Assessment of Late Game Strength : Suggestions to buff the weakest civs (Late Game /Treaty)

Hello fellow players.

Disclaimer:

As mentioned in the title, the discussion below is geared for Late Game and most definitely Treaty plays.

The suggestion might seem a bit extreme if you do not consider the following point:

  • They must be only active in Late Game (have close to no impact on balance for Supremacy)
  • They need to be balanced correctly, with associated cost if needed

They could be implemented in various ways:

  • Imperial shipments: USA recently added shipments for the Imperial Age. It could be cool to have a 5 spots only for Imperial cards (this would make other civs have 30 shipments like USA). Add a cost to them and they will rarely see play outside of Late Game.
  • Civilisation Unique Techs: USA included many of those in the Capitol.
  • Reworking existing underwhelming techs or shipments.

The civilisations discussed are those generally considered the weakest in Treaty. I chose to exclude Dutch and Russians, as those are complex cases and the post was long enought and well… we need to start somewhere, right?
///////////////

Germans

Main issue: One of the most powerful economies in Late Game, Germans are plagued by an extremely population inefficient army.

Fun fact: Did you know a fully carded (4 stats increase cards) Uhlan barely survives an encounter with the worst Hussar in the game (USA without any card boost)?

Uhlans are a good example of this. For the same population as a Hussar, they underperform by a Large Margin due to their very low HP pool. They end up with around 200 HP less, but 10% more range resistance. This is offset by the lower cost, but this is not really important for Germans.

Then you have the Doppelsoldner and War Wagon. Contrary to the Uhlan, those units are better than their equivalent (Hallbs and Dragoons), but they pay those stats increase with a higher population cost.

Finally a saving grace: the Skirmisher. The Royal Guard status sometimes makes players forget the fact that Germans only have one card to boost them, making their Skirms being outclassed by Dutch’s and probably even by Spanish’s ones (with Unction)… which would put them as the worst basic Skirmishers in the game! Nevertheless, the basic Skirmisher is still a powerhouse in itself.

Conclusion: Germans are forced to play with less units on the field and some of them being less powerful than most of other similar units.

How do we fix this? (See Disclaimer before reading this)

Reducing the population cost of Uhlans and Doppelsoldners would significantly open options. Melee units are harder to abuse and more situational, while the Artillery and Skirmishers would still be average to balance things out.

I am not convinced this would solve everything, but this could be a good starting point.
///////////////

Ottomans

Main issue: Terrible unit variety and slow training time for infantry.

On paper, there is nothing wrong with the cavalry options. Sure, cav. archers are not a fan favorite, but you have access to Royal Guard Hussars, which gives you a serviceable stable at worst.

With more cards than most civs, the Artillery options look great as well.

However, making a front line is complex to say the least. Two major points:

  • The Church card replaces Dueling School for reduced training time. There is a lack of 15% reduction time for Ottomans. Thus ottoman infantry still takes 40% of the normal time to be created (25% for other Europeans) or 25% on Upper Andes (10% for other Europeans). Therefore, you could say other civs create infantry at nearly twice the speed or more than twice as fast on Andes.
  • The two main units, Abus Gun and Janissaries, are split between two different production buildings.

Combine both points (and I won’t touch the fact that Abus Gun costs 2 pop space) and you have one of the most complex infantry lines to mass in the entire game.

Conclusion: Ottomans are widely considered the worst Treaty civ of the European tech tree and it’s pretty obvious that it is not because of their artillery or cavalry. It is a shame, because they have many unique units and some interesting plays thanks to the Battlefield Construction card.

I’d note that Abus Gun are technically a good counter to Caroleans (they do Siege damage, not ranged damage like other Skirms), boosting Ottomans would (possibly) help keep in check the top civ that is Sweden.

How do we fix this? (See Disclaimer before reading this)

The first obvious fix would be to give access to the missing -15% creation time for Infantry.

