Total War Forums

+ Reply to Thread
Page 5 of 12 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 116

Thread: untrained fugu + world weary + not having blade master = no more sword core

  1. #41
    Senior Member Brigadier AMP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,216

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BeardyMcJohnFace View Post
    i think you're understating the advantage a bit. I'm in the same boat, seems like half my vets rarely see the light of day but having an array of each unit for each class with different upgrades means an advantage in several different ways. Vanilla units are terrible (the only ones i use are nag attendants and light cav, with vets you can quadrouple the melee potential of a unit for only twice the cost), one can always spend all their koku, whenever CA carelessly swings the nurf bat they can drastically change the army line-up without having to delete and regrind vets and tokens, vets can be tailored with upgrades to better suite a specific play style etc.

    I will admit, going from say 100 to 1000 vet slots wouldn't pose as much of an advantage but 50ish is severely limiting. if you don't believe me then reset your avatar and see for yourself...
    Vanilla units aren't terrible, they are decent and if CA would ever fixes the free fatigue bonus vets get (which ofc they won't) it would help balance things out more. I play with vanilla matchlocks and sometimes they can be my game winners at the end of a battle. I play almost all my 1v1 and 2v2 10k battles with ALL vanilla units and don't get hammered because of the vets my opponents bring. The most annoying thing playing against in 10k when I bring an all vanilla build is a unit with HF, that's about it.

    Vets melee power doesn't quadruple from their upgrades for only twice the cost - abit of exaggeration there, but yes the straight 50 koku for basic upgrades and 70 koku for token upgrades doesn't make much sense at all. Cost of those upgrades should be determined by things like the original cost of the unit, the unit type and the size of the unit - not a flat cost across the board for all units.

    When CA swung the nerf bat many including myself had to delete units and regrind up again. I removed lots of units and redid new ones and 50 vet slots was always enough to field a 14k army back to back without being at any disadvantage. You're not fielding 20 strong vets in a 14k match, those 22.5k games are long gone.

    I don't need to do any avatar resetting because I've played with 50 vet slots as have we all and that's all I about use anyway, actually alittle less. You can see that in my youtube vids as well as everyone else's that have competitive battles uploaded, which all show people using under 50 vets in their builds.

    Anyway what Haze said and what I've said quite a few times on these boards since the release of the game ->
    Quote Originally Posted by HaZE7 View Post
    Many tokens and hours of grind have been wasted in the pursuit of cost-effectiveness.
    Take the grind and unfairness out of future titles CA. Unlimited, Easy-to-make, Resettable, Token-Refunding VETERANS.
    Getting rid of it would be best and just let the players have full control of their setup, case closed.

  2. #42
    Banned General
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,502

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AMP View Post
    Vanilla units aren't terrible, they are decent and if CA would ever fixes the free fatigue bonus vets get (which ofc they won't) it would help balance things out more. I play with vanilla matchlocks and sometimes they can be my game winners at the end of a battle. I play almost all my 1v1 and 2v2 10k battles with ALL vanilla units and don't get hammered because of the vets my opponents bring. The most annoying thing playing against in 10k when I bring an all vanilla build is a unit with HF, that's about it.

    Vets melee power doesn't quadruple from their upgrades for only twice the cost - abit of exaggeration there, but yes the straight 50 koku for basic upgrades and 70 koku for token upgrades doesn't make much sense at all. Cost of those upgrades should be determined by things like the original cost of the unit, the unit type and the size of the unit - not a flat cost across the board for all units.

    When CA swung the nerf bat many including myself had to delete units and regrind up again. I removed lots of units and redid new ones and 50 vet slots was always enough to field a 14k army back to back without being at any disadvantage. You're not fielding 20 strong vets in a 14k match, those 22.5k games are long gone.

    I don't need to do any avatar resetting because I've played with 50 vet slots as have we all and that's all I about use anyway, actually alittle less. You can see that in my youtube vids as well as everyone else's that have competitive battles uploaded, which all show people using under 50 vets in their builds.

    Anyway what Haze said and what I've said quite a few times on these boards since the release of the game ->


    Getting rid of it would be best and just let the players have full control of their setup, case closed.
    Well 14k is just an improved version of your 10k army. I use vanilla units as well, and well you don't need BEEFED up vets, I find myself being capable of using lvl2~4 veterans mostly since you can use a retainer to cover for the 3rd upgrade and leave more resources to spend on other contingents of your army, making it well balanced. I use about all 200 my vets either to try and mash together so I can have 0 koku left in my armies.(really just 20 koku + or -)

    In 14k Games you are really setting up a bunch of low level vets and some high quality vets together, The reason why clan skill upgrades are 70 more rather than 50 koku is to force players to spend there koku wisely. 50 koku for 2 attack... hmmm seems worth it, then it gets raised to 70 koku, and your left with the choice of having to spend it or not. The increase in cost is to merely stop people from getting all of it in favor of something else. Like the same reason why gas cost more on certain seasons is to make consumers use their gas efficiently. However for the ROTS units the cost seems to be unjustified but for the regular units I think its fine, otherwise people would just be spamming lower tier units rather than mid/high tier.

