Georgians : Monaspa -1 Melee armor, longer time to produce
Huns : Getting Steppe Lancer with discount (no elite version)
Sicilians : Donjon can be built in Dark age (no arrow in Dark age).
Bonus damage reduction from -33% to -40%
I mostly agree Hera’s suggestion especially on general change
Hera talking about his video that drush +FC is not meta these day due to expensive cost of Xbow. That is why fast feudal is almost always preferred.
I am not sure Militia line speed change can help them but I agree with direction. Also steppe lancer way too strong in early castle that need to be tuned (might be better to increase food cost instead? Food is more valueable in castle age but not that much in late game.)Preformatted text
Nerfing something that isn’t broken (Light Cavalry) isn’t the way to go.
Don’t worry not always such changes come to the game, Viper kind of dislike the Free Wheelbarrow/Hand Cart and Free Thumb Ring/Parthian Tactics, and I don’t see the bonuses being changed anyway.
These I strongly agree with, but I’m not so sure about the others.
Steppe Lancers being a problem, IMO, is strictly due to the Mongolian health bonus being really strong, so it’s the Mongols that should be nerfed and not the Steppe Lancers themselves.
+0.02 speed on Militia? What would that solve?
They’re too iconic. No other unit would make sense for the Georgians. Now, if they had an infantry specialty instead, I think the Monaspa would be more tolerable.
What if infantry just had a bit smaller of a size than currently? A big part of their poor performance comes down to poor navigation in fights, leaving most of them unable to engage. Giving them a smaller size could allow them to move around more effectively and deal damage more consistently.
Hmm discounted steppe lancers sounds really strong, even if they don’t scale. No one makes elite steppe lancers at any rate, or its very rare. Hera himself said in the video, steppe lancers are extremely strong early castle age and fall off after that. So Huns having the housing bonus, stable bonus and discounted lancers would make them Mongols 2.0, and it doesn’t solve Huns weaknesses to the stronger civs coming out these days.
Also yeah, the horse can go, not every civ needs to be strong on every map.
Monaspa should be weaker at the beginning, like having -4 attack and a small area of effect that the radius is 5, then make their attack bonus much more layers, like up to +8, so that they rely more heavily on the amount and collective action. Force them to gather an enough amount to become useful as now.
They can train SL 20% faster. Being with discount might not be a good idea.
If you are willing to give them SL, just give them ESL too. It doesn’t matter.
As a low ELO player. I have a few concerns about the Sicilian and Steppe Lancer change.
On low ELO games, the Sicilians already have a very high win rate. Further giving them a buff could really break the civ balance at low ranking games.
As for the steppe lancers, it’s worth reminding that the Mongols are not the only ones that have them. +5G would also nerf the Tatars, who are already pretty weak across all ranks. But then again I think an overall buff for the Tatars is already overdue.
I definitely agree with the increase to Militia speed and longer train time for Monaspa.
Possibly agree to Crossbow and Arbalest cost reduction.
Disagree with Bulgarian TC cost reduction - I think they need something elsewhere. Disagree with Huns losing the Hunnic Horse (could maybe reduce LOS or move speed a bit instead).
Unsure about change to Steppe Lancer gold cost, Monaspa melee armor, Sicilian bonus damage, Hun Steppe Lancer.
personally i agree on most changes except archers. i think that if pathing get fixed or at least reverted to when your unit where not regrouping into a mangonel shot they can be very good still. prior to their nerf, the mid game was dominated by crossbows afterall…
anyway, he also stated that in his mind he would just change the crossbow upgrades and only later if needed the arbalest one so it’s ok i guess
on militia, way to conservative changes. 0.02 speed would do nothing…they need more. maybe their speed at 0.95, or make the upgrades even cheaper for feudal/castle age. atm drush and MAA rush is dead in pro game, they need a bit of a rework
also on sicilians not so spot on changes. making donjon buildable in dark age feels ok but you don’t have the eco for that. they are 75 wood! also open the way for some laming/toxic play at enemy base
imho donjons should just be way cheaper, like 50W/150S. atm tower rushing the sicilians is a cakewalk simply because of that.
on bonus damage reduction, 40% would mean 1 more hit from most of counters for cav, but i do not think it would change anything for infantry or archers. serjeants would still be killed in 6 shots by handcannoners. make it 40% for cav, 50% for everything else excepts siege
Man At Arms should hve one more pierce armor or speed added. Because with the speed difference you can give them 100 pierce armor and they will still lose.
It weould matter for post-imp settings…
Huns are already very strong at DM start. Lancers would turn ESL would turn them tooooo powerful. Maybe even normal lancers