Steamをインストール
ログイン
|
言語
简体中文（簡体字中国語）
繁體中文（繁体字中国語）
한국어 (韓国語)
ไทย (タイ語)
български (ブルガリア語)
Čeština（チェコ語）
Dansk (デンマーク語)
Deutsch (ドイツ語)
English (英語)
Español - España (スペイン語 - スペイン)
Español - Latinoamérica (スペイン語 - ラテンアメリカ)
Ελληνικά (ギリシャ語)
Français (フランス語)
Italiano (イタリア語)
Bahasa Indonesia（インドネシア語）
Magyar（ハンガリー語）
Nederlands (オランダ語)
Norsk (ノルウェー語)
Polski (ポーランド語)
Português（ポルトガル語－ポルトガル）
Português - Brasil (ポルトガル語 - ブラジル)
Română（ルーマニア語）
Русский (ロシア語)
Suomi (フィンランド語)
Svenska (スウェーデン語)
Türkçe (トルコ語)
Tiếng Việt (ベトナム語)
Українська (ウクライナ語)
翻訳の問題を報告
このトピックの作成者がこの投稿に質問への回答というマークを付けました。
ルールとガイドライン
この投稿を報告する
The counters to Urumi are archers/HC only. But Dravidians have some of the best Skirms against those.
A Coustillier has way more effective and accessible/cheaper counters like Pikemen and Camels as well as Monks. The same goes for Elephants, hence: not broken.
Spot the difference?
Since you now want to move goalposts and bring counters into the equation, Coustilliers are cavalry. They can actually run away from their counter and/or to charge their special attack. The Urumi cannot. The Urumi has bottom tier pierce armour at zero. ZERO. The last unit which was a standard infantry unit i.e. not some speedster or zergling that had zero PA was the AoC Jaguar Warrior and they got 1 PA in AoFE. With that much PA even FU Skirms kill Urumi in 22 javelins. By comparison generic Champs take 35 of those. Jags/Zerks take 38, Samurais/Woads take 40, Serjeants take 85, Obuch take 95. Teutonic Knights take 100. That's not to say you should counter them with Skirms, but anything that does pierce armour is good enough. Even if the option is suboptimal or partially upgraded it will do the job as long as it deals pierce damage.
With that low of a PA you cannot even flood them in like other infantry UUs because fortification arrow fire will melt them. Remember that charged attacks don't discharge against buildings and melee armour piercing attacks don't pierce building armour. That last point is also very relevant for Wootz Steel. It is absolutely useless against buildings and Dravidian infantry is completely generic against buildings even after researching that. It is worse than the Burmese bonus or Aztec Garland Wars against buildings, that the trade-off for it being provisionally +3 to +5 attack depending on the targetted unit's armour. Any value above that is specific cases like Serjeants, Bulgarian Swordsmen, Boyars and Teutonic Knights.
I was waiting for OP to respond as I didn't want to edit my previous post, but this is a valid concern. On a macro level, take a good hard look at their tech tree. They have absolutely zero mobility options. The Viking-esque Light Cavalry is so bad that it counts as this. You have to leverage your own mobility and/or siege here. Dravidians also have up to Siege Onagers minus Siege Engineers. You can start bringing in Mangonels/Onagers and they can't do anything about it other than trading their own Mangonels with yours. Now if you leverage your mobility and take out their Mangonels beforehand, your Mangonels can start flattening the rest of their infantry and ranged army with no issues. Likewise if you have them and can upgrade to them, the Dravidians have no answer to Bombard Cannons.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9VYVeohoTU&t=496s&ab_channel=SpiritOfTheLaw
Dravidians have the worst cavalry of any civ in the game barring Americans, and the Steel tech does little to change that. Dravidian cavalry seems worthless either way.
Otherwise the Dravidians seem like a straightforward archer and infantry civ - the latter of which, I have to remind you has never been a popular or winning play for most civs, though thankfully the devs have been making a lot of effort to make infantry more viable recently.
With the tech their champions and halbs are put on the same level as other top infantry civs like Aztecs, Vikings etc but they are hardly overpowered or in a league of their own. The tech actually does little to improve halbs against cavalry, since its always been bonus damage and not base damage that made them good. It makes them great against other halbs though - which is fine. Its literally an end game tech and before that the Dravidians have completely generic infantry aside from their cheaper barracks. Their archers are pretty generic as well - only helped out by the wood eco bonus and better skirms, and elephant archers wont kick in for some time.
So the Dravidians actually have a very basic army until imperial age but some people are freaking out about a imp UT, evidently without considering it in context.
And as for the Urumi? So what? Its a UU, meaning its stats can be tinkered with without affecting any other unit in the game. If its too strong at launch, it'll get patched within a month, maybe even sooner.
And btw, if you've bothered to watch more than a couple of MikeEmpire's videos, you'll see that those arena style fights dont do most units justice. Archers in particular get destroyed in the vast majority of match ups despite the fact that anyone whose spent any amount of time playing online will tell you thats not the case.
Also, the Urumi's good performance is more due to its Coustillier charge attack than the ignoring armour bonus.
Mike's videos can be mildly entertaining to watch, but very few of them are actually informative in a meaningful way.
You never would have less Berserkers than Urimis
Vikings have the best eco of the game, and you call that imbalance?
If that was the case everyone just play as Persian and train War Elephants
I honestly think that this game is in the best possible hands and we should be thankful for that
Well no, it doesn't. How many battles in AOE2 have you played where one single type of unit stands completely still and lets another single type of unit attack it? It's impossible to judge this sort of thing until all factors have been taken into account and the game actually played by players who know what they're doing rather than a short specific video produced for entertainment.
