Best economy in game are:
Vikings, Poles, Burgundians,Hindustanis, gurjaras, bohemians… mayans are not even top 5, there are plenty civs that could do way better depending on the maps and the opening, long term economy mayans are not close to lets say portugueses in all resources incoming, not close to malians in terms of gold, burgundians or even vietnameses.
The extra villager in competitive games is not even a solid advantage anymore, even goths get the same advantage now and everyone complains about goths,remember everyone delays loom now before the up, so RIP the mayan extra villager kicking early.
Malays and bengalis get superior villagers advantages and chineses too.
Tatars get a superior food economy bonus from dark age with the lasting herdables, honestly mayans is more like a big trauma for some players, cause certainly they are not that strong anymore, they are solid given the build orders and current meta, but lots of new civs can do better.
There are better ways to nerf mayans without actually hurting the civ or the mesos civs at all, like removing the attack ability for the ew to boars or reducing the walling bonus, the arch discount is not that big(koreans and portugueses get better discounts early) and it has been decreased, mayans have got lots of nerfs, plums are not the best archer anymore and they are quite expensive despite the arch discount, plum archer cost 45 gold while rattan cost 50 gold.
You have to make 56 knights as Portuguese only to match the extra gold from starting 12 piles of gold against Mayans. Not to mention thousands of extra food, wood and stone.
Maybe not. But definitely top 5-10.
So is Mayans. And unlike Tatars they collect faster as hunters work 25% faster than shepherd. On top of that, they have 1 villagers lead from 8-9 minutes of the game.
None gets 225 food extra food in Dark age with 1 extra villager.
False, from 10k gold in mines mayans get 1500 extra gold, poles get 1500 extra gold from 3000k stone and portugueses gets infinite gold with feitora and they can save more gold than the mayans gets on military units cause that is actually were the gold makes the difference.
And about the extra villager i clearly pointed how minimal that advantage is in current meta at mid, high pro levels where loom gets delayed, while malays can be up to 5 villagers lead just by going fc straight, bengalis 4, you guys need to focus on newer civs and yeah chineses also gets +2 vills and cheap upgrades, i could extend the list if we convert the cheap upgrades from some civs to actually economy big saves.
The goal of this post seems to be to make every civ extremely equal in feudal, castle age and late game. “Strong early castle age? Let’s nerf it and buff their weaker late game to compensate. Weak castle age? Let’s buff it and nerf their strong late game.” - I understand why you might think that the result of this would be a more balanced game, but really all it would do is make all the civs really vanilla and boring. Changes like this will just drag out games into epic long stalemate games for hours and hours, especially in team games.
If the enemy civ is strong in early castle, you need to wall up and survive; weather the storm and boom, use defensive castles and get to late game with trebs before they do. If enemy has a strong late game, push them harder in Feudal and early castle, try more 1 TC all in aggression plays (especially on your bad maps).
Why are nerf suggestions always way too extreme? Tone it down and your ideas might be taken more seriously. You can’t just nerf like 3x things really hard for one civ. Either nerf 1x thing really hard or very lightly nerf 2 or 3 things.
Haha no. The Chinese identity is versatility as their archer units are generic, so without versatility they would be extremely dull. Its like arguing that Malian cav should be nerfed because they are an infantry civ after all.
And if we were to make them a proper archer civ they would become overpowered, because their archers wuld need a buff
He says “castle age jannisaries -1 range, elite jannisaries gain +2 range” its very much unclear
9 range may be fine, 7 range in castle age would suck
Gonna reminder you the that patch nerfed Khmer with 3 things at once (not even counting the battle ele attack bonus vs buildings reduction), I guess Khmer is now a bad civilization…and that not even include the other nerfs (including the battle ele trample damage nerf) made for Khmer since farm bonus.
If a civ is too oppresive even at one setting, needs nerf.
Wish we had the recent stats. Looks fine to me from what we have.
Closed maps
################################################################### Open maps
which is ironic. it more applies to gunpowder UUs. but still. its extremely ironic that any gunpowder actually FALLS OFF in power over time, relative to spears and xbows. maybe in like 2 or 3 years, they will modify the civs, so that GP UU dont fall off in imperial. like give them even higher damage (for example conqs gain zero dps gain in imperial relative to armour. +2 dmg, -2 from PA, weird AF they actually LOSE dps, vs many units that actually gain extra PA in imperial, HCA, paladins, a number of UU etc)
thats actually a very interesting idea. so porto will have 20% lower gold, but also faster training xbows. could we maybe then please convert their TB into a game mechanic? everyone has team vision?
I do agree the old strong civs need nerfs. But your proposals are pretty rubbish.
seems unnecessarily ugly
To nerf Britons in team games, wreck their team bonus. Give the 20% faster archery ranges to a civ that needs it. (specifically a civ that’s weak in team games.)
Just no.
Are there any other bonuses you can shave down? Can’t you also make their extra starting vill have 37% less work rate? \s
Mayans need to completely lose one of their bonuses to stop this endless bonus shaving. I don’t care too much which one.
They could/should also lose some archer armour.
Agreed. In general, I think the AoK/C devs greatly overestimated how powerful gunpowder units would be - remember the old “Hand Cannon” or “Cannon Galleon” techs before you could actually train those units? Getting rid of the Cannon Galleon tech was even fairly recent. IMO stuff like the slow projectile speed of BBTs, the general weakness of HCs, or how little value the Elite Conq upgrade provides are as yet unaddressed aspects of this legacy.
