Nation Buffs,Balances,Changes(Greek for me)

[mkm1g15]

I saw this post by mss gaming, and wanted to know if we can expect a few buffs for certain nations.
I personally have being playing as the Greeks and love the tanks and refunds, but I feel competitively it doesn't feel enough.
Even the Japanese have a hard time doing much war wise or even multiplayer wise.
The French tanks are bulky but don't do enough damage per 1 hp. however, overall, they have better nation perks.
Also, 50 mins off on generals is ok, but for buildings, it seems really insulting.
I would much rather take a per cent off and extend the off to the university as well.
Even, it would be cool, although I know it isn't architecture, if we got refunds from the library and university as well.
Plus, refunds should be at least 7-10% rather than 5% or instead have discounts added directly to the cost, because I get nothing when i'm at full storage.
Troop wise, I feel the centaur tanks absolutely rips, even when I'm upgrading my airstrip, I attack most bases with tanks and field howies and I hardly lose anything, thanks to how quickly the kill defenses, even anti tank guns.

That's just a little insight, but I do hope you lads consider adding some changes to the under used nations, as its no fun having two nations being the only ones used. I understand that each nation has its purpose, but they should each stay true to that and excel at it, rather than being left behind.

Please others post some changes for your nations you feel are neglected.

Cheers,
Malcolm-Rogue Knights

 

[mkm1g15]

Well Sir, things aren't so simple, the British doesn't need to be nerfed.
On a traditional scale if one quantity is more than the other, you either add to one side or subtract from the other to obtain balance.
Buffing these nations and nerfng the popular ones isn't a solution.

 

[Saruman the White]

It wouldn't be fair for those who have chosen the British or the Germans to see their nations' unique bonuses to be reduced. I'm happy to have them as they are already provided they just give some kind of boost to the Greeks and the Chinese. Of course, the Chinese have already the +1 mercenary which is very helpful indeed, but I don't think that a 2nd additional citizen after some Age (eg. IA) would hurt the gameplay, I think it'd help it instead.

 

[Manifesto]

Surprise, surprise, someone called for a nerf of a nation they don't like.
As mkm1g15 said, let's buf, but don't nerf at the same time.
Won't you then just be back where you started?

 

[SiuYin]

Keep in mind that when we buff some nations, it is same as nerf other, wise verse.

That's why I suggest discount of nation changing after balance.

 

[SiuYin]

@Manifesto
I don't call for nerf any nation I don't like.
I always ask to nerf those picked by most players and buff those least picked

 

[Manifesto]

How about this: I'm all for buffing ''poorer'' nations but leave the nations picked by most players.
There's a reason we do it and we know what we're doing!
Why should we be penalised because of what we do? Your issue should be with Nexon and making improvements, not bringing us down.

 

[SiuYin]

No Buff = Nerf, Nerf = Buff all other

I don't care which approach as long as player distribute evently

 

[KniferX]

It's not the same. There's no need to directly make a players' game experience worse by nerfing their nation.
Just buff the competition up to par.

 

[SiuYin]

You may not like it, buf nerf a single nation is easier than buff 7 nations.

That's why when blizzard do balance change, they normally target single class

 

[mkm1g15]

KniferX I agree with bringing nations up-to par with the competition, but I feel both the British and German are fine the way they are,
SiuYin That being said, there's too much being lost about the point I started this post for, not to Nerf but voice opinions and ideas regarding improving the state of lesser used nations, particularly Greeks, because I use them and can contribute sonething to the discussion.
All I'm saying is that the is, speaking for my nation only, since most people love to throw Japanese in the discussion without using them, is that I want the Greeks to be a little bit more viable and competitive for the later game.
Saruman the White pointed out, dynamic increases is a really good idea.
We don't need to break nations that are fine, just support the ones that aren't up there with the rest

 

[Exiliado]

mkm1g15

FWIW I visited your base and as a fellow Greek myself I was happy to see you giving the Greeks a try. I won’t nitpick the criticisms, after all they are the consensus held by most. But I think I have challenged them a bit in my reply #4 above in which I try to show how the instant finish bonus retains its vitality. It works for me in Industrial and I am really curious how it might work for an Atomic.

But I won’t lie, it took me months to work out the approach. Before that, like everyone else I saw the Greek bonus as useless. Although even in Iron Age (!!) I could see that the Greek bonus doesn’t work as a raw time reduction. Truth is, nothing but crowns actually reduces upgrade times. But I really felt I must have overlooked something because the designers couldn’t possibly have put a useless bonus in the game, could they? At a minimum it gives time-constrained players the ability to start upgrades on a daily schedule, similar to how 23-hour wonder cooldowns work. But since it also expands gradually, it gives players who don’t want to leave a citizen idle the chance to slot in their wall upgrades in between building upgrades. Voila - the special sauce. Now the Greeks have an effective +1 citizen bonus.

I agree about buffing the refund up to 10% as you said to give the Greeks a better balance with the British when it comes to walls. But inasmuch as the Greeks have this special trick with walls I really can’t complain either way.

