Aztec 3rd Edition - Suggestions

I still think arrow knights should deal siege damage since they are underwhelming for a 2 pop unit and their cost without sending all their support cards especially since they moved combat card to age 4. I say adjust their multipliers vs artillery to x 1.5 and they should be more in line with huaracas which have up to 2.5 multipliers vs artillery and deal siege damage unlike arrow knights. At this point I’d rather have hauraca with lower range than arrow knights.

1 Like

Cuachicqueh ready and uploaded.


That’s great, thank you will try it in a few.

Thank you again :smiley:

1 Like

Regarding the AK, they are good because they outrange most artillery (and if the artillery is moving towards them they should move back) and have a high RR, making them difficult for skirms to kill. AK + Walls and I basically must have mortars to break that/force the AK to actually come out to where I can hit them. Also, their speed is good for artillery that is ready to fire. They are also quite useful in team. The major downside is that they are expensive, so you basically can’t afford to lose them too early. And you need a decent mass before they start being really good.

As far as ERKs go, they at least were super, insanely good, and Aztec was kinda balanced around that for the late game. Now they’ve been nerfed, they are fine, but are not currently as good as they were. So I don’t see the comment from @EliteRiflemann as a contradiction at all. They should be a little overturned imo. Just replace the 0.75x vs infantry with 0.67x vs light infantry and increase their RR to 25% (meaning they only have a penalty against skirm type units, not all infantry)

“If”, most battles will have both armies moving if both have some troops Arrows will end up behind all as canons, canons due aoe will tear front lines, while arrows even with their extra range will take time to start attacking canons.

If you are “ambushing” maybe you have them in range, but if you are moving to attack again they will end up last in the formation, they will either take time to reach its target or will slow all the army.

Their speed/range even if better than canons mather little as you said a decent mass is needed, 5 at least per canon, even after 4 cards (3 knigh + 1 temple) their utility is mediocre. Plus using 2 pop, I better use coyotes.

Again they have more ranged than longbowmans, more damage. Their are intended to be aztec culverins (sort of) but fail greatly to do so, they would better be skirmisher type unit with good siege attack, faster move/fire rates, 1 pop less cost, other units to fill the anti-artillery role.

Yes, Eagles problem is that they have bonuses vs horses but resistances vs all ranged, so who counters them, artillery? So they nerfed RR. Any idea is welcomed, as long as its constructive.

Pd: I updated the post, also added some “Wild Ideas” in the 1st comment and would like to invite anyone to see this post if you havent:

The same units that counter dragoons: skirmishers and heavy infantry. ERKs werent never effective vs these units. People forget they are more expensive thank skirmishers and in order to have higher attack (and train time) 15 villagers are needed.


If I’m understanding your statements correctly, you’re point is that when armies are moving towards each other they sort into formation to put the longest range units towards the back.

The thing is players (generally with greater skill than myself) use control groups to move their units around separately, allowing the AKs to be up further than I believe you’re describing. They can’t really balance around the drag boxers (I’m pretty much one), they should balance around the better players, meaning assuming they will always be at the back is incorrect.

As far as breaking front lines goes, you’re correct that AK aren’t good at that. They’re reasonably tanky to skirm fire, using hit-n-run they can kill a few units before the fight starts, and they’re good against Artillery and Buildings. They’re a Mortar/Culv with the advantage of not being tagged as artillery, meaning Culvs aren’t a counter to them.

The tricky thing with a decent mass of AK is they actually deny cannons pretty well (and kinda more than some civs can imo). Since they have 1.5 rof all you really need is enough to start 1 shot-ing artillery pieces. If I’m loosing a cannon every 1.5-3 seconds I’m probably taking a bad trade even if they’re trading out for some slingers. At the same time I basically have to kill most of the defending units before I can start really killing the AKs, because again, Culvs don’t work.

They do suffer a bit from being a softer counter with more utility against more things then a culv. Culvs are really, really good at only one thing. But this does play towards them being more mass-able than culvs. In 6 seconds they shoot like 4 times, giving a single AK similar damage output to a culvs vs infantry (yes, culvs are bad vs infantry, but sometimes you run out of artillery to shoot at, so the comparison is worth making). 40pop of Culvs is rarely good. 40pop of AKs isn’t necessary great either, but it’s a lot better than 40 pop of culvs.

I’m not saying “Arrow knights are op”, but calling them a “bad joke” doesn’t seem fair to me. Imo they are fine. I’m not against some buffs to Aztec, and if you look through some older threads I’ve suggested a number of things. I just don’t think AKs are in need of any significant changes.


Yes that might be right still due move speed all the army would be slow, enemy army could get free shots (canon-skirmishers) against anything in front, plus if you put them first cav can get a bit too.

I don’t agree, balance should be thought for accessibility of the most player bit for the “pro” only.

The only archer that use properly that tactic is the #### due the fire rate/animation. Arrows are slow so they might get free shots due range.

Unfortunately as being “infantry”, falconet and the like get bonus damage vs them, so in gen other units aren’t needed.

As most desc sound nice in paper but in game you need 5 arrow for 1 falconet to one shot one you need more. If you are managing groups it’s easy to target arrows while they try to reach/target artillery. Or just target others units to reduce their numbers even if arrows deal with artillery, a canon can kill 5 or more units per shot.

Personally I rather have 40 coyotes.

Personally one of the things that made me love the series is the knowledge that game gives about history, culture, etc. So units should have a relation between history and mechanics.

However Arrows do badly at both, historically are a mix of different things: their suit is based on 2 captive rank suit that was based on their campaign against totonacas, bows had nothing outstanding.

While in game they use 2 pop, have more ranged and damage than any bow user, doesn’t make sense.