Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Adorbs

Matchlock + Rapid Volley is stupid.

HazedHazed Junior MemberPosts: 12Registered Users
Its just dumb, matchlock are already the most powerful unit in the game because it ignore's armor, but then you give them insta-reload with rapid volley. Turns the game into a cheese fest, where scrubs camp hills with their rapid volley matchlock. Its a joke.
Post edited by Hazed on
«1345

Comments

  • blentablenta Banned Posts: 530Banned Users
    edited April 2011
    What I don't get is that we had ETW and NTW and people still didn't get enough of gunpowder units and battles? I remember jumping up and down for 10 minutes, I was that much happy, when I saw that the next TW is sword/bow/spear/cavalry game. I haven't as much as scrolled down in the Army screen to matchlocks and siege units since i got the game. (and I have played over 200 battles in multiplayer)
    My YouTube battle replay channel with comments >
    http://www.youtube.com/user/perafilozof?feature=mhum
    With Total war since original Shogun, made my life better!
    .....''Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something.''
    Plato, Ancient Greek Philosopher, 428 BC-348 BC
  • DerpusDerpus Senior Member Posts: 206Registered Users
    edited April 2011
    Yeah, I've honestly been getting annoyed by pure matchlock armies. I've beaten them before, but I'm starting to come across a lot of high leveled people that use them because it's really simple to do and really powerful. It's a game, but they didn't even field pure gun armies back then in Japan.
  • TheDuffmanTheDuffman Senior Member Posts: 369Registered Users
    edited April 2011
    Well, I was struggling to decide what to give my matchlock ashigaru, ranked fire, or rapid reload. I think I know now. Thanks guys :)
    Interesting Signature.

    If you disagree with the above comment, your lying, because your still reading.
  • IncubusDragonIncubusDragon Senior Member Posts: 952Registered Users
    edited April 2011
    I'm all for a cap at level 6... Level 6 Ashigaru with rapid fire is a good representation of a veteran unit... when ranking-up beyond that, they start taking on god-like qualities - higher levels start producing cartoon battles.
    [PORTABLE-ID]IncubusDragon[/PORTABLE-ID]
    Disorder arises from order, Cowardice arises from courage, Weakness arises from strength - Sun Tzu
    Incubus Dragon |Ronin|
    Click me for Shogun 2 Custom Maps
  • SatchSatch Senior Member Posts: 267Registered Users
    edited April 2011
    I dont think ive ever used a matchlock unit in a battle, i dont agree with them. Imba imo. Im always the one who has 2 charge as i always play against campers and charging into 4 matchlock units is a joke... Nerf please?
    - SatcH

    (\_/)
    (O.o)
    (> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination.
  • KhurtKhurt Senior Member Posts: 102Registered Users
    edited April 2011
    matchlock are not op... they just need a cap to avoid people spamming them. 4 units are enough.
  • FranstasticFranstastic Member Posts: 39Registered Users
    edited April 2011
    they are extremly op, one matchlock unit with rapid volley can destroy several units before u even reach them now take 3 of em super veteranced destroying a whole melee army aslong as hes archers destroys urs, give them a min of 5 sec reload atleast that would balance, them spraying an army to pieces is just overpowered, they deal more morale damage and casualties then a mangonel unless u put all ur units at the exact same spott and the mongonel hits ur entire army.
  • Sun TzuSun Tzu Senior Member EnglandPosts: 644Registered Users
    edited April 2011
    matchlocks are a real problem imo

    if anyone has ever played against monk match lvl 5 and above they will know that they fire like machine guns. All you have to do is bring really strong bow and strong cav and you're onto a virtually impregnable army. You can't charge with cav because good players will cover well. Bow wont work because again good players will bring enough to counter yrs. If you try charging, well put it this way, i charged 4 nag sam all with armour upgrade against 2 lvl match. They didnt even get close.

    The reload speed and accuracy really need to be nerfed. And the special abilities should be removed. Matchlocks at their base rate were fine. LvLd up they are just stupid.