    Avatar resets are usually best for messed up DLC units.

  3. #43
    Senior Member Corporal BeardyMcJohnFace's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Adelaide, Australia
    Posts
    130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AMP View Post
    I play with vanilla matchlocks and sometimes they can be my game winners at the end of a battle.
    well that's a bad example as matchlock sams are not worth upgrading unless you're gunning for extended range as the monks give better stats for koku. matchlocks as they are now don't get as much performance increase with vet skills as other units do.

    Quote Originally Posted by AMP View Post
    Vets melee power doesn't quadruple from their upgrades for only twice the cost - abit of exaggeration there, but yes the straight 50 koku for basic upgrades and 70 koku for token upgrades doesn't make much sense at all. Cost of those upgrades should be determined by things like the original cost of the unit, the unit type and the size of the unit - not a flat cost across the board for all units.
    ok, an exaggeration yes but vanilla yari ash for instance have 4att 3def and costs 350 while vet7 can have 8att 15def for 740; twice the attack, 5 times the defence for just over twice the price. that's an advantage...
    Last edited by BeardyMcJohnFace; 03-16-2012 at 10:29 AM.

  4. #44
    Senior Member Sergeant StrakerYrius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Near London, UK
    Posts
    248

    Default

    I strongly disagree - with only 57 slots there is no way to get every vet you need to try out more than 3 or 4 army builds at most. Bear in mind that you have to have the DLCs installed to be competitive,and they foist a good dozen Hero and other non-usable units onto you which you can't delete. Thus you have actually only 45 slots to build all the different variants of the armies that you might want to play.

    Someone with 200 slots can haave 20 - 30 Katana Sams, all at different levels of spend on Skill points so they have a huge degree of choice in what they bring. With only 45 odd slots you can't afford to keep more than 6 - 8 Kat sams as otherwise you have no room for all the cav,ML, bows, Naginatas, etc etc. You end up with about 4 of each, which all have to be upgaded to the max to be competitive.

    So you end up with the very limited choice of either fielding fully vetted units or entirely vanilla ones, with nothing in between. There are times when you want some mid-ranked vets to get a better balance, and with only 45 slots there is no way to do that. That's the big advantage for players who used the exploit, and the only redress I can suggest is that CA make it that you unlock a vet slot for every province that you conquer in the avatar campaign, so by the time you have conquered the map as a gold player you would have nearly 200 slots. That would level the playing field for everyone.

  5. #45
    Senior Member Brigadier AMP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,216

    Default

    Well you can disagree all you like, but the dust collecting on my 120+ vets from being unused out of my 156 total says otherwise. Most are just experimental units or a vet of each kind that I like to keep on hand, but they aren't needed at all and most certainly don't provide any adv. collecting dust.

    And no you don't need to upgrade vets to the max to be competitive and yes there is plenty of in between with my builds mix of vanilla and vets and I do just fine really...

    You can easily get by with just 20 strong vets using 10 each match and filling the rest with vanilla units in a 14k fund match, so having around 50 vet slots of more than enough to be competitive. I only use regularly 35 vets, the rest aren't even really needed at all.

  6. #46
    Banned General
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,502

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AMP View Post
    Well you can disagree all you like, but the dust collecting on my 120+ vets from being unused out of my 156 total says otherwise. Most are just experimental units or a vet of each kind that I like to keep on hand, but they aren't needed at all and most certainly don't provide any adv. collecting dust.

    And no you don't need to upgrade vets to the max to be competitive and yes there is plenty of in between with my builds mix of vanilla and vets and I do just fine really...

    You can easily get by with just 20 strong vets using 10 each match and filling the rest with vanilla units in a 14k fund match, so having around 50 vet slots of more than enough to be competitive. I only use regularly 35 vets, the rest aren't even really needed at all.
    Thats cuz your using HIGH level vets. not alot of LOW level vets. I like to mix my armies with some low levels and some high levels or use many low levels with less vanilla units or use 10-12 well vetted units with a bunch of vanilla units. Just because your mix of veterans require around 30ish vet slots doesn't mean the rest of us. remember you are one among the many.

  7. #47
    Senior Member Sergeant Veritas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    296

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AMP View Post
    Well you can disagree all you like, but the dust collecting on my 120+ vets from being unused out of my 156 total says otherwise.
    Why do you always argue as if you're saddled on top of a horse? Get down!

