and my mind tells me that the unit is only as 'heavy' as the amount of armour and shield it wears. What else can make it 'heavy'? Don't mind the weaponry. There are 'heavy' cav that use maces, while some others use bows. It may simply be that the costs of units in Sauro are artificially very inexpensive; if you ask me, this is an artifact from SP that's carried over. Other than that, why shouldn't all the 10+ armour/shield-sum cav be deemed heavy? or whatever the number?

[antisocialmunky]

Maybe we should let everyone select 2 factions so they can switch back and forth if they run into a bad matchup Its what WCG let Starcraft players do.