[Balance] Some changes I'd wish to see

[AbuzzJam4677680]

@PlumpDucklin

Is it though? How? The opponent could spend that huge cost of the castle + pavise on ballistics or faster imperial for example which are both massively more meaningful.

Perhaps not castle age but imperial age. It comes a bit late for arbalest. But when you engage in archer war, you will find pavise significant.

@PlumpDucklin

I know it’s random, but on top of the Italian civ bonus of +1/1 for condos. What about +2/4/6 (feudal/castle/imp) damage Vs archers for infantry, remove champ. It’s not meant to be super useful, mainly to give condos more use.

Condo is supposed to be weak vs archers. I would rather silk road replace shared condo as team bonus and slightly buff Condos base atk a bit.

[AbuzzJam4677680]

@DynasticPlanet5

For Brit how bout a compromise? No bonus range on Xbow but thumb ring yes but doesn’t effect Longbow accuracy

This is a massive nerf on Britons. Xbow turns close to generic (only 20% faster training time). Then, I think longbow deserve thumb ring and cheaper yeomen as a compromise.

[Green4uu]

@AllergicTable49

Italians: Archery Range units have +1/+2/+3 melee armor in Feudal/Castle/Imperial Age

so Arbalest with 6 melee armor? Taking 5 damage from FU Hussars? I.e. 8 shots to kill? Skirmishers with 6 melee armor? Taking 7 Hussar shots to kill?

@AllergicTable49

Italians: Genoese Crossbow and Condottiero have +1/+1 armor passively

Genoese Crossbowmen already have 5 melee armor when FU (which is the same armor as Cavalier/Paladin), they also counter cavalry fairly hard. They don’t need to be even stronger vs cavalry/melee units. They are a balanced unit that is on the strong side, hard to mass but definitely not weak individually. If Genoese needs buffs, and I’m not sure it does, it should be in terms of cheaper Elite upgrade.

@AllergicTable49

Chinese : Starts with -50g

Sure just because Chinese have been dominant so long, let’s give them a brutal uncalled for nerf, in the age where they are weak, so that they can’t do 2-militia Drush/MAA opening anymore.

Chinese make sense design-wise, they have good Feudal and Castle age but unimpressive Imperial. There will always be a top dog among the civs, better for it to be something like Chinese that is hard to play, than Goths or Lithuanians.

@AllergicTable49

Incas: Stone buildings cost -20%

Incas are the worst of the 3 Meso civs but are quite good otherwise. Solid mid-tier civ. They don’t need buffs.

@AllergicTable49

Malay : Karambit creation time is now 4 seconds

Karambits are actually strong when massed, I can’t believe we introduced a metric of “training time per unit pop” which is very arbitrary and serves a narrative. Let’s make a new metric then, melee attack per unit pop, BAM Karamits stand at 16, very OP, needs nerf.

Jokes aside, the idea of Karambits is that they SHOULD BE hard to mass since if you manage to mass like 80 of them, unless opponent is fully stone walled, it’s basically GG.

@AllergicTable49

Tatars: Steppe Lancers have +2/+1 armor passively

Step Lancers are already very good and compete well with Knights in large numbers. I see no reason to buff them.

@AllergicTable49

Instead of also applying on Barracks, which makes them broken on closed maps

how does it make them broken? Teutons are top 5 at best on Arena. Bohemians, Burgundians, Poles, Britons, Malay are all stronger, for example.

@AllergicTable49

Longbow: Have 65%/80% Accuracy

coupled with no Thumb Ring, how to kill a UU.

Overall I’m glad you aren’t in charge of balance…