Aztecs need a serious economy buff

Why is it that all European civs have insane unlimited economies but the Aztecs have the worst economy compared to all the other civs especially late game when wood no longer exist.

Also there’s no way for Aztecs to counter skirmishers without and this is a problem late game. And no I dont want to play another civ for treaty games just because the devs dont care about balancing.


The Native Civs (minus the Incans) have always struggled in the long-term game. They were never intended to be useful in treaty games - they can’t access RNG elements like the Saloon or passively produce resources via Factories or similar.

All three need a major rehaul to make them more on-par with the other civs in the game. I’ve gone over ways to make the Lakota a decent treaty civilization, and all three could use a wood-production Ceremony or a way to produce it passively from one of their buildings.

The Aztecs have such an insane farming rate that their gold rate needs no buff, but a way to passively produce wood would be a boon - if nothing else, let them passively produce wood alongside food and gold.

Or, a borderline game-breaking method would be to give the Native Civs the ability to regenerate forests over time. Considering the history of Native Americans and the world around them, it would make more sense for them to produce food exclusively through hunting and forest management, where they would also produce wood - Historically, Native American (especially the Haudenosaunee) agricultural methods had little in common with the western ideology of plowing a field - rather, they would cultivate entire forests to grow abundant with food for them, while keeping only small patches of earth near their homes for things that grew better when cared for more, like maize, beans, and squash. (This could be reflected by giving Longhouses passive food generation, alongside the Kancha House, or letting 3-5 villagers collect food on mini-farms outside Longhouses instead of normal farms.)

Otherwise, cultivating food forests was the go-to method of agriculture. There’s a reason that, when the Pilgrims landed on Plymouth Rock, they described it as a garden of Eden because of how the Natives in the area had kept the forests filled with edible plants.

We didn’t cut down trees en masse (mostly - there’s also the distinct possibility that Native American logging is part of what caused the little ice age over in Europe in the 16th century), but rather cultivated entire forests as best we could and only took what we needed, never killing the plants off. Keeping them alive kept us alive.

1 Like

@moez1210, Personally I believe that “Native” (American) factions are designed to generate more shipments in general than other civs, due the “Plaza” (Fire Pit). Problem around this, is we have to choose between unit shipments, upgrade shipments, economy shipments.

In general I strugle with food and wood with them, while gold pretty much always is “abundant”, backing to cards, there are around 3 cards that buff farm production, +20% two and 1unique to them the chinanpas that bosts +10%, dont know if its intended to make us take 2 or the 3. But for the “unique” one should give more bonus than the common ones, as if it was a replacement.

Now, speaking of military units cannons should be the great deal, but pretty much with aztecs is easy to kill them, either with coyotte or arrow knights, while I havent expirienced a treaty match with them I cant say anything of that, but I have seen that they become quite strong with upgrade cards.

@FireCorn2558209 Yes I think and would agree with original devs that Native Americans should be weaker than Europeans, but would be nice if this would be balanced with army size, since both Aztec and Incan were big empires with a lot of people.

Would be nice if we could build tree farms or something like that, not only Natives, but all civs. Since all cultures realised at one moment that in order to have wood they needed trees and that some trees had better wood than others.

Since I played Galactic Battleground have been saying why other Age of Empires games dont have its “barn” mechanic, that basically you brought animals inside the building and it generated food, the more it had inside more it produced, I was modding a bit and did manage to add to Livestock Pen the japanese shrine effect to animals, so they got fat, stod there producing food and didnt left, I could also add the option to chose between food or gold.

Since so far I have seen few people actually using Livestock Pens, this could work with all civs too.

1 Like

All civs have upgrade cards for their farms…just because the Aztecs have them as well doesn’t mean they’re equivalent. All the European civs have unlimited and insane eco compared to the Aztecs upgrade cards doesn’t mean anything.