Having a way to move Abus Gun to Barracks is also a logical step.

It has been mentioned many times here, but it would be incredibly fun to be able to train Nizam Fusilier and maybe Spahi. With the correct cost/balance, this would spice things up.

Finally, a way to toggle off the TC would be nice, as this would open the option to delete settlers for more military pop.
///////////////

Indians

Main issue: Abyssal training times and lack of a regular artillery unit to deal with massed infantry.

The issues of Indians in Late Game have been discussed here already extensively, so I’ll be brief on that one. Outside of the two points above, it was said they need more wood options as well as better siege options.

Feel free to disagree, but for me, those issues are corollary to the first ones: the slow training rates and lack of artillery put you on a defensive stance that costs you more units and buildings, therefore putting extra stress on your economy.

How do we fix this? (See Disclaimer before reading this)

Here is what is missing for the training times to be on par with Europeans civs:

Infantry: -25% (mandatory, right now European infantry is trained 2 to 4 times faster!)

Elephants: -5% (this one might be skipped to not have Instant Elephant on Upper Andes)

Camels: -15%

Without rewriting the Indian tech tree, an infinite cannon shipment would do wonders, similar to the Infinite 2x Crow of the Chinese. Otherwise, reworking the consulate to have easier access could be an option.
///////////////

The Natives civilisations : let’s start somewhere

We could do an entire post about the issues of those civs.

One of the main factors to take into consideration is the economy. The Native tech tree has one very big weakness: a smaller gather rate for their Estates. Researching all techs increases the gather rate from Estates by 80%, while Europeans get 110% increase (Asian 120%). This is because they lack one of the technologies, only having 3 in total (though they increase mining as well).

This varies even more when you take cards into account. The biggest extreme being Lakota with a 90% bonus VS an European civ with all cards reaching 200% bonus. That’s right, with a similar number of gatherers, the European player would outproduce the Lakota player by more than 50% gold!

Adding a (renamed) Raffineries tech for the missing 30% would already be an improvement.

But this does not take into account the fact that most Natives civs use up to 25 villagers on the Community Plaza, reducing their economy further…

The Community Plaza issue

As you must know, this building offers a lot of flexibility in mid-game for Supremacy players. However, by Late Game, it becomes a burden, as outside of Incas, a big part of your villagers must be sacrificed to it.

How do we fix this? (See Disclaimer before reading this)

Add the possibility to perform 2 ceremonies at a time and include a new ceremony that increases the gather rate of villagers by 1.4% per unit on the Plaza.

How OP does that sound? Let’s see…

On the gather rate increase, let me quote the original poster:

The ceremony would thus make the villagers working on the Plaza no longer a burden on your economy, only the Incas could really abuse this, so we might avoid them for this.

What about the 2 ceremonies at the same time? Well the idea is to give the option to have either the new Labor Ceremony active at all time and/or the Fertility one as well.

As you know, the Fertility Ceremony increases the production of units. For 25 villagers, this is 224% faster.

It is hard to compare the increase in creation speed to the reduction in creation time, but luckily for you, I made the calculation and tested to be sure!

The Lakota Cavalry, with a full working Fertility Ceremony + Riding School card + 10% reduction from Immigrant = -74.5% training time in total.

Europeans with the card, Immigrants and Church tech get -75%.

That is right, even with Fertility Ceremony active at all time our Lakota friends would still produce their cavalry at a slightly worse speed than any regular European civ!

Conclusion: If we were to give the options for Natives to do two ceremonies, it is unlikely to be OP. As seen above a combination of Laborer+Fertility basically would give you the same economy and training time as what European civs get by default.

Adding the Laborer Ceremony AND the option to do 2 ceremonies at a time is an elegant solution that should put most Natives on par with others in some fields, but some small balancing will probably be needed as there are differences between civilizations.

