Regarding turtle ships, it is more related to water balanced, which is a topic that has to be faced after the land balanced is completed.
Turks need something for sure. I do not know the proposals of @JonOli12 and @JoJo9942 tbh, but I guess that they do want Turks balanced but they do not want a trivial balance like e-skyrm.
Those are all options. Tbh I do not see a huge issue if the bonus cannot be denied. But also, the fact that they get 2 real relics it is clearly balanced to me. Everyone knows that 2 relic advantage is not broken…
And a late game gold access:
Some civs have to be weak to archers. Also Burmese are. Turks have SR + hussars + boosted CAs as decent anti archer options.
Overall, if you want to buff Turks trash, you can give them the genitour from berbers (for the sake of hyst accuracy, change the name of genitour since they were not turk)… but this is a quite heavy redesign…
The main issues I’d have with free relics would be teamgames & having Aztec / Lithuanian teammates, and in 1v1 if your opponent steals your relics it’d feel really bad.
This is something you should avoid… Just put the first monastery in a safe place.
For aztecs is not a big deal imo. Still, 2 relic advantage is balanced even if you have an aztec ally.
did I suggest a nerf or implied they don’t need a buff? You don’t buff a weak civ by giving them 3 different buffs, it just results in an overbuff and later on a overnerf.
Turtle ships are still very useful as frontline tanks for your galleons; maybe they need an improvement, but you’re giving them both wood and gold discount+ speed buff, on a water civ that isn’t necessarily bad.
ESkirms don’t even counter Britons without ram support, thats the point of the range. Turks have FU knights to deal with castle age Britons, siege ram, hussars and cav archers in the late game.
Again I’m not 100% against giving them Eskirms but you’re giving them Eskirms+pikes+ Jannisary buff which btw is a fine unit I might add; a hand canoneer done right.
Also Elephants? Turks have above average monks. Jannisaries also do great against them
good luck monk microing vs elephants and we are speaking about a civ that dont have eco bonus and good luck using full Knights against Britons or other good archer civs with good eco bonuses
Turks have Siege Rams and Heavy Camels. SR + Skirm with Bracer beats all Archers. Heavy Camels and Monks destroy Elephants.
heavy camels destroy elephant :DDDDDD sorry but this is very funny
I appreciate your ideas to buff Turks, but actually it is fine if they get something really small.
Regarding Italians/Portuguese, ok they really need a buff: just notice that if you make a civ having all the Italian bonuses + all the Portuguese bonuses, it is still quite underwhelming on land 1v1 arabia…
While for Italians you have (correctly) proposed very small changes, for Portuguese it is an overbuff
If this was a teamgame scenario, I’d have agreed but 1v1 is controlled enough for monks to micro against Elephants. Doesn’t even take amazing skills.
No, you can’t micro monks in 10< groups it’s just impossible/not cost effective
“I can’t do it, clearly impossible”
I don’t think their price is fine because they are the most useless unit in Team Games even more useless than Champions
25% is not that much since Portuguese wouldn’t have anything besides this: Berbers have better discount overall with useful unique techs while Mayans have a free villager, longer lasting resources and useful unique tech. Carracks is a good tech but completely useless on land and Arquebus is for Gunpowder… That would be a water buff to bring them closer to Italians and Vikings
I’d agree with:
land units cost 25% less wood, naval units cost 15% less wood
I agree generic unit shall not replace unique units. But unique units should not completely replace generic units. Your ideas of buffing is a bit too much.
Condottiero is firstly designed to be a fast producing unit but hurt the economy. Hence, Condo has a higher gold cost to compensate its fast-producing speed. It is the only unique unit require no castle to produce besides huskarls. It is reasonable to give it a minor buff after the nerf in 5.8. eg. Shortening in training time (18s->15s) or allowing condo to receive pavise buff. Losing Champions while giving Condos +4 atk for EA or reducing its cost takes away champion/2H swordsman role.
I think the goal is exactly this. If Italians loose champions, they will have condos as replacement. To do that condos need better stats, a bonus vs eagles and a lower cost.
BUT this is difficult balance for everyone (like malians and Vikings). So, fine with the bonus attack vs eagles, but the stat buff and the cost reduction must be for Italians only. Pavise for the stat buff is fine. For the cost reduction I would implement it as an additional effect of the imperial UT. Just to avoid fast imperial issues…
There is no UU that is a straight upgrade from a regular unit. Even UU that look like carbon copies still have some parts that don’t perform as good as the regular one.
Take Cataphracts : they counter infantry and anti-cav units, but have less attack, a bit less hp and 1 less PA than paladins, meaning paladins will perform better against everything else. Same for Janissaries, beefier stats than HC, but no bonus damage against infantry, and less accurate.
UU are not meant to overshadow regular units, but offer an alternative to said units. Some even fall into a niche, but that doesn’t mean the unit is bad by any mean.
There are a few, Like Mangudai, Chu Ko Nu, Longbowman and Kamayuk.
It is however true that UUs are not supposed to be better than baseline units, they are only supposed to be Unique, not even useful.
Why are people constantly bashing on Tarkans of all things? They’re cheap and fast to upgrade for a UU, cheap to make, incredibly tanky little bastards, easy to mass, and Elite Tarkan can roll anything in castle age and pretty much everything but massed halb in early Imperial. The surprise raid potential is enormous.
And why are people complaining about Berserks? Elite Berserk is very useful. It’s stronger, moves faster, and is much faster to upgrade, if you can keep your castles up they’re useful beyond measure against e.g. eagles, being the one thing Vikings have that can actually catch the little buggers in any reasonable time besides Viking Cavalier.
I get the complaint about some of the UUs but going on about TAxemen, Berserks, Tarkan, etc. is pretty ■■■■■■■■. They have clear use cases. Berserk is even a straight upgrade over Champion if you can afford the cost.
Strictly worse than Paladin, for a comparable cost, need a Castle and an UT to be really massed.
If only Elite Tarkan got +1 Melee Armour + 5 Hp + 2 Damage, and Paladin was removed form Huns, would you ever see Tarkans.
They basically would have to be an universally better version of the Paladin, for people to even consider them at this point, and that would be quite OP.
Strictly worse than Paladin, for a comparable cost
How earth is Tarkan’s 1000f600g cost comparable to Paladin’s 1650f/1050g cost? For that matter, they’re also 15g cheaper, which can also be read as ‘for every 4 knights you can make 5 tarkans with the same gold’. Tarkans aren’t better than Paladin, which is good - but that doesn’t mean they’re useless. They’re extraordinarily tanky and are much faster and cheaper to upgrade and are very, very good raiding units in team games. What I’m seeing is people thinking that in order for a unit to be viable to use under at least some situations, you need to be able to viably form an entire army out of them and expect results. The amount of time pocket elite tarkans can buy in team games is insane.