    Really hope CA do something as it forces the same army compositions and tactics. Which is really sad as this game should allow for multiple playing styles.
    "True wisdom is knowing you know nothing."
  • FilarFilar Senior Member Posts: 416Registered Users
    edited April 2011
    increase their cost... make matchlock ashigaru cost 700koku (guns themselfs costs more than peasants), samurai 1000, monk 1500.

    I was trying to play "bushido way", withotu using dishonorable gunpowder weapons, but in current situation its like having a death wish. Matchlocks in the forest are just too deadly. At least give archers possbility to "attack ground" so we can fire some arrows on them BEFORE we get in their range.
  • TurdlesTurdles Junior Member Posts: 27Registered Users
    edited April 2011
    Sun Tzu wrote: »
    matchlocks are a real problem imo

    if anyone has ever played against monk match lvl 5 and above they will know that they fire like machine guns. All you have to do is bring really strong bow and strong cav and you're onto a virtually impregnable army. You can't charge with cav because good players will cover well. Bow wont work because again good players will bring enough to counter yrs. If you try charging, well put it this way, i charged 4 nag sam all with armour upgrade against 2 lvl match. They didnt even get close.

    The reload speed and accuracy really need to be nerfed. And the special abilities should be removed. Matchlocks at their base rate were fine. LvLd up they are just stupid.

    Really hope CA do something as it forces the same army compositions and tactics. Which is really sad as this game should allow for multiple playing styles.

    Firstly the accuracy of the guns falls off greatly with range, so bows will always destroy the enemy matchlocks regardless of rank. Secondly a fully ranked matchlock monk costs 1.2k, if they buy matchlocks they are losing out elsewhere. And why were you surprised when 4 naginata lost to some matchlocks? Did you not realise that matchlocks are meant to counter armoured troops?

    I really hope CA do nothing about the matchlocks. It encourages a versatile army and punishes the noobs who just spam melee and cavalry and expect to win. If matchlocks are weakened, archers become less useful, melee becomes way more useful and then it becomes a joke of a game where all you need to win is a noob tactic where melee infantry is king.
    if anyone has ever played against monk match lvl 5 and above they will know that they fire like machine guns. All you have to do is bring really strong bow and strong cav and you're onto a virtually impregnable army. You can't charge with cav because good players will cover well. Bow wont work because again good players will bring enough to counter yrs.

    All you have to do is bring really strong archers cavalry and matchlocks? What a meaningless thing to say. Meanwhile you don't have strong archers or cavalry or matchlocks? What? Why are you spending all your money on melee infantry if he has better archers cavalry AND matchlocks, why not invest in some archers and defend them with the cheaper units that are yari ashigaru if you don't like cavalry? Sorry but I don't think you're very good is all. Your argument makes little sense to put it lightly.
    I'm surprised by the number of people who complain about them on these forums and yet nobody elsewhere dislikes them.


    All it takes to defeat matchlocks are a few archer units, they absolutely destroy them
  • TurdlesTurdles Junior Member Posts: 27Registered Users
    edited April 2011
    Filar wrote: »
    increase their cost... make matchlock ashigaru cost 700koku (guns themselfs costs more than peasants), samurai 1000, monk 1500.

    I was trying to play "bushido way", withotu using dishonorable gunpowder weapons, but in current situation its like having a death wish. Matchlocks in the forest are just too deadly. At least give archers possbility to "attack ground" so we can fire some arrows on them BEFORE we get in their range.

    Why don't you use archer units, or is that not "bushido way" enough for you?

    Yeah I actually agree though about being able to make your archers force fire on patches of land, it's like I know there is a unit there but I can't do anything about it even if I have tonnes of archers.
  • dark as silverdark as silver Senior Member Posts: 1,645Registered Users
    edited April 2011
    I've never found matchlocks to be too op as they have a tendency to be slaughtered by bows, from what I gather its the rapid reload upgrade thats the problem, would it help if CA turned it into one of the specialist (lvl 9 and 20 clan tokens) upgrades?
  • TurdlesTurdles Junior Member Posts: 27Registered Users
    edited April 2011
    I've never found matchlocks to be too op as they have a tendency to be slaughtered by bows, from what I gather its the rapid reload upgrade thats the problem, would it help if CA turned it into one of the specialist (lvl 9 and 20 clan tokens) upgrades?

