Balance Suggestions for Monaspas

Age of Empires II: DE II - Discussion
1

Hi. Let’s talk about the Monaspas.

Since Mountain Royals, Monaspas have proven to be an oppressive unit.
There have been some bugfix to their attack and increase in training time and attack buff requirement but the overall capability of Monaspas in fights is unchanged.

When massed with full attack buff, they destroy even the counter units (like heavy camels, halbs etc.) and are also good at destroying buildings, including Castles, to the point where Georgians are less likely to create skirmishers (to counter halbs) or siege (to destroy production buildings). Even though they miss Bombard Cannons (despite being the “Defensive” civ), they never felt the lack of it because of Monaspas.

That said, Monaspas, even though they destroy counter units, they do bring something unique to the game. There is a reason why they haven’t touched Monaspas attack, melee armor or HP yet.
If we nerf Monaspas’ stats so that they die to counter units and they don’t destroy buildings fast, Georgians will become another generic Cavalry, Skirmisher, Siege civilization (they might get BBC to compensate monaspa nerf, making them even more generic.).

This is why I am not willing to nerf Monaspas attack, armor, HP or attack buff mechanic.
However, there are still other problems to Monapsa that are totally worth the discussion.

1. GOLD COST

Why does Monaspa cost only 40 gold? Why are they cheaper than Steppe Lancers?
This is a big problem because even if you somehow manage to beat massed Monaspas with counter units (probably under Castle fire or High Ground Advantage), They can still continue making more monaspas for a very long time before they run out gold.
They kinda tried to address the issue by increasing training time and requirement for attack buff, but is doesn’t seem enough. I believe it’s fair to say that a powerful unit like this shouldn’t cost less gold. (plz forget about Leitis in this discussion)
I can’t determine the exact numbers but Monaspas should cost less food and more gold.

2. HP REGENERATION

Something I haven’t seen many people talk about, but after destroying counter units with Massed Monaspas, the surviving Monaspas can regenerate HP. Combine them with some newly trained Monaspas and now they are ready to destroy another group of counter units.
As I stated before, I understand not nerfing their attack, HP and armor but don’t you think that the HP regeneration is too much?
Same problem applies to Monaspas destroying Castle while getting hit by Castle fire and other units. They run away, regen HP, regroup with newly trained Monaspas and repeat.
I personally think that Monaspas destroying counter units and building, and Regenerating HP at the same time is too much. Monaspas shouldn’t regenerate HP.

3. OTHER CONCERNS ABOUT GEORGIANS

As long as Monaspas exists, Georgians Tech tree and their Fortified Church bonus will never be fully realized. Unique units don’t care about eco bonuses and discounts because their base cost can always be adjusted accordingly.
Does anybody know how good Georgian Cavaliers and Hussars are? How much their FortChurch bonus improve their tech tree options? As long as Monaspas aren’t balanced properly, we will never know.
Georgian Knight-line regenerating HP is completely overshadowed by Monaspas (even if Monaspas didn’t regen HP) Knight-line HP regen is also the reason why Georgians don’t get Paladins.
Not sure what to do about it. Maybe Knight-line HP regen is something they should give to another civ where it’s not overshadowed by Cavalry UU.
Cavalry Archers regenerating HP is a nice concept, but I would like to see something like this on another Cavalry Archer civilization instead of Georgians.
Plz stop giving every civ powerful early game. It’s okay for some civs to have solid-tier or low-tier early game. Maybe Georgians should start with Mule Cart but -50 wood. (still solid early game but not powerful)

MY BALANCE SUGGESTIONS

  • (elite) Monaspa cost changed: 65 food 40 gold → 40 food 65 gold
    (less food, more gold, numbers adjustable)

  • (elite) Monaspa movement speed reduced: 1.40 → 1.35 (optional)

  • EITHER: HP regeneration bonus only applies to Stable Units
    OR: HP regeneration bonus only applies to Scout Cavalry-line, Gain access to Paladin

  • Start with Mule Cart but -50 wood (optional)

Note:
If Monaspas still end up being overpowered after the changes, increase their cost.
If Monaspas ended up being underpowered, reduce their requirement of nearby units for attack buff.