1 Like

Exactly, plus the Aztecs may have a strong food economy, but the gold gathering upgrades are a mockery, I’ve played hundreds of games where I have a disproportionate amount of food and very little gold, and no, it’s not because I mismanage my resources, I simply have 30 villagers in gold and 15 in food and still gold is scarce.
the Aztec economy is very weak, having a high food collection does not counteract the fact that gold and wood are garbage

I disagree that Native American civs should inherently be any weaker than European ones. Just because the technology available to Native Americans wasn’t war-centric like Europeans doesn’t mean their economies should suffer for it - if there’s actual historical evidence that Native American industry in North America may have had a significant impact on the Little Ice Age of Medieval Europe, clearly they did not have weak economies.
They had the manpower to turn entire forests into centers of agriculture and had trade spanning from the northern Inuit to the central Mesoamericans. They did not have a weak economy. There is evidence of cities bigger than London that were deliberately destroyed and erased by Europeans. Native Mesoamerican cities were clean, with indoor plumbing and a net-zero waste management system. (Look up how Tenochtitlan was run - they were extraordinarily efficient with everything they had.)
Just because their technology didn’t center on the ability to kill doesn’t mean they should be inherently weaker. If anything, their units should be weak and spammable, but backed by strong economies.

same with sioux, not exactly the same since i got a very fine economy but just rather the shite units against late game ■■■■. Not to say that the sioux aint got god units, they do, but for early and mid-game, vs mercenary and cannons imperial halbediers and such, they suck. Dunno a 100% easy fix but just might need a overhaul

Perhabs I didnt explained myself clearly as I would like, I meant to say that back in original AoE 3 card progression was by levels, then we had for example:

"Food Silos" (Common) that gives +15% gather work rate for farms.
"Sustainable Agriculture" (Common) that gives +15% gather work rate for farms.
"Grain Market" that gives +20% gather work rate for farms.
"Chinanpas" that gives +10% gather work rate for farms/plantation.
"Great Chianpas" that gives +15% gather work rate for farms/plantation

That means +75% (+10/15/20% from Chosing the Tribal Wise Woman), being +95% gather rate from farms. While this is quite high compared with all other civs, I believe very few pick the 5 cards, and with the limit of 25 deck cards fewer.

"Team Silver Mine" that gives +10% gather work rate for mines.
"Aztec mining" that gives +40% gather work rate for mines.

+50% gather work rate for mines, +25% for plantations, this without counting other cards, like wood, fish boosts, so as I have stated above a ton of cards more than other civs for food but I dont think many people pick them all.

So what I meant to say earlier is: that should “Chinanpas” card be “stronger” than the other two, or pretty much having instead 2 stronger cards or even 1.

No dont misunderstand me,

I didnt say Native Americans werent war-centric, in fact its the contrary, both Aztec and Incas were Empires in expansion, nor did I say their economy should be weak, contrary again it should be stronger, since America had and has many resources and its rich in food.

Mexicas (Aztecs) were constantly in war, and its people in order to archive wealth and prestige could join the Emperor campaigns to capture people and archive a rank.

Also you are wrong, there is evidence that some cities in order to produce “Cal” a white powder to build deforested some zones around some cities and eventually were forced to abandon such areas.

And yes in general there were many people in America, that somehow its not represented correctly in game, with this I mean that as China that its unit production is of “armies”, natives could have something like.

But overall my point was, that Europeans (and those that used gunpowder) at that time had the upper had in the world since they have been focusing in a new type of warfare, Guns and as someone said it allowed untrained men to kill those that spend its life training, in other words to kill knights.

This is reflected in how the Europeans colonized the New world and tryed to get inside Asia, they even killed the japanese Emperor and the Shogun, so its a fact.

Going back to the Aztecs they had 2 things that they didnt, Horses and Guns. Whats the difference between America and Asia, something simple yet descisive, the fact that Japan, Indian and China were together internally, while in America there were many tribes and were in a period of unification that all nation pass throw, it is known that Tlaxcaltecas and Huatecs helped the Spanish to overthrow the Aztec Empire.

