if they get these changes they would absolutely need to be monitored closely, they have a 52% winrate as is and they field cheap armies, these could push them over the edge even harder then the +2 armor does for Teutons currently.
Boiling oil was barely researched as I understand it so itās not a major change.
For the reduced cost, I would not suggest anything drastic. Like -100f and -100g for each tech.
But if they Byzantines remain as they are, Iām fine with them.
iām far more concerned about cheaper E Cataphract and Logistica. you might be fine with them only being 200 food and 200 gold cheaper, but we got others around here suggesting halving the Elite Cataphract upgrade costā¦
Halving the cost is not realistic of course. As I said, some civs need some small tweaks. Not massive redesign. Then the game will be balanced with all civs within the 47.5-52.5% win rate bracket.
this i agree with. i think byzantines are fine as is, ofcourse they need more playtime for more accurate numbers, but that is true of about half the civs in this game.
1 Like
Indeed we are at a point now that many civs are not played enough by pro players who tunnel vision themselves to finding the slightly overpowered strat among a handful of civs. Also, often they do not seem to remember or know all the civ bonuses. This opens the window for new players to rise in the rankings by utilizing little unknown strats.
Personally, I believe that after one or two patches, the balance changes need to stop and players need to start testing all the civs and find new strats.
In a recent game of Hera vs Daut, Vikings vs Portuguese, even the caster, T90 was prejudiced against the Portuguese, but Daut showed that they are excellent on water maps by utilizing their gold discount, feitorias, and caravels.
1 Like
i believe we need to go longer then one month between patches. iāve felt this for a long time.
1 Like
Really enough is -400F maybe -500F on Elite Upgrade. Logistica is insanly strong so should stay expensive, maybe -100G only.
I think this is interesting. We can see how cheap Keshiks and Leitis are.
1 Like
I think this is interesting. We can see how cheap Keshiks and Leitis are.
This. Exactly what I pointed out in the other threads days ago: Are there any downsides to lowering the costs of the unused(in ranked) War Elephants, Shotel Warriors, Condottiero, Teutonic Knights, Turtle Ships, Steppe Lancers and Siege Towers?
For how long can we keep imbalances just to gather slightly more accurate winrate data, only to please those who still believe that civ winrate data is the crux in deciding balance changes?
Even though we have already disproved that notion in this thread: [Helping weak civs] some minor ideas for improvements
P.S. It is a long read, sorry
You can block me if you want, but the truth remins that balance is subjective and it should be done on the collective feelings of topmost PRO players and PRO casters.
What I see being interesting is how bad the cata perform vs archers. Jus watch this guyās vid on the teutonic knight, it performs better than catas ivs longbows! Of course in an actual game you canāt hit and run catas like you can for TK but still, with all these upgrade costsā¦ Oh and something I donāt see being brought up much: catas need both elite and logistica for being good. Without logistica, it takes more damage from halbs, has less infantry damage and without the trample they can barely trade with briton/vietnamese cavalier, while without elite itās just too weak.
All due respects, but the pros wouldnāt have agreed that much with your āletās remove 5 goldā policy either. They would have pointed out there was a reason condos were nerfed to have less attack and no base pierce armour, and that itās normal an infantry UU isnāt seen every game because itās on an archer and siege civ and thus the gold goes on this first. They did find an use to the normal SL, they can even use war eles and so on.
1 Like
OK im fine if they would not have agreed with my specific suggestions, I dont take it that hard. I continue to brainstorm more potential solutions wherever necessary.
But I do think the UU Tierlist Videos from both Viper and Hera do say a lot about just how much work is to be done in balancing some of these.
In both lists most units are A/B tiers, and even with a lot of S tiers stuff for Viper.
And alas, they have their own bias (here, Hera getting salty over his chu ko nu not rekting boyars while his chu ko nu are actually busy rekting boyars)
But Hera did rank Chu ko nus very well in the UU Tierlist video (just like TheViper), so please, just forgive him for being in the heat of the moment there.
He is a pro player, so his insights into units are the best when he is serious, but he is a human after all, so he can say stuff like that sometimes.
I will admit I needed an excuse to post it 11 After all it would be unfair if I was the only one to get a good laugh
1 Like
My suggestion:
Indian:
elephant archer +10% speed
elephant archer -20G
elephant warrior +
elite elephant warrior
Burmese:
Arambai, elite Arambai +20% accuracy
Saracene:
Mameluke -20G
Lithuanier:
Leitis +10G
110F 60G for EAs? Iām still not using that even if I were held at gunpoint 
What are they going to lose for getting these massive buffs?
Winning only 48% of games and gets nerf. Nice. Welcome to the bottom of the barrel again lithuanians.
1 Like
I will also oppose a Leitis nerf here, as I really want most civs to make good use of their UU
Meanwhile, Elephant Archers:
#NuclearReactorElephantosForIndians
No way Leitis should be left unchanged, +10 gold is a reasonable cost increase.
By the way unless there are nearly countless matches that had have been played, you cannot trust statistics, but Iāve already told yout this a tousand times. If you really want to rely on statistics, it is much safer to rely on the all elo data instead of the 1650+ data. The winrate inaccuracy will decrease with the number of matches being played. Currently it is even possible that there is a 10% inaccuracy at 1650+ winrates (so for example lith winrate is actually 52,8% instead of 48%). And btw liths are a top 10 civ at all elo stats so even if we rely on statistics, which we in fact shouldnāt, then lithuanians are strong.