1v1 Focused Changes

started a new account and won all my ranked 1v1 games except one due to a crash. game also crashed multiple times in a single hour when testing things in skirmish mode, something that hasn’t happened in a long time and is killing any mood to continue playing. fixing these crashes should be the highest priority.

otherwise here are some changes that would make this mode more pleasent to play in 1v1, most have little effect on treaty.


let me check my profile and other players profiles without leaving the ranked que as well as letting me change deck/selecting color. wanting to check my profile only to find out it cancels my que is incredibly frustrating. I honestly do not understand the point of forcing players into the que page, it does absolutely nothing and forces attention on what is essentially a loading screen. and you can guess how much players love being forced to look at loading screens.


remove water maps from ranked 1v1, at least until water gets overhauled.


they scale too fast. remove 100 food and the governor politician, move Virginia company to age 2. slowing them down will give other civs a chance to breath when against them while having almost no effect on treaty and average skilled play.

the scaling itself isn’t the problem, it’s how fast they can do it.

add a house wagon to the Florence Nightingale card as a gesture of goodwill to average skilled play.


change first big button to aenna, remove 2nd aenna shipment and lower aenna siege damage. keeping haud honest in age 2 will make them less gimmicky and abusable. no effect on treaty. musket riders now have a cape so they have a much different silhouette compared to horsemen.

toma and horsemen wood cost changed to gold will solve a lot of this civs problems, but that would influence treaty.


like Britain. change their houses to default 100 wood 1200 hp to slow them down. they get out of hand to quickly. little effect on treaty.


add 100 food per bank, add a 100-food cost to their bank shipment. slows them down by 400 food early game, like 2 hussars or 3 skirms. little effect on treaty.


I’ve won every game I’ve faced against Aztecs. I’ve also won every game against every civ I faced, but the Aztecs were the easiest and fastest to conclude. they are either a desperate age 2 all in that is laughably easy to repel, or an even more desperate ff without much of a power spike.

remove 2nd slinger shipment and puma siegetrooper tag to rid themselves of these self-destructive all ins and increase units per age 2 shipments. they need more than this, and im glad for the attention they received.

replacing gimmicky shock infantry with the cavalry tag and buffing coyote runners would be the best thing to happen to them.


they do not seem strong, but we should nerf them again just to be sure. move Karni Mata to age 2 to slow them down.

as a compensatory buff make 2 vill shipment x2 an infinite shipment.


same as Japan, may not be too strong but can never be too sure. change 4 vill shipments to 3, change 4 axe rider to 3 and move evening star to age 3.

as compensation, make nomadic expansion and friendly territory attack aura baseline rather than a card.


slow them down.

                       Changes that may affect Treaty


they will need changes that affect treaty. their early age 2 units are too weak and cheap to be effective while not being able to leverage their cost efficiency through their slow early production from 1 building and heavy wood cost. they then scale too hard with cards for very cost-effective mass. they need a more balanced power curve.

cards like Old Han need to be removed, their age 2 units need to have higher base stats and cost rather than relying on an age 4 card. there are too many upgrade cards, again some need to be folded into their baseline units with a cost increase. wood cost removed from age 2 banner armies and replaced with either more food or gold so they are more practical to make. this is an awkwardly balanced civ currently, big discrepancy between early game and late game due to cards and base unit stat/costs.


jans and abus need nerfs reverted, need some form of native ally shipment. remove governor politician, move silk road into royal decree card. move mosque construction card to age 1, change nizam into 1000 food for 5 nizams.

abus cost increased to 200+, stats adjusted to match. with jans reverted to 100 food, age 2 death ball will hit slower and with fewer units through sizable cost increase. allows breathing room for slower civs and discourage super early rushes/all ins from ottoman players in favor of longer/more complex gameplans.

spahi shipment cost reduced to match 300 food per spahi, corrected xp bounty. revert 4 mamelukes to 5. artillery cards changed into age 3/4 combat cards rather than age 2, nerfing early and buffing late.