 

[mkm1g15]

Exiliado Yes, but the static 15 minutes+ 5 every age is actually a joke, like I showed in the calculations.
Having a percentage increase is way more fair to the players that decide to give the other nations a try.
Like, I think sarumon the white, said a the refunds are OK, taking into cost of buildings in the later ages

 

[Exiliado]

mkm1g15 - I looked at the calculations and yes, a gradual time reduction up to 3% or so could be legit without being OP. Although it would mess up a daily schedule pretty severely putting those time-constrained players at a disadvantage. No longer could I count on my upgrades finishing at 11:00 pm when I know I’ll be there to start the next one. Part of what makes the nations work (or not, depending on your point of view) is that they cater to individual play styles and preferences and aren’t necessarily intended to be equally interchangeable for everyone in that sense. I saw a similar argument that the French training bonus should be universal so that French players could try other nations without giving up their preference for binge raiding sessions. But I get that’s the gist of your argument. I would just say, don’t assume that instant finish is a joke for everyone. Some folks like it and make good use of it!

Anyway, an effective +1 citizen as I described delivers (in theory) 5-7% faster progress in Atomic (equivalent to the Chinese). You can exchange that for a 3% reduction in time if you want to. I wouldn’t.

 

[KniferX]

Just because it's easier doesn't make it the better option necessarily.

And we shouldn't compare Blizzard's game where you can change class during a match seamlessly and Dominations where you have to pay crowns to change your nation, and you have to have workers free.

 

[mkm1g15]

Exiliado I'm really sorry mate, that I didn't see the earlier post, but I do feel that just because your content or comfortable with the current system, doesn't mean that it's good for everyone.
A ton of active players would take the percentage increase anyway over the 15 minutes, which effectively can add up-to a day or two at the later ages.
I mean, numbers speak for itself, we're the most under represented nation along with the Japanese,
why is that?
Also, to address , the dump, I feel BETTER ARCHITECTURE, could also mean a direct discount to the cost of upgrading rather than getting cashbacks!
I completely get your argument, but as an active Greek player, 50 minutes doesn't fool me at all mate, as timing your upgrades is frustrating.
But, no matter how much we debate, I doubt our Nation will ever be as great as it actually was.

Cheers,
Malcolm - Rogue Knights

 

[Exiliado]

mkm1g15 - why aren’t more players Greek? Well for one I doubt many players (even Greeks) use the bonus the way I described. I myself used it the ordinary way for months and months. So if there is a criticism to be had it’s that the strategy is not obvious enough. But that can be cured by communication, on this forum, in alliances etc. even though conventional wisdom can be a tough nut to crack.

But the Greeks are almost a cliche for having overlooked benefits. The instant recovery of slightly damaged generals - using generals in combat in multiplayer battles constantly- is another great example. When I upgraded my Fort and had no generals I really missed that benefit. Generals are a powerful troop. Being able to use them meaningfully in almost every battle is a big deal.

So, there is more to the Greeks than meets the eye. I will expand on this in due time, in another post. Till then, keep the ideas coming!

 

[mkm1g15]

Exiliado Since you said that your early Industrial, I can understand why you're fine with the current system, you probably aren't feeling the stress of doing upgrades whose times increase exponentially with every consecutive upgrade.
just saying, you really feel the uselessness of the static time discount once your into late industrial mid global.
But still, please do an explanation in another post later.

Cheers,
Malcolm-Rogue Knights

 

[Exiliado]

mkm1g15 - fair enough. Although your reference to a time *discount* makes me think that I haven’t made my point about the Greeks clear enough. The benefit is not that upgrades are faster but that they are continuous. We do not often think about the time that a player spends not utilizing citizens/armory/library to the fullest extent. But visit many bases and the underutilization is obvious. Which means that the biggest obstacle to progressing through the game most quickly is a player’s own inattention and lack of focus. The lost hours add up. For what it’s worth - which I think is a lot - the Greeks make it easier to avoid that pitfall by enabling a player to keep upgrades going on a daily schedule so that the player won’t fail to keep upgrades going continuously. Anyone can stand to benefit from this use of the Greek bonus. The opportunity to upgrade walls in between is just icing on the cake.

Apart from TC during rush events, time discounts for upgrades do not exist in this game. The only option for the player is whether to pay with money or with time. That is the same for the Greeks as for everyone else. There is no reason to think that will ever change.

 

[Manifesto]

Exiliado, I wish you the same luck co-ordinating your rolling upgrades in Global or AA as you've had in IA.
Would be interested to see your calculations if/when you make it to those ages.

 

[mkm1g15]

Just a small add on to what you're saying,
In the later ages and I think even industrial, buildings take longer and more citizens to upgrade, not always being 4, which is what I'm guessing you're used to for timed upgraded.
The fort takes 8, farms take 4, cannons take 3, wonders take 8 and 10 respectively, barracks take 5.
Getting to do all this and fitting it to account for your extra citizen, really isn't feasible.
Also, a lot of players do walls when discounts are active or do grind sessions by keeping a single, or two citizen free by taking into account other buildings to fit their citizen cost.
Not to forget the different numbers needed for university upgrades, like Amelia needing 3,4,8 citizens.
You may not like my proposition, but that doesn't mean it isn't feasible and viable for most players.
Hey, that's why we're here. Devs need to listen and take into account the best changes, rather than reshuffling books.