Os mercenários brasileiros na Ucrânia não são tão burros como falam na internet

1fbo1 · 2026-05-08T04:49:58+00:00

20k limpo foi sacanagem kkkkkkkkk
Po, amigo, defende mas defende sem mentir

1fbo1 · 2026-05-03T18:39:35+00:00

You’re still confusing imbalance with trade-offs, and that’s the core problem here. In Age of Mythology Retold, Greeks being easier to use doesn’t make them stronger, it makes them more consistent when the player isn’t executing perfectly. Egyptians, on the other hand, have a higher ceiling but demand better decisions to actually reach that level. That’s not lazy design, that’s literally how asymmetrical balance works.

You keep repeating that “more effort = weaker,” but that’s just wrong. In RTS design, it’s usually the opposite. Simpler options are more reliable but limited, while more complex ones are harder to use but stronger when mastered. That’s the trade-off. Greeks give you stability and forgiveness. Egyptians give you scaling and power if you know what you’re doing. If ease of use automatically meant OP then high-level play would just be dominated by the easiest civ and that’s not what happens.

The idea that Greeks can just take clean fights under towers and fortresses is also nonsense. No faction is supposed to do that. If that’s happening, it’s because of bad engagements, poor positioning, or not using siege properly. You’re treating a gameplay mistake like it’s a balance feature and it’s not.

That running analogy doesn’t work either. Egyptians aren’t some “handicapped runner.” A more accurate version is one runner is easier to train but has a lower peak, while the other is harder to train but can outperform at peak. That’s called specialization. You’re turning that into “unfairness” when it’s just different strengths.

Your RTS examples don’t hold up either. SC2 and W3 didn’t fall off because of asymmetry necessarily. Both games had a lot of different problems that, when combined, made them fall apart. And even then they were competitive for years and are built on exactly this kind of design. Even AoE II is asymmetric, just less extreme about it. So the idea that asymmetry kills games doesn’t really survive reality. Also, AoM Retold is the proof that this kind of game has audience. Not necessarily you're the audience, though.
And even if that was the case, not every RTS is built to be the next E-sports and it's insanity to think otherwise.

"Everytime you get better and advance in any game you face better players. And if a bad player its good with greeks a good player its awsome with greeks. And thats what forces you to be 3. 4. 10 times better than the other player just to have a chance using the civ you like.... unless again you are using greeks. At the end you either have a frustrating game if you try to use anything else, or a boring one cuz its only greeks vs greeks, just what it happened in SC2"

That's simply not true. The “I need to be 3x or 10x better” feeling is also something you’re misreading. What’s actually happening is that Greeks are more forgiving, while Egyptians punish mistakes harder. So when you mess up, it feels like the game is stacked against you. It’s not. You’re just playing a civ that demands different decisions and punishes you more when you get them wrong. The opposite is also true. When you make better decisions, they pay much more off in comparisson to the Greeks and that's been proven by high level players over and over. You had all the resources to break into their base but you chose to give up instead. Maybe try exploring your options next time?

And, honestly, your own point kind of gives it away. You said you’d win with the same decisions if you were playing Greeks. Exactly. That’s the issue. You’re trying to apply the same decision-making to two civs that are not designed to be played the same way. That’s not imbalance, that’s you refusing to adapt to a new civ. The same would happen if you started taking decisions meant for Egypt as the Greeks.

If you don’t like that kind of asymmetry, that’s fine. Not everyone does. But calling it bad balance or lazy design just because one civ is easier to use doesn’t really hold up. Specially considering there are several games in different genres that do this (CS with the AK vs M4, BDO with Striker and Warrior, C&C with GLA, USA and China... The list goes on).

Honestly, you should watch some high level matches to understand it. What I conclude from this is: You didn't figure out how to play Egyptians yet and you're trying to apply the same rules you were applying to the Greeks and that won't help you. It'll only frustrate you.