5 Likes

Plaza

The biggest issue with the Plaza is sacrificing villagers to accomplish what European civs get by default - the clear correction is to give the European technologies by default and greatly weaken the fertility dance in general.

Otherwise, a quick fix would be to give some sort of Plaza-replacement units to each civ in some manner of way - Give the Aztecs more Warrior Priests, and the Incans have Llamas. Give the Hauds a way to get to 120 villagers with a population cap of 220, like China. Let the Lakota attract wild animals to their plaza that will be more powerful than villagers.
It gives each of them a unique way to supplement their plaza in a way that ends up more or less the same strength (the Hauds would be noticeably weaker, but this is alright, as they are intended to have a weaker plaza mechanic anyway) and gives some more fun ways to interact with the plaza.

Native Economies

The Hauds and Lakota need their economies reworked from the ground up. Aztecs and Incans have economies that are just fine for treaty - Aztec's issues lie more in their military than their economy. They *do* have the highest farming rate in the game with all possible upgrades.

I’m working on a rework for the Lakota economy that I personally think will make them more viable in all aspects of gameplay, but we’ll have to wait and see how well it actually works out.

The Haudenosaunee, on the other hand, just need more upgrades, period, available to them. Free farm upgrades mean nothing without the ability to have more of them. If anything, their BBT should relate more to gathering speeds than just shipping crates of resources. Would make them more viable in longer games.

We’ll have to see how things turn out. Frankly, I don’t think the devs want the Native civs to be viable in treaty games.

Man, I agree all of your suggestions. I dont understand why sweeden, Japan, china are most powerful nations. why European nations, ıncluding Ottomans are weak? I think devs should give equal oppurtinies to the every nation.

These are very good points.
Some mechanics should be applied to all civs especially for late-late games. That would not interfere with the balancing of normal matches but adds more fun.

way too much of a buff. i am not certain germany needs a buff at all.

perhaps giving them an African native ally in the upcoming expansion would be enough?

Or alternatively disable uhlans from spawning during treaty and compensate with lower exp requirements making you able to get more cards pre treaty.

ottomans are a weird faction, i think a very slight buff to janisaries (be it train speed or just better stats) would go a long way, alternatively give them an actually useful card for their cavalry archers. ottoman mostly just need a buff to their anti cav, otherwise they are good i think.

personal opinion: they shouldn’t have stayed in DE, they should have removed them while they had the chance.

there is a lot of things about natives that suck in general, and i am not certain it is at all possible to fix them to be fun in treaty without making them lame.

the main issue for haud eco is actually the fact that cows are so weird around farms, farms just dont make for good herd buildings which is by far the factions biggest eco issue.

As Aztec main player I think that your laborer dance could be OP for this ones, they would get 1,420 = 28% = 1.2899->127 villagers with wp dancing. With max plaza (35) = 125 (only 2 less vills)
Also aztecs, like you said, have the best farm rate. Finally giving 2 dances at the same time is not a good idea.
Economically natives are ok for long treaties, only Hauds need a wood source cause their army is wood heavy. About their army I think only coyotes and huaracas need a buff while Hauds need to can train their units

I think the inclusion of Captured Mortars would indicate a certain interest on their part.

I can agree with most of your suggestions, though as noted in my post, I wanted to offer a more generic way to approach the problem of Natives in general, as well as a very easy way to try to fix it. Reworking more in depth could be ideal, but it is also more demanding in ressources.

There is a massive amount of things that could be done for each individual civ. For exemple, I was thinking they could improve the 3 Big Button that provide ressources to the Haudenosaunee to also include a Trickle if it is researched after 30 minutes.
A similar thing for Aztecs: the numerous Big Buttons that give a batch of units could instead/also provide a stat increase for the unit in question if researched after the max of 30 minutes.

