Balance TKs, Shotels, Karambits, Jags, Lancers, Longswords, Missionaries, HCs, Gbetos, EAs, Ballista Eles, WEs, GCs, Condos, Genitours, Orjan Guns, Mamelukes, Turtles and Siege Towers NOW!

Age of Empires II: DE II - Discussion
22

bro, even if you were right, the way you’re saying the things will turn people against you, also saying the same thing over and over doesnt make it true… for example, elephants are amazing in team games, even if we hardly see them in 1v1, and even there, i love me my malay eles in 1v1

if you were to buff eles to make them more viable in 1v1, you would make tg ele spamming even worse…

yes a lot of these units could do with some buffing, and to be fair, adding +10hp to the missionaries is a very simple code change, with logically small impact on the game, so there are definitely some things they could buff without taking much resources away from the bigger issues like pathing

but there’s other units here that are coupled to a or s-tier factions which even if the unit is subpar will take a lot more care to balance properly without further over powering already stupid strong factions…

2 Likes
23

The only thing i see on every thread where you reply is “the game is not how i want it, it should be how i want it and if you don’t agree with me you are an idiot”.
You argue that making a unit viable (only god knows what you mean by viable at this point, but ok) doesn’t make a civ better even tho it does. Giving an already strong civ another options makes it stronger, and so it goes for every other civ. While i agree that some of these units are bad and should be reworked, it’s also not true that all the units you listed aren’t viable and that they should be buffed giving (in some case) an already strong civ another strong option.

Stop acting like you are the god and saviour of this game, because you ain’t. You are just an entitled and biased person who writes a lot on this forum and believes he understands the game better than anyone else, while he clearly doesn’t

7 Likes
24

I understand this, but over the years I have seen too many people use the typical “SITUATIONAL” keyword to justify these 21 UNIT LINES NOT BEING BALANCED. For all these years.

It’s just too much. Gotta speak the truth.

One can appease and talk cautiously and defensively.
One can divert attention to other “more important” issues, despite them being NOW ALREADY resolved (Matchmaking, Mappool, Ladder, etc).

One can gaslight anyone bringing up these unit balancing issues, by saying they’re crazy or narcissist

But that doesn’t change the truth about these 40+ units and 21 unit-lines.

1 Like
25

imo all of these can get simple buffs without breaking the game, even simple things like +5 hp for HC, -10 gold on the LS tech, tatar and cuman SL could get specific racial bonuses like +1PA etc

even if its low impact buffs, it would take almost no time to implement, and hardly make anything OP in comparison to things like briton arbs or aztec eco…

everything else on the list is a lot more effort to balance, possibly even SL, shotel and HC could be removed, as there are repurcusions like the mongol SL or turk Fast imperial

26

Yes you can keep on thinking like that

But remember,

One can appease and talk cautiously, politically and defensively.

One can divert attention to other “more important” issues, despite them being RESOLVED ALREADY (Matchmaking, Mappool, Ladder, civ balance etc).

One can gaslight anyone bringing up these unit balancing issues, by saying they are crazy or narcissist

You do you. Keep your opinions, But that doesn’t change the truth about these 40+ units and 21 unit-lines. Which clearly need balancing, over all these years.

27

I think devs should work on everything (balancing, pathing, matchmaking, glitches, map pool) all the time and should improve all 5 every month

2 Likes
28

So the game is 20 years old and has never put unit balance over civ balance. You bought de knowing this full well. Why should the game have to adjust to what you want?

29

this is false and has been disproven so many times over the course of rts in general. Not just aoe2. Just because you repeat a lie does not make it true.

2 Likes
32

I disagree. Civ balancing is way more important.
First we need to buff the weakest civs. Currently the balance is good in the sense that there are just 3-4 civs unplayable on land (Turks, Koreans, Italians, Portuguese) abandoned after the buffs of the other weak civs.

Then you may buff the non-uu units (HC, SL, condos), and after that the unused UUs.