Agree with UI Changes.

Water is fine and should definitely not be removed from ranked, it’s incredibly enjoyable.

Brits are fine and vulnerable to early aggression, those villagers and investment into virginia company take time to pay off and are useless whilst garrisoned or being starved off hunts, brits also lack a fast age to fortress.

Hauds are fine.

India are fine, house cost was recently increased.

Dutch coin bonus was recently lowered by 5%, I’d be up for lowering bank hp but nothing else.

Recent aztec changes were really nice imo, it’s easier than ever to priest boom, changes to jaguars were ok on the whole, I think they’re in an ok place being strong early game and weaker later on.

Japan are fine.

Lakota are fine, if anything I’d remove their starting gold and give them wood back so they can start tp.

Inca have been slowed down because the kancha boom now costs 400w more than it did before, the native rush does seem very good now but that’s a result of changing the 2 warhut age up for 2 travois that can be used for 2 tp’s, I’d be fine with changing that back.


Omg leave everything alone. Just fix civs that are obviously broken. Enough with the nonstop “tweaking” it’s an illness.


It just depends on the cards you choose. Water is a great source of resources. I would say that there should be shipments of fishing boats for Europeans as happens with Japan so that this is a good opening and not be such a risky strategy in the medium term.

I agree that Inca, Brits and India need NERFS, rest is fine.

1v1 already grabs wayyyyyyyyyyy toooo much spotlight , changes are needed for treaty and team games and many civs NEED! Serious lookover and revisits like Iro, Aztec, India and asian Civs in general.

It’s impossible to please everyone and as they add more civs it only gets worse. This game should cap it off where it is.

I don’t agree, especially on Aztecs. if your available, we can play 5 games vs your Aztecs tonight. if you can win a single game as Aztecs, ill concede they aren’t as bad as I believe. I’ll play some bottom tier civs as well.

brits are too safe and strong very early; they scale too quickly and are not vulnerable to most civs.

India also scales too quickly and safely with very flexible army. incredible ability to defend, pressure and scale.

haud in certain circumstances can still rapidly get a large mass of units very quickly, replacing some of them with lower siege aenna instead from the big button will weaken those edge cases and allow for buffs they need, such as gold cost tomas/horsemen.

I’m ok with bank hp nerf as well but increasing cost of their boom to ensure a bigger window of vulnerability has more player interaction. scout little pressure? boom. Fail to scout pressure and invest too much in banks? get punished.

Inca are still too fast.

age 2 evening star, shrines, 4 axe rider shipment and bow riders are still a thing. nerf those and i dont mind a buff to other areas.

and China and otto need a deeper rework for 1v1.

1 Like

I’d say the nerf to india is to move the skirmishers to age3 and grant them the veteran upgrade for free, accordingly.

1 Like

india ghurka age 3 is a nice idea, it would make them more inline with other civs. but the problem is they would have no other light infantry. they would need a new counter to light cav/heavy infantry in age 2 such as some sort of archer. or buff sepoys to carolean pre-nerf levels to compensate.

while that would be nice in an india overhaul, for now ghurkas need to stay in age 2 to cover up anti heavy infantry role. commerce age nerfs such as further reduced range would likely be easier to implement in the meantime. moving sepoy to age 3 and forcing them to use rajputs is a better way.

Light cav is very unusual in age2 fights, and heavy infantry can be countered with sepoy.

80w is fine. Keep in mind Indian villagers cost wood, coupled with market upgrades, and houses you’re going to idle a lot, and be severely disadvantaged from the beginning if you nerf house cost by 20w.

India is actually one of the slower civs in the game to get up to fortress, and is slower in general unless you’re doing the sepoy rush, which is still easy to counter now that sepoys can be two-shot from the tc due to reduction of hp from RE.
Slow because you usually end up fighting age 2 vs 3 against most ff civs.
Yeah, they do scale well post that provided they survive getting falc’d, but which civ barring Haud doesn’t?

