[EB MP]3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates

**-Stormrage-** · 10-07-2011, 08:42

Also I'm going to put forward a request to take scary off nakeds and catas and increase charge. I think the scary effect should only be reserved for chariots and elephants. The range of scary is just too large right now.

ASM doesnt like scary, and wants as few units as possible to get scary becuase scary is the weakness of his faction rome. the weakness of rome is Scaries everyone knows that. The only reason that you give is "range of scary is too long" a player who doesnt use scaries would say this is bad. a player who does use scaries would consider this good.

**TheShakAttack** · 10-07-2011, 08:47

Originally Posted by -Stormrage-

ASM doesnt like scary, and wants as few units as possible to get scary becuase scary is the weakness of his faction rome. the weakness of rome is Scaries everyone knows that. The only reason that you give is "range of scary is too long" a player who doesnt use scaries would say this is bad. a player who does use scaries would consider this good.

I'm in a rush so I cant respond to other posts, but storm, ASM's faction is not Rome. If you played as often as you complained, you'd see that :P

**Lazy O** · 10-07-2011, 08:49

Leave the Bosporans as they are, they already cost 2.1k and arrows do not scratch shielded infantry.

And I think speeds have something to do with the unit model (iirc) so I do not think gg2 has the time to change all of them.

**antisocialmunky** · 10-07-2011, 14:22

Yeah, I figured but it is completely annoying especially if they are sporting the scary ability since they just need to be near by to apply scary. They already do morale damage by just being behind your units.

**TheShakAttack** · 10-07-2011, 17:48

Standing close with scaries is how most ppl use scary units. Though there might be something to say about the large radius it affects, I think this is quite justifiable. Plus, standing close but not engaging is how barb fear units are usually used (except Gaesatae). Fear is a very psychological thing, and the mere sight of things like eles and catas are likely to affect the average trooper.

Re: Bosphorans, I think lets try them out as they are. They are not particularly cheap (though an excellent bargain as they double as melee units). We can always tweak later if they turn out to make Pontos too OP.

Re: Persian bows- they should be just as powerful as steppe bows iirc. Certainly their proximity to steppe peoples, the fact that Persian warfare historically relied upon archery heavily, and that many Persian dynasties has steppe-ish origins would indicate so. Though this is merely conjecture, it would be like how the Romans adopted the Gladius, which was in its early form an iberian weapon. Romans liked sharp pointy things, saw that the gladius was excellent for packed troops to use in close combat and upgraded their own weapons to suit.

Am I wrong to think this re persian bows? Are there any sources on this to prove otherwise?

**Lazy O** · 10-07-2011, 20:05

You are right.

From the top of my head if I put it rougly

Aryans=Persians=Scythians=Sarmatians=Iranians=Whatever

**vartan** · 10-07-2011, 23:18

Wow. More of the same modern nonsense. This is getting more exciting as the days go on.

**TheShakAttack** · 10-07-2011, 23:29

Originally Posted by vartan

Wow. More of the same modern nonsense. This is getting more exciting as the days go on.

Are you referring to me or Lazy?

**gamegeek2** · 10-08-2011, 05:19

Originally Posted by Lazy O

You are right.

From the top of my head if I put it rougly

Aryans=Persians=Scythians=Sarmatians=Iranians=Whatever

Well, technically the language of the first branched into that of the fifth, which branched into that of the second, third, and fourth.

Once again, it surprises me little that you dislike historical accuracy as a basis for balancing stats.

I have...erm, other work to do this weekend, so don't expect an EDU update till the second half of October rolls, or perhaps not until the end.