    What people seem to misunderstand is that they should kill enemy matchlocks before the main battle even begins, or at least keep firing at them over time and that way they won't even get to use the ability.
  • dark as silverdark as silver Senior Member Posts: 1,645Registered Users
    edited April 2011
    Turdles wrote: »
    What people seem to misunderstand is that they should kill enemy matchlocks before the main battle even begins, or at least keep firing at them over time and that way they won't even get to use the ability.
    Yer matchlock spam is easy to beat if you exploit land and use superior range.
  • Sun TzuSun Tzu Senior Member EnglandPosts: 644Registered Users
    edited April 2011
    Turdles. I have 300 games worth of experience with a win loss ratio above 10/1. I know how to counter all styles of tactics. I bring a balanced army and know how to use and utlize all the units abilities. If you had actually read my post then you would of noticed that i said as well as bringing ridiculously ranked matchlocks, generals are bringing extremely strong archers as well. They have you beat on range, they have you equal on cav and they have their match. Most times they have very weak melee. It is extremely hard to counter these army setups, as you will lose the bow exchange. You cav are equalled. If you try and charge you get torn up by these machine gun matchlock.

    My question to you is - have you ever seen the fire rate of these matchlocks? You really think they are suitable for overall gameplay?
    "True wisdom is knowing you know nothing."
  • SterriusSterrius Junior Member Posts: 46Registered Users
    edited April 2011
    increase their cost... make matchlock ashigaru cost 700koku (guns themselfs costs more than peasants), samurai 1000, monk 1500.

    People want it balanced not impossible to use, you can´t manage the units already thinking of them lv9 veterans.

    I agree a lv9 monk matchlock is deadly but i also agree almost any unit of this game at lv9 is deadly. Even ashigarus become monks/samurais in disguise with enough lvs.

    Maybe the problem is not the unit but the upgrade system giving too much bonus. (+10 reload or accuracy for only 1 point)
  • SoriSori Member Posts: 81Registered Users
    edited April 2011
    i dont know where you have seen that a matchlock monk can route three units before contact, i got one monk matchlock with rank fire, rapid volley and also increased range, so very powerful, it will kill one unit but not two, just got a game where it happened, if he routed three units you did something wrong

    they are powerful but not op imo, remember that a fully upgraded matchlock cost around 1300
  • Sun TzuSun Tzu Senior Member EnglandPosts: 644Registered Users
    edited April 2011
    Sterrius wrote: »
    People want it balanced not impossible to use, you can´t manage the units already thinking of them lv9 veterans.

    I agree a lv9 monk matchlock is deadly but i also agree almost any unit of this game at lv9 is deadly. Even ashigarus become monks/samurais in disguise with enough lvs.

    Maybe the problem is not the unit but the upgrade system giving too much bonus. (+10 reload or accuracy for only 1 point)

    i agree with this...

    Instead of increase of 10, maybe 3 for ashi units and 5 for sam and monk. This would reduce the level of fire and accuracy considerably.

    Good idea.

    Get rid of fire by rank and rapid volley too i think. At base rate all the match are good.
    "True wisdom is knowing you know nothing."
  • TurdlesTurdles Junior Member Posts: 27Registered Users
    edited April 2011
    Sun Tzu wrote: »
    Turdles. I have 300 games worth of experience with a win loss ratio above 10/1. I know how to counter all styles of tactics. I bring a balanced army and know how to use and utlize all the units abilities. If you had actually read my post then you would of noticed that i said as well as bringing ridiculously ranked matchlocks, generals are bringing extremely strong archers as well. They have you beat on range, they have you equal on cav and they have their match. Most times they have very weak melee. It is extremely hard to counter these army setups, as you will lose the bow exchange. You cav are equalled. If you try and charge you get torn up by these machine gun matchlock.

