Balance changes from July Update guys!

[Sylux1000]

In feudal and early castle age, giving extra armor as a civ bonus is equivalent to make pavise a civ bonus. Equivalent in the sense that it is the same. You will have xbow with +1/1 armor.

For instance, if they get a new UT very weak (like the hun one), their late game will be unchanged, since your units already have the extra armor as a civ bonus.

Then finding a new UT more useful is not that difficult imo. For instance a UT giving a discount to condos (even for the all team), a UT affecting monks, rams, buildings. All these options can have a limited or situational effect, also negligible, so no balance issues at all.

I think this would make more flexible the way to balance them. For instance assume someone argues that +1 PA stackable with the current pavise is too much since you will get +2PA arbs in imp (btw, I am very convinced it is not). Then if pavise becomes a civ bonus, nothing changes since you will still get +1PA arbs in imp.

[DoctBaghi]

@Sylux1000

In feudal and early castle age, giving extra armor as a civ bonus is equivalent to make pavise a civ bonus. Equivalent in the sense that it is the same. You will have xbow with +1/1 armor.

No, because the idea is to give them +1PA (or +1/1 if we want to exaggerate) that is stackable with pavise then in castle age, for a total of +1/2 plus the standard blacksmith upgrades.
So if you give just pavise as a bonus, you just have +1/1, you still lack that +1PA.

@Sylux1000

For instance, if they get a new UT very weak (like the hun one), their late game will be unchanged, since your units already have the extra armor as a civ bonus.

But they don’t need a new UT, and the idea is TO CHANGE their late game a bit, by giving them more durable arbalests.

@Sylux1000

Then finding a new UT more useful is not that difficult imo.

It easy for you and me that we don’t have to implement it in the game, they we don’t have to verify that it’s balanced, that it work without bugs, that most players would accept it.
They shouldn’t make such a radical change if there are other way to help the civ.

@Sylux1000

new UT very weak (like the hun one)

I don’t like having a weak UT like huns or mongols, I prefer a decent UT that is useful.
Removing a UT that work just for giving them an useless one doesn’t really make sense in my eyes.

@Sylux1000

I think this would make more flexible the way to balance them. For instance assume someone argues that +1 PA stackable with the current pavise is too much since you will get +2PA arbs in imp

But that’s the purpose, and most aren’t that against the +1/2 arbs in imp.
However, if the majority is against it, that’s why we also came up with the free armor upgrades bonus, which is far from being OP, and more easy to implement since you don’t have to change pavise.

@Sylux1000

Then if pavise becomes a civ bonus…

Also, with the new condos changes, people will complain that now it’s too easy to do a fast imp condos rush, that are even stronger than before, while now the castle and the UT act as a buffer.
Before such a change, we should see how the new condos works.

[Sylux1000]

@DoctBaghi

No, because the idea is to give them +1PA (or +1/1 if we want to exaggerate) that is stackable with pavise then in castle age, for a total of +1/2 plus the standard blacksmith upgrades.
So if you give just pavise as a bonus, you just have +1/1, you still lack that +1PA.

In feudal and early castle you do not have pavise, so it the same. 100%. Then it changes. Clearly if the goal is affecting the late game, +1 PA is needed. Pavise becoming a bonus is a weak version of +1 PA since it works only for the early stages.

Overall let me repeat I am in favor of +1PA and in changing the late game. I was just proposing weaker solutions if someone thinks that +1PA is too much.

In my personal perspective, +1PA is probably not sufficient to make them viable, but I would be fine with even a smaller bonus since now, with the recent buffs to italian competitors, Italians are probably the worst civ in the game averaging all the scenarios. And maybe in 1v1 arabia by a wide margin (together with turks).

[DoctBaghi]

@Sylux1000

In feudal and early castle you do not have pavise, so it the same.

It is not.
Ok, maybe I wasn’t clear, sorry my bad.

The main idea for the +1PA bonus is that archer (only) get +1PA from feudal (well tecnicaly from dark, but since in dark there are no ranges…), so in feudal they would have a bonus, that then can be further improve by researcing pavise in castle for a total of +1/2.

This is the main idea, some weaker versions (that would still be better than nothing) are to buff pavise to +1/2 (but it’s more complicated since you would have to differentiate between xbows and the 2 UU) or to give them the bonus only from castle age.

There are also stronger version of this bonus, but let’s discuss those another time.

@Sylux1000

In my personal perspective, +1PA is probably not sufficient to make them viable

Righ now, italians arbs with pavise are about on the level of etiopians and viets if you confront only the pure stats of the xbow/arbs and you let them fight (without considering micro of course), all other archer civs are stronger. And a lot of non-archer civs with better eco are better too.

The problem is, that both etiopians and viets get their bonus for free (let’s call it the “resources” problem) and a lot sooner (the “time” problem), so to compensate that, on the late game after buying pavise, their arbs should be more powerful.

So the +1PA would act as a bonus that let you archer still keep up with other archers civs on a military level from the faudal age (solvig the “time” problem) but still with the eco disadvantage.
Then pavise would come into play on mid/late castle, and their arbs would finally be better, since you pay for them (solving the “resources” problem).

That way, we should’t worry about changing pavise. And it’s just a small and easy bonus to implement.

Of course, free archer armor is a weaker but still viable option.

[DoctBaghi]

However, I’m doing a new topic only to discuss the italians, since it seem that it’s a pretty big discussion, so if you want wait and answer me there.

[DoctBaghi]

New italians after the update and further ideas for the next ones

So, since it seem that on the post-update topics, the italians are the most discussed civ, I thought of making a separate topic just for them. First, I like to talk about the new condos, how they fell and work. In my opinions they are in a really good spot, they have some occasional use, their stats are good and the need of a castle act as a buffer, so they are neither OP nor useless as before. Still, they need testing, so I appreciate your feedbacks. We should keep in mind that if we discuss…