If you’ve made it this far and read all, thank you :slight_smile:
What do you think about Monaspas? Do you agree with me, or you have your own ideas? Give Comments.

Some formatting edits made to post.

3 Likes
2

I agree that Georgians are just too strong now and tournament results back up this.
we need first:

  • Give them back some res penalty to slow down their stupid fast uptimes (-25w to not hurt them on nomad).
  • The fortified church economy is simply busted in the late game, would also nerf the boost from 10% to 7%.
  • Cavalry HP regeneration shouldn’t apply on feudal age, a civ that can age up very fast shouldn’t get scout bonuses like that.

As for Monaspas:

They must attack slower when unmassed to motivate the mix with Knights and higher numbers of them, as well higher gold cost and training time so players can’t just go full monaspa once a castle is up.

3

It’s hard to pass judgement on FortChurch bonus rn until Monaspas are balanced. Yes, they also contribute to Monaspas’ OPness but Unique units can always be balanced by increasing their cost.

Scout regenerating HP in Feudal is pretty unique but I understand the concern.

Attacking slower when unmassed is decent idea tho.

4

I would only try nerf Monaspas first.

And my idea would be to slightly reduce their HP.
I know that the biggest “imba” point rn is their Attack. But that’s also their speciality.

I would like to see what happens if we leave that but instead make them more of a “glass cannon” in compensation.

2 Likes
5

I don’t think any civ needs this many nerfs. In fact it’s generally a bad idea to apply multiple nerfs at once, otherwise you run the risk of overshooting, and then can’t tell which nerf was too much.

1 Like
6

They’re 60f, 45 gold. And they require a castle to produce (which makes production harder, which is a reason why UUs tend to be somewhat strong compared to other units)

One of the reasons why I liked the percentage based healing they had for a short time is that because Monaspas have lower hp, they got less from it than knights did. Perhaps they could change it to 10% of hp rather than the 15% it once was.
Georgians also have Azunari cavalry, which reduce the pop requirements of cavalry unit. (Which is another thing that would be OP with paladins)
And I do like that the Georgians (as a defensive and cavalry civilization) have the hp regen on their cavalry units. It encourages a playstyle where you run around with cavalry to raid, and meanwhile build up your base. Maybe occasionally switch out the raiding units so that they can regen.

Personally, I think giving Georgians -20f (equal to the food cost of the free mule cart) would be a fair adjustment. Georgians are strong but don’t need too much of a nerf

Another way Monaspa could be nerfed is giving them negative cavalry armor (similar to how rams have negative melee armor). This would cause them to take additional damage from anti-cavalry units (might not mean much against halbs, but camels and other anti-cavalry units would appreciate this).

Or if you want a spicier (and less serious and harder to implement) idea, have enemy camels count as -1 nearby knights/monaspas for the purposes of extra attack. That would make camels a better counter unit, but might make Georgians harder to balance (they’d be extra vulnerable to camel civs, but would remain strong against non-camel civs - and may make them worse in team games where you’re more likely be be facing a civ with camels)

7

But as I mentioned above, they destroy counter units and buildings, and this is something they might not wanna change but we’ll see. All I am saying is they should cost more gold (so they can’t spam Monaspas for longer) and reduce food cost to compensate.

I like it too, but not on Monapsas for reasons stated in original post.

8

Sometimes single nerfs do nothing, look at Khmer in 2020, they had to be nerfed MANY times, also at this poitn is time to start toning back the powercreep it was happening.

Isn’t just the Monaspa, Georgians also have top 3 Hussar spam (self-regeneration, less damage from hills and less pop space after UT), combine that with also top farming in Imperial is simply a broken combination (without even mentioning their wide late game options), same with Poles (especially before the nerfs) with their OP Winged Hussars.

9

Yeah but when you look at the stats Gerogians aren’t top in any of them.