    My question to you is - have you ever seen the fire rate of these matchlocks? You really think they are suitable for overall gameplay?

    What I'm saying is if they have you beat on archers and matchlocks, and equal on cavalry, why are you bringing so much melee infantry? Your army would appear to be grossly imbalanced if that is the case. And the suggestion that accuracy increases should increase by 3 is worthless, I wouldn't pay an extra 50 to increase the accuracy by such a tiny amount. Fire by rank being removed is a very bad idea too. And yes I do think they're fine, they're key to the balance and key to stopping nooby melee spam armies which detract greatly form the game.
  • Sun TzuSun Tzu Senior Member EnglandPosts: 644Registered Users
    edited April 2011
    sori....it was 2 lvl8 matchlock monks, 1 with inspire and stand and fight on. It was on Shinano River, so i was slowed by the river. I used the nag sams as a meat shield for my nag monks to get close. My army got no where near and they were rallied.
    "True wisdom is knowing you know nothing."
  • SoriSori Member Posts: 81Registered Users
    edited April 2011
    you were not wrong but you were on a special case, it's like clustering his units while a mangonel shot,

    why didn't you attack from the hill? you know it's kinda your mistake, there is no way saying they are op because your crossed a river to get them...
  • Sun TzuSun Tzu Senior Member EnglandPosts: 644Registered Users
    edited April 2011
    Turdles.....how do you know what army i bring? How do you know the balance? Please stop making assumptions about what i bring in my army..

    This is convo about whether we thinl ranked up matchlock are too OP, not about my army balance. My ratio speaks for itself thank-you.

    Currently I utilize extremely strong bow and matchlock with strong cav and generally weak melee. I played va a few top 10 players and discovered it is exceptionally hard to beat this setup.

    IMO - matchlocks being too strong are forcing a one side style of tactics. If they were reduced slightly in stats they would open the game up a little better tactically. There would a better balance.
    "True wisdom is knowing you know nothing."
  • Sun TzuSun Tzu Senior Member EnglandPosts: 644Registered Users
    edited April 2011
    sori...please! please! please! did you see the battle? NO so stop making stupid comments. i had lost all my bow. i had no more ranged units. there was one option left. i am not basing my comments on this one instance.

    Please can people writing on these forums stick to the topic in hand and not start picking apart tactics and army setups of which you have never seen. Its quite frankly pointless and brings nothing to the thread.

    I was simply trying to back up my arguements with some examples and i have judge and jury being critical about things they hhave never seen.

    Have an opinion, fine. Different to mine, fine. Base your arguements on guess work, childish!
    "True wisdom is knowing you know nothing."
  • Lemmy WinksLemmy Winks Member Posts: 66Registered Users
    edited April 2011
    eh in the origonal shogun matchlocks were so bad they were almsot completly worthless. They never killed anyone in battle and couldnt really be used if they were firing at a unit that was engaged in combat with a unit of their own right infront of them (in shogun 2 the bullets seem to magically travel through their own units and into the enemy units fighting on the other side). Matchlocks were only for hurting morale in shogun, not really useful at all from a kiling standpoint but now they are really good, and capable of impossible abilites. If they are going to be effective atleast make it fair and realistic with friendlt fire. If they are going to fire matchlocks from behind their battle line there infantry should take massive casualties.
  • SoriSori Member Posts: 81Registered Users
    edited April 2011
    if you say something, why i should not answer based that?!?

    if u don't want people argue on your game experience don't speak about them or explain them fully so we know, because it looks like, i can argue with my examples if i want but you can't say my example are bad because you didn't see the match

    you lost your bows right (so no good counter against matchlock left), you charged trough a river facing matchlock you loose, it's NORMAL plus you have say that you had only few melee units so what did you expect, that you would have won?

    i think you are the stupid, iam not Okay?

    and people complaining about something can be because they don't know how to counter that (don't seem to be your case, 'cause your telling us you're a good player), apart from matchlock spam there is nothing against them, there are various tactics, ones more easier than others to kill them, easiest is bows, then matchlock then cavalry and then melee

    and don't start flaming me just because your example was bad and that you got nothing else to say that i don't know what happened
  • Sun TzuSun Tzu Senior Member EnglandPosts: 644Registered Users
    edited April 2011
    whatever sori, instead of sticking to the thread topic you divert on the smallpoints of what everyone says. This is really adding to the thread. Well done.