Civ balance is the only balance priority: however I agree that some buffs to the weak civs may pass through a UU buff (like for Portuguese and Italians)…

10 Likes
33

completely agree with you. This game has never put unit balance first, it has always prioritized civilizations. Why change a working formula now?

Why after 20 years should the game change its design philosophy? Its clearly worked well, aoe2 is easily a top 5 all time rts game.

5 Likes
34

Keep your opinions, But that doesn’t change the truth about these 40+ units and 21 unit-lines.
Which have been clearly needing balancing over all these years.

I’m not sure who is the rigid one(which I am being accused of), who doesn’t acknowledge truths here.

“It is fine” you say
You appease and talk cautiously and defensively.

LOL to the jargon thrown around all the time to justify all these years of NOT BALANCING these 21 UNIT-LINES. “Situational”

Unique Unit production from the castle must be justified by them being good in most situations for every civilization.
And then there are these other non unique unit-lines which are not balanced AT ALL either. HCs, Lancers, Longswords, Siege Towers etc.

35

Let say like this. I agree that balancing under used units is good for improving game variety. You proposed to remove knights from SL, I tried to help you in this case, for example, by proposing for instance the imperial SL for cumans.

However there are things that need more balance than others. For instance buffing organ guns and genoese crossbowman is more important than buffing the aztec UU, since Aztecs are a top civ.

Italians and Portuguese do need a buff since they cannot be properly played. Aztecs can be played even without UU.

So, I am saying that we all agree that it is sad that we do not see TKs. But let us focus on what bring a larger improvement to the game :slight_smile:

1 Like
36

Obviously.
But EITHER of them should be BALANCED.
I don’t care about the order in which it is done. I CARE ABOUT IF IT IS DONE.
That is what matters.

Stop jumping to talking about “priorities” when there are people here who literally say these UNIT-LINES need not be balanced.

37

Someone seems mad and made a thread to express his frustration. Please calm down with your tone if you want a fruitful discussion about balacing certain units.

Talking about unit balance is for me also talking about civ balance. If you change certain units, then this will be a buff or nerf for certain civs. Buffing the Longswordsmen line, means a buff to all civs that have that unit availible and a nerf to all other civs. Just reaction like a mad man if someone brings up civ balance, makes no sense at all to me.

Also not all UU are meant to be the main part of the army in every game. Some civs just lean more towards to there UU then other civs. For me this is just fine. Every unit has some use, so they arent completely useless.

6 Likes
38

I will make an analysis tonight how would Unique Unit buffs change a civilization.

39

I want to point out that you should open a specific topic for the majority of the units. If we say: “make the samurais variable” , we should think if Japanese will remain balanced with a stronger UU.

Clearly no issues with buffing genoese xbow or organ guns, but for Jaguars it is difficult.

Btw, I am very favorable to game variety, so fine with adding more variety

40

they’re useful on arena so thats a bad idea

41

Well, then I’ve got good news for you. It very likely will be done - just not right now :smiley:
So you should be able to calm down now^^

I don’t think that’s true. People (me included) say civ balancing is more important. Nearly noone says unit balancing has no importance.

42

Teutonic Knights: Make them a bit cheaper and easier to mass Teutonic Knights kill Infantry and Cavalry. Against Cavalry Halbs are much more cost effective than TKs while Champions are much better cost effectively against “WEAKER” Infantry units: Eagles, Champions, Shotel Warriors, Halbs, Karambits… while Teutonic Knights only better against strong Champions, Samurais and Jaguar Warriors. Teutonic Knights could replace the free infantry armor if its needed balance wise if devs made them CHEAPER and much EASIER to mass, but I think they could work with free Infantry melee armor. Now even Hand Cannons are more cost effecitve against the “strong” Infantry units

Shotel Warriors: Maybe the most useless Infantry unit. They clearly need something. I’d change their price to cost LESS gold and a bit more food. They die easier against melee and ranged units than Champions, BUT they have mobility and better raiding potential. However Champions can destroy buildings quite easily and chase down Eagles much easier than the Militia-line. As a Unique Unit they have a nice creating time. I think they have too less identities: Eagles and Huskarls kill archers while they are good at raiding, because of their pierce armor and Goths have bonus damage against Buildings. With Shotels you can’t raid under Castles. Recently I beat Ethiopians because I just built 2 defensive Castles and Shotels died like flies.