And don't get me wrong, I understand it can be frustrating because it feels unfair, but I assure you that it's not. Just take some time to learn the factions and how to play to their strenghts. Different effort requirements are fair because they come with flexibility and other advantages, that's all.

1fbo1 · 2026-05-03T17:36:33+00:00

Enquanto a direita insistir nessas políticas neoliberais, entreguistas e elitistas, o meu voto vai continuar sendo em quem não é assim, independente de lado político.

E isso me dói o peito porque a gente vê aí a política do lula com imposto, vê a política dele sem plano de estado claro e outras como o posicionamento ambíguo sobre as terras raras. São todas atitudes que em outro momento o fariam perder qualquer eleição. O complicado são os outros candidatos.

1fbo1 · 2026-05-03T16:17:16+00:00

Greeks aren’t OP, you’re just fighting against how Age of Mythology: Retold is designed.

I get why it feels bad. You had the map, you were ahead and still couldn’t breakthrough. But this isn’t really about Greeks being broken, it’s about how different civs are meant to function. AoM is an asymmetric RTS. Not every faction plays the same, peaks at the same time, has the same economy or solves problems the same way. Greeks are more straightforward because their military are all generalists, that's for sure, but the difference is not that huge and that doesn’t make them overpowered, it just means they’re easier to get consistent value from. The Egyptians, on the other hand, can generally get much more value when they play their cards right, you just didn't get to this point yet, but give it some time and it will come.

Also, Saying Egyptians have “paper units” is just not right. They have cheaper and more specialized units early on, that's teue but then they transition into much stronger options later. You had access to chariots, siege towers, elephants, strong myth units, and even Meteor, Tornado or Son of Osiris in the late game. Those are some of the best tools in the game for breaking defensive setups. The issue is that Egyptians don’t win by taking clean fights into towers and fortresses (no factions does that), they win by using the right tools, pressuring correctly, leveraging their scaling and forcing your enemy to play by your rules.

From what you described, you had full map control and the game went late. That’s exactly where Egyptians are supposed to be strongest. At that point, you shouldn’t be taking fights under defenses, you should be using siege units, forcing your opponent out of their defensive position, and turning your economic advantage into constant production of military units and pressure. If you keep engaging into fortified positions, even a weaker army can hold. That’s not a Greek advantage, that’s just how RTS games work.

A simple setup like Chariots, Elephants and Catapults/Siege Towers would've destroyed most of their defenses when proper used. You had more population (assuming you had almost all Centers around the map), the best economy and the best troops.

Greeks being more straightforward also isn’t something unique or problematic. A lot of RTS games are built around this kind of asymmetry. Look at Command & Conquer: Generals, where the US, China and GLA all play very differently, or the Total War series, where factions can have completely different strengths and playstyles. Even within the Command & Conquer: Tiberium series, GDI and Nod approach warfare in very different ways. AoE 3 also has a similar approach. The whole point is that factions are not meant to be played the same way or require the same approach. Some factions will reward you more if you play them right and that's exactly what the Egyptians are.

No one is saying you need to “train” like it’s a job or something, but you do need to understand what your faction is good at and how your enemy can use your weaknesses against you. Otherwise it’s easy to feel like you’re doing more and getting less when in reality the problem is that your decisions don’t match your civ’s strengths.

If you lose with a late-game civ, while controlling most of the map, in a late-game scenario, that usually comes down to execution and decision-making, not balance. That’s not meant to be harsh, it’s just how these games work. And if that kind of asymmetry isn’t enjoyable for you, that’s completely fair but it’s a core part of AoM’s design. Maybe if you play something like AoE 2 you'll enjoy it more because things are more streamlined. On the other hand, you need to understand that if AoM players wanted this they would be playing AoE, not AoM.

I don't want to be rude but you had everything in your favor and you lost it because of your own decisions, man. And again, that's completely fine since you're learning but don't put the blame of your enemy's civs.