    Maybe i was a little vague, sorry didnt realise my every tactic would be picked upon by some high and mighty. You made a lot of assumptions in the process, didn't you.

    I am not going to get into a debate about this with you, you clearly are looking to pick apart people's comments and not add anything interesting to the topic at hand.

    Anyway, enough. Final comment. Apologies to original poster for poisoning thread with trivial posts.
    "True wisdom is knowing you know nothing."
  • DerpusDerpus Senior Member Posts: 206Registered Users
    edited April 2011
    Sori wrote: »
    if you say something, why i should not answer based that?!?

    if u don't want people argue on your game experience don't speak about them or explain them fully so we know, because it looks like, i can argue with my examples if i want but you can't say my example are bad because you didn't see the match

    you lost your bows right (so no good counter against matchlock left), you charged trough a river facing matchlock you loose, it's NORMAL plus you have say that you had only few melee units so what did you expect, that you would have won?

    i think you are the stupid, iam not Okay?

    and people complaining about something can be because they don't know how to counter that (don't seem to be your case, 'cause your telling us you're a good player), apart from matchlock spam there is nothing against them, there are various tactics, ones more easier than others to kill them, easiest is bows, then matchlock then cavalry and then melee

    and don't start flaming me just because your example was bad and that you got nothing else to say that i don't know what happened

    You should realize that there is no good counter for matchlock spam. If an army has basically every unit as that, they will simply wait on a hill/in front of a river. They'll stretch out their matchlocks into long lines/box shapes so you literally can't flank them. Then you have to come up and hit him while losing units very quickly. If you have a few bows they'll simply advance towards your army in the box/line formation. Guns should be powerful as they really are, but when you're able to field so many like this, it's broken. When it comes down to it, this is just exploiting a powerful unit and it's ridiculous at this point.

    At the very least, matchlock's friendly fire should be x10 what it is now. That would make them actually have to play the game instead of just sit there and shoot.
  • ThaxThax Senior Member Posts: 123Registered Users
    edited April 2011
    The next few years in Japan after this era saw the matchlock armies conquer the entire country with ease.
    [PORTABLE-ID]yourname[/PORTABLE-ID]
  • swalkerswalker Senior Member Posts: 159Registered Users
    edited April 2011
    I don't think that he is talking about spamming matchlock armies. I think that he is talking about 2 or 3 vetted matchlocks with self-inspire and rapid fire on...otherwise know as full on machine guns.

    The high level players that use these units also use 4 monk bows, so please don't post all you have to do is use bows to counter. If you don't have previous knowledge of this army composition, and therefore use roughly 6 bows yourself...your entire melee force will be wiped out before you reach their lines (posted this example before).

    If you don't believe me go play sabre, he went from ok player that had about a 3:1 win ratio, to now being a top 10 player. Change in skill or change in army composition to OP units? I'll let you decide.

    Sincerely,
    Patrick Walker
  • SoriSori Member Posts: 81Registered Users
    edited April 2011
    i say apart from matchlock spam there is nothing against them, so yes matchlock spam is annoying, but else it's fine
    and a line of matchlock that would fill the entire map would not have such ability as rapid volley and such

    Sun Tzu, i answered you because you where the only one to give an example and arguing, the others didn't, so don't take that personnally,

    and iam talking about the subject,

    and what people are sayin that interesting? "matchlock OP" "remove rapid volley",

    what is that? how you convince people just saying that?

    why not remove banzaï ability? this is clearly OP and only cost 120... uh you're joking?
«1345
Sign In or Register to comment.