I beg to differ. You have to take into account that everything Germans do, French do better. Uhlans might be cheap, but they do not hold a candle to French Hussars (and Cuirassiers are there too). Halberds are way easier to mass than Doppel. and French even have the option of ranged heavy Infantry. French can decrease the training time of Artillery and increase their attack, while Germans have vanilla Artillery. French have an extra 19 army pop space, great Native plays and better Skirms… I think you get the point. You might argue that War Wagons are pretty unique, but I doubt they can win you a war.

If I do the same exercise with British and French (one of the best civ in Treaty), I can at least come with some good things to say about the formers: better Cow boom, better Musks and Hussars, as well as Rockets being a powerhouse.

I have a hard time believing that having a bit more ressources would make a civ break the meta. After all, this would not inherently solve the other issues the civ has, but like I said, minor adjustments to take into account faction specificities are obviously needed.

Why? Because it would feel wrong or do you have any combinaison that would be broken?
I reviewed all available ceremonies and I cant really see anything worth fearing.
Maybe a combinaison of War Ceremony + Fertility, but I am not convicted this would be overpowered, as most players can already switch behind the 2 very fast with some shortcuts.

I agree with your German points, always when I am playing them I just get underwehlmed with my armies. Not to mention (dont know if its stillt he case) settler wagons not being counted to villager count left down screen. I had matches were I was trying to figure out why my max army consisted of 20 war wagons or only 30 uhlans. I think they can get a card like you said which would give them pop reduction on their unique units a bit like certain artillery and mercenary cards. Or maybe 3 seperate cards for every unit that gives like 10% hp and damage increase and 1 pop reduction.

On Ottomans however I do not agree at all. Abus are historically and realistically considered artillery, they arent holding muskets but mini howitzers (yes really), seeing you have 40 minutes to prepare you will definatly have enough wood to make a foundry here and there. It doesnt really matter abus cost 2 pop as they shred enemy lines of infantry.

Spahi arent necissary for Ottomans, they are first of all another gendarme and we dont really need another one. Ottoman hussars do their job good enough. And the Nizam arent that good, besides they historically were only used a short time period I heard, so it makes sense its a one time thing. But its a game so it doesnt matter entirely, yet I dont see how you would train Nizam when you can train Janissary and Abus. I dont really care what people say, but Ottomans are pretty strong in treaty. Having “free” food because you dont need settler purchasing gives more freedom in tech research and gathering other resources.

Indian artillery is pretty good they have a lot of range and are instantly movable. Their units are also very strong and able to make forward bases. Overall I would say Indians are alreafy good treaty civs. Maybe give them 15% reduced train time, but not 25%. Thats called balance as for generally stronger units you have to wait a bit longer on your units. Maybe make it like a combined card for 15% infantry and cav reduce.

Also you mention Russians being their own thing, but honestly Russia is a very good treaty civ. I dont see what should change.

TRUE

The “Indian artillery” has:

  • 7 pop(with age4 card it goes to 5)
  • 350 G and 350 W (add that problem to less wood source in late game ! )
  • Trains super slow !
  • has range resist of 0.3 that nullifies the huge HP, coz regular canons have less HP but 0.75 resist
  • Literally, Almost Every unit in the game is a hard counter to it

LOL! a Siege ele is a Culv+Mortar

A culv/Hand Mortar has a Range of : 34
A Mortar/Morutaru has a Range of freaking : 40+
Meanwhile , a Siege ele have a range of : 28 (30 after age5 upgrade)

If they are so good will you exchange the Indian “Artillery” for the normal Artillery Foundry ?

1 Like

I think otto consulate should give a foundry wagon, indians havent anti inf artillery like chinese or japan. Or mahouts shouldnt have penalties vs HI

1 Like

No as it doesnt work together with other civs units. You have to look at the entire unit rooster and if it wotks together. And in Indians rooster their artillery is fine.