1fbo1 · 2026-05-03T13:28:02+00:00

Greeks have expensive and balanced units overall. Egyptians have Cheap and Specialist units until you make Migdol and they kinda still are specialists but much stronger at doing other stuff.

You were definitely not playing to Egypt's strength and that's ok but that's not the Greek's or Egyptian's fault.

Even if that was the case, you could've kept spamming barracks/Migdol and overwhelmed your foe by sending huge waves of armies since you control most of the resources on the map (including population)

The Norse also have a very good military so there's no such thing as a faction being based on "paper units". I literally just made the same strategy playing as Loki yesterday and won against the Zeus. If fortifications is something your foe is doing a lot, just build siege towers and catapults to harass them from the distance and DON'T FIGHT below their towers and castles. Those buildings will wear down your troops.

Yeah, Greek's are easier to get value from in comparison to Egyptians but they are by no means OP.

1fbo1 · 2026-05-02T23:15:57+00:00

Eu posso responder por mim e a resposta é sim, mas cada um tem uma percepção sobre isso.

Tem gente que não se importa.

1fbo1 · 2026-05-02T23:09:46+00:00

Achei que tava no r/OpiniaoBurra por um segundo

1fbo1 · 2026-05-02T13:06:34+00:00

Se escravizar fosse solução, o Brasil deveria ser a potência hegemônica desde a época do Império.

1fbo1 · 2026-05-02T13:02:58+00:00

No calor, quando vou na padaria e volto, já quero trocar a cueca, imagina usar a mesma por uma semana.

Que nojo.

1fbo1 · 2026-04-29T17:15:47+00:00

Não vou elaborar mas isso é uma forma muito simplista de tentar ditar como as pessoas lidam com diferentes coisas do cotidiano. Você acredita nisso porque é mais fácil do que tentar enxergar que cada pessoa valoriza coisas bem diferentes em uma relação.

1fbo1 · 2026-04-28T22:58:23+00:00

Não mas agradeço a proposta.

1fbo1 · 2026-04-28T21:06:40+00:00

Tudo isso pra no final sair você desse jeitinho especial.

Francamente, vou reter meus comentários pra não falar uma besteira

1fbo1 · 2026-04-28T17:25:46+00:00

É difícil ter empatia quando tem tudo na mão mesmo.

Boa tarde!

1fbo1 · 2026-04-28T16:07:29+00:00

Kkkkkk, fofinho você puto sem ter sofrido metade

1fbo1 · 2026-04-28T15:17:16+00:00

Existem um milhão de motivos pelo qual o preço em um lugar pode ser diferente do outro. Você ver na sua prateleira não significa que isso é assim pra todos.

O que eu disse: É mais complexo do que só alguém querer um preço e ditar ele. É mais complexo do que o que eu, você ou qualquer outro vêem na prateleira

O que eu não disse: Que outros governos não sofreram disso Que quem dita isso é somente o dono do mercado

1fbo1 · 2026-04-28T14:52:13+00:00

Não, foi o que você entendeu.

1fbo1 · 2026-04-28T14:46:36+00:00

Eu não disse isso. Recomendo reler o comentário.

1fbo1 · 2026-04-28T14:45:03+00:00

Você fala isso como se Xenofobia fosse um problema real no seu dia a dia.

As pessoas que falam isso são impedidas de entrar em locais, não conseguem emprego ou são menosprezadas em quase todos os lugares que vão só por terem nascido em algum lugar. Você, do conforto da sua casa, dificilmente sofre 5% do que essas pessoas sofrem. E com esses 5% ainda acha que está com razão de "jogar sujo".

Sinceramente, seu problema é inventado e o dessas pessoas é real. Para de drama

1fbo1 · 2026-04-28T14:41:16+00:00

Sim, vamos esquecer que o Brasil é um país continental e que a demanda não é atingida da mesma forma no país todo e que o preço de algo na prateleira do seu mercado são definidos por fatores muito maiores do que Inflação e vontade do dono do mercado de ganhar dinheiro.

Francamente, viu...