They are strong, especially on high elo. But there are other “meta” civs like Mongols, Hindustanis, Persians or chinese which outshine them. Even civs like Franks, Romans, VIkings and Mayans these days on Arabia.

So the only real annoyance is indeed the Monaspa which is just way too good of a unit for it’s cost. But I wouldn’t target the Gold cost either - it’s actually similar to the ones of other Cav UUs. I like the idea of:

For me this can solve the issue of “it’s hard to find a counter” to the unit.

10

Well tell that to pros that made them top ban alongside Malay in Warlords, or how constantly picked were on the RBW Qualifiers, or to the perfomance in ShenAxie Cup. Also, the civs you mentioned do worse on many other maps, while Georgians are even insane on those maps as well, not without a reason Hera rated them at S+ tier for most maps.

11

The thing on the counter units isn’t really true, even fully massed Monaspas can’t kill Halberdiers/Heavy Camels faster than Paladin (only faster when both lack final armor) while fully upgraded Elite Leiciai can even go cost effectively vs them with 2 relics (though they are more balanced by costing more, training slower, and belonging to a civilization whose economy is slower).

12

I guess the Solution to Monaspas lie in either of these options. I would make Monaspas cost more gold.

Also, do you think Monaspas should regen HP?

13

Well there aren’t more Cavalry UUs that can recover HP, also if you nerf Monaspas in other ways the self regeneration isn’t even a problem.

19

Just change Georgians civ classification “Cavalry and Defensive Civilization” → “Cavalry and Offensive Civilization”. That will fix everything.

1 Like
20

45 gold

They’re lesser in terms of gold but anyways these two are not meant for the same purpose. Lancers are a timing advantage unit and made from stables. Monaspas aren’t a timing advantage unit, usually Georgian player does tc, churches and then transitions into them mid game. They need a castle. Even though you’ve mentioned to ignore Leitis, castle cavalry unique units are the correct comparison.

Just to remind, the OG Georgians which got -50 food at the start had 42% winrate (one of the bottom 10) for the first 2 months even though Monaspas were stronger compared to the current ones.
Based on the changes done to Lithuanians and Burgundians, it feels like the problem is not Monaspa but rather the Georgian bonuses for the early game, economic benefit and free regeneration.

I think Monaspas are problematic because of the rest of Georgian tech tree and church bonus. Lithuanian 150 → 100 food nerf for hybrid maps and Burgundian 50% → 33% discount nerfs prove how economy is the problem rather than the unique units themselves. Lets say Georgian didn’t get regeneration on scout line, and -50 wood like you mentioned, lower default work rate boosting range or rate for churches, I don’t think Monaspas themselves will be problematic.

I agree with this but first the existing eco powerhouses in the earlier stages should get nerfed according to their rest of the tech tree before or along with this change. Otherwise everyone will keep picking Mongols, Franks, Chinese (at higher elos), Turks for Arena, Spanish for Nomad and the new civs will bite the dust.

Doesn’t fit a mid game high dps low hp cavalry unique unit. This change can be good if the stats and special property of the unit is changed to something else to be a raiding specialist while not being vulnerable to conversions.

Another terrible change. Its a unit from castle and unit without range. Its not a conquistador or Mangudai. In fact those are the units whose speed should get reduced, especially the obnoxious conquistadors.

If the civ gets Paladin that regenerates, castle unit with 40 food 65 gold, 75/90 hp, unranged and same speed as knights is never going to be made. Absolutely no purpose for it whatsoever. 10 gold and 20 food and potentially 4 extra attack won’t be worth trading for 70 hitpoints and the requirement for several castles.

Quite the opposite. I think Scout cav line alone shouldn’t get the regeneration. Advantage in feudal age will be restricted to free mule cart.

This is probably the necessary change for a wide variety of maps.