Talking about their unit roster, it’s flexible sure, but barring sepoys they are all paper-thin, and usually require 2 extra cards to make them viable (looking at you sowars and zamburaks). They are notoriously known as magicians for their disappearing acts.

With no ability to ff quick enough, and with no falcs, that is just not an option. India like Russia and Japan is and should always be comfortable staying in age 2 when required.

Which is what we’re trying to avoid? India like the other TAD civs is unique with clearly defined strengths and weaknesses. Let’s not try and make it another Euro-based civ. Thank you.

1 Like

A good nerf for India that wouldn’t be game breaking is to reduce siege elephants’ speed from 4.0 to 3.5, which is the same speed as culverins in limber mode.
Or to raise house cost to 95w or 100w.

India doesn’t get any falcs (not unless you do from the brit cons, but that’s far too late in the game to be a standalone siege unit, + it’s only 1 falc).
Siege Ele’s are fine as they are, and is a one-time unit shipment only that is countered by literally all unit types. Seriously, that light cavalry tag needs to go if anything.

I’ve spoken about this just above your post.

Their houses cost 90w not 80w since two(?) patches ago, a 5w or 10w increase wouldn’t hinder them dramatically, every map usually has decent wood treasures.

Yeah Indians don’t have access to falcs but they have one of the strongest armies in the game with a full unit roster + wonders. Siege eles are way too easy to micro with their insane range and high speed, they definitely don’t need a buff, if they need anything it’s a small nerf.

You’re mistaken, it was a 10w increase from 70w → 80w.

Sure a 5w/10w (in op’s case 20w) isn’t going to be as dramatic to every other civ. But to the only civ in the game that is wood dependent to produce villagers, that’s huge! We’re not talking about one house alone.

Yeah they’re nice to micro, but they’re also not cheap but easy to kill. They cost 350f and is a unit shipment. Seige Ele’s are also India’s lone siege unit (barring which they have no viable siege potential) that performs the function of both a culverin and mortar. They are also ridiculously expensive to make, costing 300w and 350c unlike a euro falc/culv that is only 100w 400c. Also, Flails are only ever used in troll builds as they have one and only one function. If I’m going to be paying such a hefty amount, I’d expect it to have 4 speed at the least. Hence proved.

a 20-wood increase is just 35 seconds on a base Indian villager due to their increased wood gathering rate, 7 seconds for 5 vills. distributivism alone covers it in 16 seconds. this would be a very minor nerf with the most effect in the first few minutes. at 50 pop space you lose out on 80 wood total, which is less than a villager worth.

It’s a slight early game nerf that slows them down a little, india will still be very strong.

1 Like

35 sec, for one of the slowest civs in the game, especially early game kills any realistic chance India might have of applying any sort of pressure that justifies ageing so late to and fro colonial. RIP slow sepoy rush.

Also, tinkering with one of India’s unique strengths makes it the next honourable civ. GG.

Oh, and India needs a minimum of 2 houses, 3 if you’re going Agra (for the 1st wave) and shipping units. That’s a 60w increment already. Add a market and 3 (not 2 as for euro civs) market upgrades for the first tier, all the while producing vills. All this by 6min. The loss is just compounded and takes longer to recuperate.
Don’t you think this is a significant nerf to India’s early game? which is literally their strong suit and is utilised like 80-90% of the time?

It’s not even as if India is OP in any way, or that their timing is hard to hold than any other rush civ for example. Could you imagine how much breathing space a 35 sec delay in attack is for a real boom civ like Japan, Dutch, or the like is?

a unica coisa boa de jogar com a india e que ela tem sepoys e gurkas pra combinar na era 2.

they will still reach age 2 at the same time, this is a lighter nerf than losing a crate. you really do lose out on just 20 wood before 4 minutes, and by the time you build your 4th house India’s economy can take on a loss of 80 wood just fine. it’s one of the lightest nerfs I’ve suggested, it targets the early age 2 exclusively.

1 Like