It takes a Surplus of wood + a toll on eco + wastage of wood ! to do the same work as a canon+mortar
Even with the roaster, India doesn’t have a very reliable cav (dont count mohouts there are complexity of wood+train time + its blocking area + pathing with them)
Urumis are the only canon that India have, as a compensation to not having a true canon, but that too comes only from shipment in age 4
Whatever way you see it, Indian Roaster will feel incomplete in the end

Other civs Foundry work with India very well , but Siege ele doesn’t with any civ, coz its simply not enough

Absolutely true , or just give Dutch Consulate to India, itll sort many of things, and increase siege ele range +2 to 32 and train time

it is not reasonable to compare the strongest faction in the game to a middle of the road faction and give that as a reason for why they need a massive buff.

if i could field a 130 dopps id end the game right there and then, it is not even a question.

some higher tier players actually prefer the heavy cannon shipment from germany to the 2 rockets from britain.

hussars dont compete with gendarmes

I definitely agree with the Ottoman buffs, mainly for faster training time for Janissaries. The Janisary combat card should provide a slight boost to their train time to make them competitive.

Abus Guns and Grenadiers can be buffed by having a card that allows them to be trained from the barracks as an Age 4 card. Similar to Russians having falconets in blockhouses.

Cav Archers need another card to make them stronger. Cav combat is nice, but maybe one more that either increases range or siege would be nice. Right now the one card for them is higher damage against settlers, perhaps this can include a siege damage boost too.

1 Like

This might be true, but ingame, Abus Gun have the exact same tags as Skirmishers. They are a Light Infantry unit that is affected by the same technologies as others and they fulfill the same role in your army.

I should have mentioned I take my ranking reference from the Treaty Universe Discord channel. The ranking has been put in place by some of the best Treaty players in the world, based on matchups points. Ottomans are rock bottom with Lakota and Aztecs in that ranking.

My point was specifically for anti-infantry artillery. Siege Elephants are useless in that scenario, as they have less base damage than Falconets and no multiplier against infantry.

The thing is, those numbers stacks fast. As mentioned, the (relatively small looking) 25% difference in practice is massive, going as far as European infantry being created 4 times faster on Andes.

If we take your suggestion of 15%, Indian would train in 20% of their normal time in Andes VS Europeans at 10%… meaning that they would still be at twice the Training time as their opponent.

You mentioned the higher training time balance better stats, but a reduction of Training time in % would still keep the units that take more time to be created (like a Sepoy) take longer to be created:

Sepoy : 34 secs
Musketeer: 30 secs

With equal -75% reduction:
Sepoy : 8.5 secs
Musketeer: 7.5 secs

The reason we need to compare them to French is because Germans do not have anything special about them that would differentiate them. They have no bonus that is relevant to the Late Game army and no units that do something most other civs cannot do with regular units.

Why would you take Germans is everything they do is less powerful than your average civ?
Compare Germans to British (a middle-of-the-road civ) if you want to make it more fair, but you’ll come with a similar conclusion.

I’d be curious to see it in action. Cavalry boxes and even Infantry boxes (Skull Knights have been popular since the buff) are often the subject of complaints online, but have rarely been winnings strategies in high level plays. As of now, Doppelsoldners at 2 POP are close to irrelevant even with the massive amounts of cards they receive.

1 Like

There is no reason to move abus to barracks. In treaty you wont go without an foundry anyways unless you want to lose.

Today I again played Otto in treaty and didnt have any problems with economy or countering enemies. I holded of 3 players on my own as one had left at 20 min mark and 2 were noobs not moving their armies on Orinco untill the enemy alreadt established bases on our side.

I am not pro but I would like to 1v1 of those high tier players as Otto and them doing the strats against me of which they say Ottos lose. Not that I say I dont believe them, just want to see for myself as generally thats the best way to learn.

The reason abus gun is in artillery foundry is to make some semblance of balance in ottoman Jan rush. Imagine being able to build 2 rax and have both abus and jan available.

So are you agreeing with me? Shouldnt you say that to the other person?

CBA to find where they asked Abus gun in Barraks so ill just agree with you instead.