    You only use 35 vets? Fantastic. You're a one dimensional player. But hey, your limited armies/style works. But in the mean time try comprehending what others are saying.

    And more importantly saying something like "you can all disagree with me but the fact my experiences are different makes you wrong" is not only absurd because your argument is purely anecdotal but it also makes you look incredibly arrogant, especially as you're not addressing other people's points. So settle down, AMP.

  8. #48
    Senior Member Brigadier AMP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,216

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Veritas View Post
    Why do you always argue as if you're saddled on top of a horse? Get down!

    You only use 35 vets? Fantastic. You're a one dimensional player. But hey, your limited armies/style works. But in the mean time try comprehending what others are saying.

    And more importantly saying something like "you can all disagree with me but the fact my experiences are different makes you wrong" is not only absurd because your argument is purely anecdotal but it also makes you look incredibly arrogant, especially as you're not addressing other people's points. So settle down, AMP.
    How dose 35 vets make me a one dimensional player? You mean one dimensional with my vets? How many options do you have though really? Spear heavy, sword heavy, cavalry heavy, missile heavy, balanced? You can make a good core with all those type of builds with just 50 vets and easily 3 different builds in 14k with just 35k vets. My youtube vids don't look any more one dimensional than others from what I can see.

    You say "try comprehending what others are saying" which part? Where having 100+ vet slots gives someone an advantage over someone who just has 50 vet slots in battle? Both players have 14k funds so it's not you can deploy all those vets at once. Sure you can change up your units more having a wider selection in vets including low tier and high tier, but that doesn't mean you have an advantage in the battle itself.

    And there is no point in addressing again for the 2nd time someone who said vanilla units are terrible when I've beaten already a couple people posting in this topic 1v1 in MM with an almost all vanilla build against their almost purely vet build... you only need a small handful of good vets to be equal to your opponent in battle.

  9. #49
    Senior Member Sergeant Veritas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    296

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AMP View Post
    How dose 35 vets make me a one dimensional player? You mean one dimensional with my vets? How many options do you have though really? Spear heavy, sword heavy, cavalry heavy, missile heavy, balanced? You can make a good core with all those type of builds with just 50 vets and easily 3 different builds in 14k with just 35k vets. My youtube vids don't look any more one dimensional than others from what I can see.
    Having 100 vet slots means you can make an array of different army setups. You're one dimensional because you use the same builds, along with the same play style and make very minor changes to your setup. Nagi attendants out in front, 3 vanilla matchies to soften up the enemy (which I agree... as vanilla units they're perfect) and then you retreat them behind your line, placing them so you can exploit the gaps you leave in your own line. Then send your monks in with your no-dachi (or whatever infantry you put on your flank but it's usually quite strong) in and use your katana cav to soften up any swords whilst your matchlocks hit the enemies infantry... and you try to time it with warcry. You also like Hold Firm units. I've never really seen you do much else. Your builds were very generic in the whole Aggony tournament as well. Prior to the patch you monk spammed... your builds were absolutely disgusting, but you still used the same **** and didn't really do much else. You're limited, and your thoughts on vet slots also demonstrate this - but that is not to say you're not good at what you do, but it does mean you're one dimensional. Furthermore your arrogance doesn't allow you to recognise other people's points of view. Hence your response 'well you can disagree all you like'. Just sheer arrogance - especially as Beardy quite clearly refuted one of your main points.

    All these things I have said to you already elsewhere, btw.

    If you used more veterans you might be able to alter your play style a little more. I don't know why you think you're so amazing and you talk to others as if they are below you. It's really not very nice Ampy, and it's why I'm being so harsh on you right now.

    Sure you can change up your units more having a wider selection in vets including low tier and high tier, but that doesn't mean you have an advantage in the battle itself.
    Agreed, not in one battle. But more vet slots = more flexibility and a greater ability to adapt over series of battles... a good example would be a tournament. Outside of that, you're granted an ability to test other types of builds or 'cores'.

  10. #50
    Banned Sergeant-Major
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    365

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AMP View Post
    And there is no point in addressing again for the 2nd time someone who said vanilla units are terrible when I've beaten already a couple people posting in this topic 1v1 in MM with an almost all vanilla build against their almost purely vet build... you only need a small handful of good vets to be equal to your opponent in battle.
    OH NO! its so hard to win with a purely vanilla build! against someone with an almost purely vetted build! MAN you must be a pro among pros!

    So From what I am understanding from your post, you can use 35 vets to create a spear build, a cav build, a sword build, a missile build, a balanced build? WOW with just 35 vets? will all of those builds be available after a battle? or would you need a vet refresh? From what I read in the past posts, NO ONE is talking about a IN BATTLE advantage. Its a more of a competitive advantage in CHOICE.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 5 of 12 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts