I didn’t mean completely useless, i meant it is not even worthy especially for knight which they are already good vs archers, and i discussed this in perisans civ topic
No, Portuguese Team Bonus for 1v1 is useless. Either have the team bonus only work for team games or rework this mini-cartography. At least the other mentioned team bonus has some use for 1v1.
Worty? It’s free. It means that you and your allies basically get blast furnace in castle age for knights when facing xbows.
How can be unworthy when you don’t do nothing to get it, but it’s simply free.
It was implied that it’s usefu for low elo TEAM game, of course is useless in 1v1. But it’s fine, portos problem isn’t their TB.
It’s not fine, that TB is very outdated and has no effect at all for 1v1. I wouldn’t complain if the other TB doesn’t work for 1v1 albeit they do.
None of these are useless in 1v1.
Having an extra (or stronger) trash option in 1v1 is not a bad thing. It gives you an edge in trash wars which can be decisive when the gold runs out.
Players are known to utilize Outposts to keep an eye on sensitive areas, especially with forward villagers and/or against a forward, usually for siege micro, and Ethiopians having a better LOS on them is a nice quality of life.
Japanese have a big eco bonus on water with the faster gathering, more durable Japanese Fishing ship. Having a larger line of sight means finding more fish to gather incidentally, but more importantly making it more difficult for an enemy navy to circumvent your ships and idle/destroy your fishing ships.
I’ve seen your complaints about the Persians, so let me simplify how good this is: In a standard game where everyone does what they should do, the Knights are dramatically more efficient by killing the Xbows in 3 hits instead of 4. In fact, they are the only knights who will always kill an Archer-line unit in three hits, save the Lithuanians after claiming two relics. Once the archers get even a single armor tech, they’ll survive 3 hits from a fully upgraded knight of any civ other than Persians who, with less investment, will kill archers 33% faster. That is a huge bonus that the simple +2 doesn’t quite quantify because it passes a very important damage threshold to have such an effect.
Malay effect, ditto the Japanese one, except it’s more useful early for the potential of finding food and less useful later for the eco raid deterrent.
Slavs effect, if you consider the cost of the house being taken from the total cost of the building since it saves you having to build a house, effectively it makes all your military buildings cost -25 wood. That’s not a huge bonus, but they’re getting it for free. Any measurable discount isn’t useless, by definition.
Tatars CA are less clumsy than the traditional CA options because of the extra vision. Units will only engage enemies they can see, and extra LOS means they’ll seek engagements better, finding all the targetable units in a wider area before dropping idle and focusing on buildings. Add in their speed, and it’s really difficult to waste CA time unless they’ve found a ram to particularly hate for a moment. That, and it means they’re much harder to sneak up on with an onager, which is one very easy way to lose with CA.
So yeah. Most of these are not useless. And for the ones that are useless in 1v1… You know they’re called a team bonus for a reason, yeah?
1 Like
So two things about this thread:
-LOS does scale exponentially! Therefor, the ABSOLUTE difference in vision is bigger the bigger the LOS already is (although the relative difference is still smaller). So while seeing 1 tile more might be less important on a CA than on a kts, the trade is more like seeing 30 extra tiles in a CA or 10 extra tiles on a kts.
-Why should all team bonus be equal? Noone demands every civ to equally on all type of map/gamemodes in every aspect - that would be hell of a boring game! Some civs have stronger UTs, some civs have strong bonuses, some civs have a good UU, some civs have a wide tech tree, some civs are good on water maps - and some civs have a very nice TB. Thats what keeps them game intersting.
2 Likes
Saves wood and idle time
You always spot the fish and sneak enemy docks
You kill Crossbows with one less hit.
Why do you think these TBs are useless for 1v1s?
Line of Sight bonuses are meh, but not useless. (other thank Franks)
I agree with the Berber and Vietnamese TBs. Imperial Skirmishers and Genitours are available for them by default and they are useless for Team Games.
I’m not sure you understood me correctly.
I said useless TB are fine an sich.
It’s just that if a civ is going to have a useless team bonus, it should be a civ whose bonuses, techs & play-style are good in team games. Civs like Mayans, Franks, Britons, Indians.
In contrast civs whose bonuses, techs & play-style are bad in team games should have strong TB. Civs like Incas, Japanese, Goths, Spanish.
(Note I’m not particularly certain of these examples. It’s hard to get a bearing of which are the worst team civs.)
In the case of the Spanish, this paradigm is followed, and thus Spanish are actually a good team civ (AFAIK), despite their bonuses being better for 1v1s (AFAIK).
You have completely misunderstood me. I’ll clarify just in case it’s my fault.
suppose 2 civilisations have bonuses
Civ X:
Bonus A
Bonus B
Team Bonus C
Civ Y:
Bonus D
Bonus E
Bonus F
Team Bonus G
To improve the team-game aspect of civ Y, one might “teamify” Bonus E, resulting in
Civ Y:
Bonus D
Team Bonus E
Bonus F
Bonus G
The team strength is improved (if E>G) but the 1v1 strength is unchanged
There need be absolutely no correlation between 1v1 strength and the strength of a team bonus
Sorry, but it is not exponentially, but quadratic. While your explanation still holds true
1 Like
I would say this is one of the best team bonuses in any game as it saves a lot of idle time. And that is useful for rushing.
Yeah this is one is really good, i did a mistake actually i thought those +5 pop not for the general pop room but for the military building itself how many can it garrison inside 
1 Like
Wait how is persians knight bonus vs archers in here for bad bonuses. Half the time in pro play persians are picked 1v1, that bonus is a huge part of the equation. It makes archer mass counter knights a lot less effectively.
Also unsure how a bonus which gives you imperial scirms can be considered weak When it gives you an upgrade on a crucial trash war unit.
1 Like
In 1v1 it is not that much, i am talking from 1v1 perspective
Pretty sure the persians attack bonus vs archers is a huge reason persia is usually a top tier 1v1 civ since archers are very common (along with their solid eco).
Also keep in mind if we have a bunch of these civs a good 1v1 team bonus they would probably have to be nerfed in 1v1 unless you are proposing we buff vikings and persians
and killing archers 33% faster isn’t a good bonus? man, you have strange priorities.
1 Like
It is a meh bonus especially any player already go pikes against them so not that advantage
someone doesn’t pay much attention to team games.
2 Likes
Huh? So if you play mayans against a persian player, you don’t make any archer and go for only pikes? 
or you saying that because you have pikes, their knigth does not reach your archer?
What you’are saying is a complete non sense. Your knigth need 1 less hit in castle to kill a crossbow. 33% faster killing potential.
Except Spanish and portuguese team bonuses, all team bonuses are somewhat useful in 1v1 (and incas, but it’s useless in all game mode). Yes some of them are better than other (anyone can agree that britons team bonus is better than Japanese one) but i don’t see the problem. It’s taken into account when they balance the game.
2 Likes