Now I'm not saying the unit isn't unbalanced at the moment and I'm in no way qualified to do that, however using this sort of video as your benchmark really isn't representative. I'd suggest waiting to see what the high level players make of it before declaring it to be broken.
I'd say keep doing it. Sales keep the game alive, and they can fix balance a few months down the line. Even if it stays exactly how it is you're still not suddenly going to see Dravidians shooting to the top of the civ rankings as a civ / unit being good is far less important than the skill of the player.
The DLC has already been released to certain people to allow for thorough testing, my concerns aren't unfounded.
And I have seen plenty people on reddit and youtube agree that Wootz Steel is broken and will need a major nerf or change.
Yes Dravidian cavalry is terrible, almost as bad as the meso civs. Does that mean 2 wrongs can make 1 right? No.
Did they therefore make the meso civs' infantry unbeatable in melee, not even by designated counters? No.
(On a sidenote, imo the Ghulam should have been instead given to Dravidians to grant them more mobility aside of light cav.)
It being an endgame tech is no excuse. The Goth flood was one of the most controversial topics since its existence and there have been lots of changes made to them since.
Such mistakes shouldn't be repeated, since like it or not - not all games are a 1vs1 on Arabia and many do last until Imperial Age.
If they weren't, by your logic we might as well remove the Imperial Age from the game altogether.
Lastly, I have no idea who you are and you can discredit MikeEmpires' videos all you want - but when it comes to melee fights in smaller numbers they are truly insightful.
Even Hera, one of the best aoe2 pros recently featured MikeEmpires in his video and thanked him for his research.
False. Elephants are considerably slower and usually not worth it since easily countered by Monks or Pikemen which every civ has access to.
Certainly not every civ has usable Archers. When Dravidians mix in cheap faster-firing Skirmishers even Archers aren't a threat.
That's probably the case but I'm no fan of this.
I remember when some were calling Obuchs overpowered, yet they are nowhere near as strong. 11
but then again, I feel like people are overreacting, I don't it will be as good a bonus people think it is, either that, or it will be a tunnel vision civ, like the goths, only having one or two good things.
Their tech tree looks solid, unlike Goths they have a strong economy, even more so on water/hybrid maps.
While Goths only have a strong infantry late game, Dravidians are good throughout the game but once in Imperial Age, balance is gone:
They have fully upgraded Archers and 25% faster firing Skirmishers, to take out the counters to their unbeatable infantry (Archers and Hand Cannoneers).
If the opponent manages to mass up (immobile) Scorpions they can destroy them with Light Cav.
Many civs don't even have good enough Archers or unique units that could pose a threat.
Jokes aside, a small group of Youtubers and esports players do not represent the entire community. It is very possible for something to appear overpowered or underpowered depending on the skill level - the Chinese civ is a classic example.
The DLC is still not available to the public i.e. me and you, so yes I still think posts like these are premature. If you had made this post after the release, when we'd all been able to see the civs for ourselves, I wouldn't be having an issue with it.
"2 wrongs dont make a right" is a warped way of viewing balance. There are plenty of examples of bonuses and trade-offs, like Briton range but no thumbring etc. My point with the Dravidian cavalry was that they are actually a net negative even with Steel, meaning one of the two unit types benefiting from this "OP" are actually worse off. Would it be nice for Dravidian cavalry to be a bit better? Maybe, I'm not actually sure since its very clear they arent intended to be a cavalry civ. Making Steel apply to their cavalry seems like throwing them a bone but its clearly a rather token effect. Maybe we'll find a niche application for them but from the SOTL video at least they still look un-viable.
And what are you on about with their infantry being unbeatable, or the tech being completely unjustified even in imp. As I already pointed out, and as the SOTL video shows, it makes their infantry top tier without being over the top. Their champions are fine and their halbs only seem to have a big advantage in halb on halbs fights, and anti infantry counters remain perfectly fine since the tech does nothing to make them better against archers, HCs etc. If they have a great tech for late game trash wars, then good for them. Theres nothing wrong with Slav splash damage infantry, which is also a very strong late game infantry tech. And again I have to point out that before imperial age their infantry is completely generic.
The only unit of any concern is the Urumi, and once again - the unit'sstrong performance seems far more the result of its coustillier charged attack than the Steel tech. Most melee units dont have an enormous amount of melee armour. In practice their armour ignoring is basically giving them the effect of Garland wars or the burmese attack bonus.
And Im not even the only person on this very thread to point out that MikeEmpire's videos are far from irrefutable proof of a units performance so I dont see why you're getting to personal with me. I even said that some of his videos can be useful - my main point was that his arena style fights disproportionately affect certain units like siege and archers, which they do. Watch any number of his videos and you'll find comments saying things like "the [archer unit] would have done so much better with some sort of meat shield in front" because frankly its true and how units like that are actually used in practice.
So obviously Im skeptical when you say things like "the Urumi cant even be killed by its supposed counters" i.e. archers and other anti infantry units.
And dont assume that I only care about arabia 1v1s thank you very much. I honestly couldnt care less about that map. I like playing closed maps and i like games that go to the imperial age, and Im excited to see what the Dravidians bring to the table, but I will reserve judgement for when Ive actually played with them, rather than doing the equivalent of leaving a negative review on rotten tomatoes before Ive even seen the movie for myself - because thats what this thread is. Goodbye
I suspect Dravidians are overcompensating for their very weak Stables. I expect the balance hammer to hit them hard, and either Wootz Steel to be nerfed to garbage, or for them to lose Champion and Halberdier, which would still give them amazing Infantry, but would curb their power a lot, specially since they have very good Skirms and Arbs.
Wootz Steel is not better than Druzhina or the Japanese attack bonus
conclusion: Dravidians are not overpowered