In my opinion, 3 out of 5 of these are the changes that need to be made for Georgians:

  1. Start with -50 wood
  2. Knights and Monaspas regenerate 1 hp every 10 seconds in castle age (6 hp per min) and 1 hp every 5 seconds (12 hp per min) (Currently its 5, 10, 15 hp per min but for all cavalry class units) implying Scouts and CA don’t regenerate OR Regeneration is removed as a civ bonus and becomes part of Imperial age UT.
  3. Fortified churches cost 225 wood (+25) boost work rate in a 7 tile radius but can be increased with range upgrades (f letching,…)
  4. Lose blast furnace but Monaspas extra attack can go upto +5 for elite (still 1 lower damage than now even for 35+ Elite Monaspas)
  5. Minimum Monaspas needed for extra attack increased from 7 to 10 for non-elites, stays at 7 for elites.
1 Like
21

My only problem with your balance suggestions is that nerfing eco and removing blast furnace will make Georgians Monaspa-only civilization in Imperial Age; You either make Monaspas or you make nothing.

But fair enough I guess. My goal of balance suggestions was to increase cost of Monaspas and remove HP regen on it so that the Monaspas are balanced (obviously) and allow the civ to explore more of its tech tree besides Monaspas.
That’s why I suggested giving Paladin but remove HP regen on Knight-line, but maybe that’s not the greatest idea. I concede.

I stated in my original post that UUs don’t rely on eco bonuses or discounts that much because their base cost is easily adjustable. Generic Units like Knights, Hussars do depend on eco bonuses. That’s why civs like Khmer and Slavs have powerful Hussar spam, because of farming bonuses, not because they have a bonus specifically for Hussars.

Lithuanians and Burgundians were problematic as an entire civ, not just unique unit. That’s why their eco bonuses were nerfed.
Nerfing Eco bonuses will nerf everything about the civ (including Unique Unit) but nerfing Unique Unit only will nerf Unique Unit only.
My assumption is that the Monaspas are OP right now and the rest of Georgian TechTree is not fully realized yet. Let’s only nerf Monaspas first and then we’ll see how good their FortChurch bonus is. If Georgians still end up being OP because of their Cavaliers, Hussars and ESkirms, then their FortChurch bonus could use some adjustments.

That said, I liked your detailed reply :slight_smile: .

22

It’d be extremely difficult to play them in castle age because without the strong eco. The overhead for multiple castles plus the lower regeneration or more units per extra attack will make them very difficult to use in castle age. So then their only purpose will be in imp. And you’d still have hussar, cavalier, heavy CA with regeneration as an option, you can either keep that bonus or make it a part of UT. Anyways like I mentioned you can opt for any of the other 3, just throwing this route as one of the possibilities.

The thing about unique units is they need multiple castles to keep up production. So they need to be significantly better in some way over their generic alternative. If you nerf the unit directly, players will never opt for those units because it would be too much of an overhead and will take too much time to payback.

Exactly and if you nerf only the unique unit, everyone is going to play generic units. We already have several civs that play with generic units and whose unique units are rarely used.

They’d just become a hussar/CA civ or castle age knight spam civ. Additional churches payoff their cost in about 6-7 mins, so that should be quite good.

You’re welcome and its a great post discussing about the current patch. I’m always glad to participate in good discussions about civ and unit balances.

2 Likes
23

WI we take away their Husbandry? They can probably get Paladin as compensation. It may or may not make them too much like the Teutons though.

1 Like
24

Definitely a unique idea. Not sure how this will go though.

25

I don’t want Monaspas to become unusable, just balanced. Kinda like Keshiks when their food cost was increased. They are still great unit after nerf but not overbearing.
But I agree, I would prefer to see Monaspas from Georgians instead of Cavaliers + ESkirm combo.

Hmm… Decent idea. Make Georgians weaker in Castle Age to justify Strong Monaspas in Imperial.
The Gameplan against Georgians would be to beat them before they get to Monaspa deathball.
But this won’t solve the problem on defensive/closed maps (Arena, Hideout, Black/Rage Forest etc.), would it? or maybe Monaspas/Georgians are okay on closed maps?