Game number one, Vinch vs valas, now you can’t argue that was vs a bad arena civ but was vs no more or less than Bohemians, both competing at map control but thanks by Turks free LC upgrades Valas couldn’t go scouts ofc so forced to spears eve though having 25% more bonus damage, game foes and then that just naked how absurd and ridiculously cheap is the Artillery UT, and having instant BBC that trains faster with 100 HP just stopped Valas to even fight that back with Houfnice, follow thay with jannissaries and Hussars, game over.
Turks are just broken on arena after Poles, and they need nerfs here because no other civs have that amount of advantages lol.
Who would have thought giving the same civ a free bonus on top of an already free bonus would be good. Uncreative buff just so they better on Arabia instead of tackling the broader issues of the civ.
I think the PA buff is nice and in this game wasn’t a factor ( vinch didn’t get the armor upgrades btw) but the real problem goes to the free LC upgrades, is just soo big of a powerspike and makes impossible to compete for map control and relics.
I’m sorry, but I find ‘look at this game, X is clearly OP!’ type of posts really useless. There are multiple high-level games with the same matchup where Bohemians won.
Well then show up here those samples then, because the last time I saw Bohemians winning vs Turks was because player did a dumb throw by letting the Bombard cannons die to a single shot of other.
Stats on aoepulse.com show that Turks, Portuguese and Poles dominate the arena Meta.
Civs like Burgundians, Bohemians and Bengalis can somewhat hold their own there too.
Turks are in that regart special as they are strong in basically all strats you can effectively go for on arena (except trushing). Many of the other civs usually have certain strengths and weaknesses.
In another Thread about Turks I proposed to slightly nerf Jans but let Sipahi affect Camels and Knights in the exchange. This would just slightly nerf the Clowning potential of Turks but make them stronger on open maps.
Turks are fine. Even in Arena it is all about high risk high reward which pros can pull only. Turks only got one time chance to win the game. On Arena their late game is worst. Archer civs can kill them off easily.
If you do want to fix it then solve their Pikeman or Skirmisher issues. How do you even survive 1v1 if you don’t have good non-gold units?
Turks are one of the WORST civ in aoe 2 if not the worst one.
They are absolute trash in open maps so its fair for them to be little above moderate on close maps.
I saw countless games Turks losing arena matchup.
Turks are OP on arena and being worse in open maps doesn’t justify being that strong on closed maps, nerf them.on arena and buff for open maps, easy.
Btw Bohemians aren’t great on open and still were too oppresive on arena, got a nerf, are then trash now on open maps?
Nope they are not OP on arena. They do above overall having about %53.82 win rate on close maps.
Buffing them on open maps … Hmm idk. Probably no need they have %46.91 win rate on open maps.
I’m wondering if removing the free SC line upgrade and making all Stable units +1 PA rather than SC only would help weaken them on closed maps and strengthen them on open maps.
I don’t think having possibly the very best Knight rush in the game would be a good idea (with +1 PA Knights suddenly take from 40 crossbow shots to 60 shots).
I proposed replacing the free LC upgrades to Stable technologies gold cost removed, so nerf in closed maps but is a major buff for open maps (especially for Bloodlines).
This is a myth that I didnt here for a long, long time… Since they got +1PA on the scout line to the latest. Their eco isnt that bad, they got good gold ranged options and good hussars, which is the best 1v1 unit assuming you still have gold army (which you should as they are mostly ranged units).
I think it would:
make them less oppressive on arena, hideout, and closed maps where you start behind walls and need to contest relics (so not BF for example)
make them a very contested pick as open maps team game pocket, as their castle age knights and camels will bw feared (like the very old indian camels)
make them very strong in 1v1 open maps as knights wont be countered by xbows mass and camels wont be hard countered by xbows.
I don’t like balance changes in general (and am not in favor of this one) but this one doesnt sound game breaking, as I dont see why Turcs being a great pocket civ would be a problem.
Well I have pointed out that such change makes them the very best for Knight rush and Camel with free extra PA would be even more problematic (remember how absurd Indians were with this bonus?) now put a combination of both and then you have a quite busted 1v1 and TG civ and the only way to counter that will be mass pikes.
That will definitely solve a lot of problems but Knight with BL +1PA is probably the biggest nightmare for all non-cavalry civs.
That fits to their design as they need gold for basically everything but scout line. But aren’t they saving too much gold? Right now they save 150f/50g in Castle and 500f/600g in Imperial, 1300 resource in total. With your proposal they will save 100/50/1260 in Feudal/Castle/Imperial, 1410 in total. Total resource is almost same but towards more on gold. Maybe Artillery cost needs to be increased as well.
After a second thought, I agree with you. I didnt like the change, but have probably underestimated +1PA on knights for a camel civ. Camels+knights would only be beaten by mass pikes, mass camels, and/or monks. which may be too akward as turcs eco isnt bad enough to allow opponents to overwhelm them.