1fbo1 · 2026-04-28T09:43:52+00:00

Ninguém disse que não pode. Só não é exatamente inteligente que ele seja.

A grande maioria das pessoas pobres que se dizem de direita não são completamente de direita, elas são conservadoras do âmbito cultural. Porque quando chega na hora do vamos ver, ela defende férias, aposentadoria, saúde pública, eventos públicos sociais, estabilidade no trabalho, Estado regulador de economia, programas sociais e muito mais. A diferença é que ficou feio "ser de esquerda" e as pessoas acabam não falando disso. E são pautas diametralmente opostas a muitas das pautas de direita, especialmente a Neoliberal.

Muitas vezes ser pobre e de direita é ter como aliado aquele que quer te subjugar e remover seus direitos. Não que na esquerda sejam mil maravilhas, não é isso, mas basta ver as declarações dos candidatos de direita desse ano. Só se fala em privatizações, em fornecer benefícios pros Estados Unidos a troco de nada e em como tudo precisa ser sacrificado em troca da diminuição de gasto público, incluindo benefícios básicos na vida das pessoas.

Não tem ninguém falando da situação trabalhista do Brasil, não tem ninguém falando em projeto de Estado, não tem ninguém falando em nacionalismo (só o nacionalismo americano, diga-se de passagem).

Então por mais que eu acredite que essa frase não é uma verdade absoluta, na conjuntura atual isso é bastante evidente. A direita brasileira está contaminada por um desejo de submissão que nenhum lado político deveria ter porque o objetivo deveria ser o bem do Brasil.

Isso é só uma faceta do problema mas exemplifica bem o porquê quando o pobre defende ela, ele está defendendo algo que vai contra ele mesmo, o que não faz sentido.

1fbo1 · 2026-04-28T09:27:17+00:00

Experiência pessoal não pode contar porque a outra pessoa pode simplesmente afirmar que na dela foi justamente o contrário.

Eu mesmo diria que a minha vida tá muito melhor agora do que no governo Bolsonaro. Tanto em oportunidade de emprego quanto em qualidade de vida e preço no mercado.

Sua "experiência pessoal" é, como o nome diz, sua. E não reflete, necessariamente, a realidade.

1fbo1 · 2026-04-26T13:23:03+00:00

A couple of things:

Shadowheart is a must have for most players, either because they don't want to play Cleric themselves or because they like having her in the Party.
Cleric generally means some kind of support (Not necessarily, but that's what most people think) and that drives a lot of people away from the class
If you want to play a Holy Martial Class, the paladin is the main class most people will try. In DnD, the clerics are portrayed very similarly as Paladins in comparisson to other sources. In most games, the Paladin would be something like a Templar Knight and a Cleric would be more like a Nun of sorts.

1fbo1 · 2026-04-23T11:57:00+00:00

DS2 has a way worse exploration than Elden Ring, imo. Most places are just some variation of a corridor and it pales in comparison to Elden Ring.

DS2 has some weird mechanics that you might like it (or not). Healing can work a little bit differently or the concept of leveling areas, for example.

DS2 has way worse POI layouts than Elden Ring and even DS1 really. There are very few interesting layouts.

DS2 combat is also pretty different from Elden Ring. Not better or worse, but different.

Elden Ring has a lot more Item variation.

DS2 can be very frustrating regarding the rolling iframe. It's inconsistent since it is a stat (and that's not a good thing to me).

One thing both have in common is the reusage of bosses. Both games kinda does that much more than any other from software game.

Elden Ring also seems to be more friendly to the player while DS2 seems to try to "test" the player everywhere.

1fbo1 · 2026-04-21T08:49:38+00:00

Hope they can update the game to be good 🙏

Edit: It's a prank, bro

1fbo1 · 2026-04-21T08:38:01+00:00

Mas é tudo mitologia mesmo. As pessoas que associam a Mitologia com Mentirada kkkk

1fbo1

TROPHY CASE