1 Like

The Aztecs have a lousy economy, no one is asking the developers to give them horses or gunpowder (I personally like their military units), we are just asking to make their economy decent, they literally have no mine collection upgrades and the Wood gathering is absurd because in late games wood run out and you automatically lose … In tier list the Aztecs are almost unplayable in competitive, while Lakota and Haud, although not that strong, are much stronger than Aztecs, so something is wrong.
How many times have you seen the Aztecs in multiplayer?

Dude Incas are the worst lone term or treaty civ , they just have no eco to support their weaker army that also cost too much wood that Inca has no source of

Who use mine late game ??? Aztec has good food eco but very bad gold eco

Aztec as well as inca have below average eco , but their main problem is weak cav that cost wood . Same problem with Iraq , they have weak cav that cost wood and these civs ahve no rourse of wood late game

I agree with you, how do we get the devs to actually buff the civ?

I think the mine card is completely useless , its not worth wasting a card on.

Agreed, I rarely see people play Aztecs because its pointless compared to European civs who can produce unlimited eco.

It could be a card that changes the cost of wood to food for land units and decrease the cost of food for all units by X%. Maybe the card of Tezcatlipoca which is currently not very useful.

1 Like

I think a community plaza dance to increase all resource gather rates could be a viable way to help the Aztec economy. Like a +20 percent gather rate multiplier to all resources with warrior priests, as in +1 percent gather rate per pop on the community plaza.

Their max estate/plantation gather rate would then be 1.35x(0.5+(0.1+0.2+0.5+0.1+0.15+0.1+0.2)x0.5)=1.5862 with a full community plaza. As this would apply to all resources their food gather rate would be further increased, allowing less villagers to be on farms, as it would be 1.35x(0.5+(0.1+0.15+0.2+0.5+0.15+0.15+0.2+0.1+0.15+0.2+0.1)x0.5)=2.025. Aztecs would need to send 6 cards to attain their maximum gather rates, and age V with the wise woman.

Thus with 84 villagers gathering, 15 villagers on community plaza, and 10 warrior priests on community plaza, ERK would cost 84 villager-seconds, JPK (though not very relevant, could use a speed boost) would cost 78 villager-seconds, arrow knights would cost 72 villager seconds. They would have 84 villagers.

By comparison a standard European civ (the Spanish) has a max estate gather rate of 0.5+(0.1+0.2+0.3+0.5+0.2+0.2+0.2+0.1+0.25)x0.5=1.525, a max mill gather rate of 0.67+(0.15+0.3+0.5+0.15+0.1+0.2)x0.67=1.6. They would have 99 villagers plus two upgraded factories however giving an additional 14.3 resources/sec of choice thus equivalent to another 9.5 villagers. Spain needs to send 7 cards to attain their maximum gather rates.

Musketeers would cost 63 villager-seconds, skirmishers 74 villager-seconds, dragoons 115 villager seconds, and hussars 127 villager-seconds.

Thus normalizing for total adjusted villagers(TAV) available to each civ, an ERK would cost 75.1/84=1 TAV-seconds, a JPK 0.93 TAV-seconds, and an arrow knight 0.86 TAV-seconds whereas a musketeer would cost 0.582 TAV-seconds, a skirmisher 0.68 TAV-seconds, a dragoon 1.06 TAV-seconds, and a hussar 1.17 TAV-seconds. Considering that Aztec units are stronger than most European units, this would balance Aztec’s treaty/late game economy.
The issue with this solution is that one would have to choose between good gather rates, better attack, or good training rates, which is especially relevant for ERK which have no train time reductions.

An alternative to a dance could be to significantly buff the wise woman gather rate boost to +80 percent age v, but that would make all other age V options irrelevant.

I also think Aztecs should have an Age III HC card or improvement that makes the community plaza “dances” change instantly, which would allow better and more predictable switching between healing units, increasing damage, train time, and a theoretical gather speed dance.

I think the train rate dance and the damage one are necessary for aztecs a gather rate dance would just make them even weaker, all they really have to do is buff the cards that increase farm rate on both the farms and estates. They need a buff for gold gathering mainly.