There are a few UUs only get countered by 1 thing at some point and can’t be fought with anything else.
Under the same gold cost , arbalest need to 1v2 champion. cavalier need to 1v3
They got quite a few boom maps this month, and people always vote for closed maps.
Arguably people complaining about the YouPudding rush could be seen as thinking the Serjeant is OP at least in that context. Even apart from that, there are threads where people think it’s too strong:
I also remember a single post in a larger thread where someone thought Rathas were OP because of their Imp stats (i.e. matching up well vs. Elite Mangudai). But yeah, the majority of suggestions for those units have been for buffing them. Maybe flaming camels check the “never thought of as OP” box?
Yeah they aren’t OP in TG. Only in 1v1.
OK…
So good our community is such a good sport and never uses them
Cause when they would use the OP Champs, Armenians clearly wouldn’t be the currently worst civ in the game.
This was actually before Serjeants got buffed. It was for the OG Serjeants 11
If that’s the case then you can prove it with an experiment. Pick Armenians every 1v1 game for the next month on the ranked ladder and go full champions every time. If it’s OP then your ELO should significantly jump above your typical range.
We have to be fair here.
In some matchups the Armenian Champs in the super lategame can feel unfair to play against.
Civs like Goths, Malians, Romans may have issues finding answers to them.
This is mostly to the militia line design as being a trash counter which leads to when gold slowly getting scarce it really becomes a sheer strength comparison for these infantry civs that don’t really have a good anti-infantry option. That’s why so many other Infantry civs have unique infantry counters aswell.
It doesn’t mean the Armenian Champs would be OP. Just the general role of the militia line can lead to the result that’s just winning in certain matchups. But as it is so lategame, it’s not like these civs wouldn’t have a chance against armenians. They just have to win before Armenians get to that.
Also one of the reasons why I think we need a generally available infantry counter in order to hopefully at some time get a “power infantry” unit, but that’s a different topic.
Goths and Malians have hand cannoners
And imo Armenians just die too hard to archers in general imo, not that shiny 30hp is going to help anyway.
It depends on the map. 100HP champion timing is much earlier than HC, and a few HC are not enough to stop champion.
Only if archer civ raid them hard in castle age otherwise all foot archers other than CB got no chance when fighting against champion spam.
I don’t have the DLC unfortunately.
Do people have short memory? Gambeson was removed from Malay as THS was OP in trash situation. Similarly 100 HP Champion is OP in low gold situation as well as early trash wars.
Armenians have 66% higher HP than pre nerfed Malay THS. And +1 attack. That makes it at least 100% more cost worthy than 65 food THS. If 45 food + 20 gold = 130 food, then 20 gold = 85 food. This means minimum market price needs to be at 24 gold per 100 food to make these 2 units equal. So mathematically current Armenians Champion is just as strong as pre-nerfed Malay THS until market price fall downs to 24 gold. And before that they are even stronger.
Now if we consider current Malay THS is balanced, then Armenians have +40 HP (+66%), +1 PA and +1 attack. Skirmisher resistance goes from 30 → 100 (+233%), arbalester resistance 12 → 25 (+108%), Hussar resistance 9 → 15 (+66%), Halberdier resistance 10 → 17 (+70%), HC resistance 3 → 5 (+66%). I’d say it should definitely cost 120% to 125% more than Malay THS. For that If 45 food + 20 gold = around 145 food, then 20 gold = 100 food. That means in completely bottomed down market price, they are just 2nd to Malay. And always better as long as it is not the case.
Feel free to disagree with my assumption of 100% or 125% more cost and provide your reasoning. Mine is pop efficient units should cost more than the % of HP value they provide. The only reason the civ is not immediate OP or even stronger than Malay is because current Malay infantry transition is way smoother. Maybe removing Gambeson is not an immediate priority. But if Armenians starts to be OP, this should be kept in mind.
Now this seems more like Goths flood. It is hard to get there. But once you get, it is almost impossible to stop.
A video is posted, providing context. Of course, if you take anything out of context, you’ll always come to the conclusion that “doesn’t prove anything.”
The video shows that of all the champions in the game, the Armenian champions are the best between champions.
And to say that the devs improve the militia line with this is a joke. Improving the militia line must be coherent, consistent, logical and, above all, addressed to all civilizations. I hope devs have better solution than adding 40 HP to the Armenian champions if they want to improve mlitia line.
Exactly. Instead of slapping some power creeped militia line bonuses to a new civ of every DLC (Dravidians, Romans and now Armenians), they better redesign the unit base stat and then revisit existing bonuses.
But you have to get to late game with enough resources to afford all the upgrades in order to get to Armenian champions. You could argue that any fully upgraded late game unit is OP. Most 1v1 games are over well before post-imperial.
So Armenian champs are fine for now, give it a chance to develop into a meta before jumping the gun. If Armenians rise to the top of the 1v1 win rate then we’ll know there’s a problem. Until then, I think you’re all over-reacting.
Personnally I don’t feel I am over reacting and I have not claimed that Armenians are OP. You are over reacting by interpreting the topic the wrong way.
My position is the following : I wonder why devs decided to make a civ with Champions stronger than the traditional Slavs and Aztecs Champions.
I give a chance and my topic is not a complaint or a whim, it’s simply a comment on a fact and on a video I stumbled upon on Youtube.
People say Infantry is too weak.
Ergo existing Infantry boni are too weak.
Ergo the devs introduce stronger infantry boni. First with Romans, now with Armenians.
Because people wants a rework of milita line and infantry in general not a unique bonus for one civ.
And what better place to test changes of the militia line with a single civ rather than making an update to all civs and ruin the balance for weeks.
Guys just chill.
Exactly, I hope after this “test”, they will finally give champion line something that’s equivalent to bloodline.
Before Armenians, Slav champion should have been the previous OP according to the same theory. However Slavs used to be mediocre and their infantry was never seen as broken ever in practice. This is because a lot of things happen in the game before its possible to get champion upgrade and a very expensive UT. And a lot of other things are still needed after champion upgrade is done which Armenians don’t have…So neither Armenians nor their champion is broken. Its just an amplified version of Viking bonus but for a lot of extra resources. Analogous to Dravidian Wootz steel, Burmese infantry pair.
Gambeson for Malay can be powerful even before forced levy since they get all armor for free and usually they are the civ with the timing and momentum advantage. Its not the same thing for a slow civ with a very expensive UT.
Its more like Wootz steel, Druzinnha or charge attack legionary. Instead of higher dps it’s going to have longevity which is better but at more cost.
And once again how does everyone get bothered by +30 hp on one of the weakest unit lines with a moderate paced civ but never bothered about +40 hp on one of the best unit lines for one of the fastest civs.
But here is more. Slavs is generic against ranged and siege units and buildings. Armenians are not.
Which I said, they have smoother transition.
Perhaps the only reason Freteres is balanced. If Armenians had Poles or current Slavs eco, or even Vikings eco, the UT would be broken.
What am I missing here. Do Armenians get some generic bonus for their infantry against buildings and ranged units? Or does Druzinha not work against a stack of archer units? Anyways I’m not picking any specific cases.
My point was its a civ that gets some UT that makes their militia line significantly stronger and quite pop-efficient for the late game. But since militia line by itself is niche and its very difficult to get fu champions with UT despite decent eco bonus, none of those civs nor their champion play is broken.
Yes and by that I mean, its not the equivalent. Its a strong champion civ rather than a civ which can easily get to champion.
That’s fair. Weak eco strong military or strong eco weak military both are balanced.