Jaguar Warriors: I think they don’t need stat buff or a reduced food/gold cost. If developers buffed Infantry Jaguars would be much stronger

Karambits: Their main strength is that they need 0.5 population space. In Rise of the Rajas they got overnerfed and Forced Levy steals their viability (very cheap infantry spam). I think they should cost -5 each gold and food to compensate their nerfed stats.

Missionaries: Maybe the most useless unit in the game. They are Monks with more hitpoints, but weaker range and they can’t pick up relics. Either they need more range or they should have pick up ability

Flaming Camels: You need a Unique Tech for the most useless suicide unit for the game. WTF! They supposed to kill cavalry but they can’t do it cost effectively. Their anti cavalry damage should be increased by 10% and they should do half as much damage as a Petards against Buildings

Gbeto: I’ve seen many times pros complain about Gbeto’s Frame Delay. I think that is their only problem. Gbetos should have 8 Frame Delay and Elite Gbetos should have 6. They would be amazing to micro and they wouldn’t be op. Still more Frame Delay than Mangudais

Hand Cannoneer: I think their weak points are: Skirmishers wreck them easier than Arbs, they are really slow so Infantry units can reach them, u can’t mass them easily and Infantry is weak overall. They deserve +15 hitpoints. Skirmishers and Champions would need +2 hits to kill Hand Cannons. This could be a cheap upgrade in the Archery Range simply because Turks would be OP in early Imp. You can argue: but if it’s cheap Turks can research it easily. Devs could solve this problem: Chemistry would need like 30 seconds research time and this upgrade would need 100 seconds. OR JUST Turks should not have this upgrade

Organ Guns: They got overnerfed when devs gave them minimum range. I think they should remove Organ Gun’s minimum range. The problem with Organ Guns is that if units reach them it’s gg because Organs can’t kill them even they have high damage output. This could solve this problem + Squires + bigger gold discount

Genitours: tbh I think they are fine. They are skirmishers with good mobility and hitpoints. They are quite underrated. I think more people should try them. I’ve seen many times Nicov abuses this unit

Ballista Elephants: Useless lvl99. We don’t even see them in DM. They should cost less, their Elite should be researched in 20 seconds and Elite upgrade should cost -200F. Also I’d remove their negative armor class. They already recieve enough damage from Halbs. They have a single advantage over Scorpions: they can cut trees. Both are useless vs Onagers. I think this wouldn’t break the Khmer civilization and we still wouldn’t see them

War Elephants: Their Elite should cost -300 food and should be researched in 20 seconds. This wouldn’t break the Persian civilization and we still wouldn’t see them. Even mbl complained about their Elite Research time

Elephant Archers: The Elite research time makes zero sense here too. Their Elite should cost 700F/500G because it’s super expensive now and we are speaking about a trash tier unit

Steppe Lancers: They should resist to conversion. They would be the ultimate Siege+Monk push counter and I’d buff their to 2.1 and they should cost -10G. Knight would still dominate over them in combats while they would be a better raiding unit and a defensive unit against Hoang style players. This wouldn’t break the Mongols, Tatars and Cumans and Steppe Lancer would be worse than the Cuman era Steppe Lancers

Condotteiro: This unit makes zero sense since there is no point of making Hand Cannons against Italians and in Team Games nobody makes Infantry units and Hand Cannons. Condotteiri should be balanced for the Italians first. This unit needs a huge rework because the concept is wrong imo. They should cost more food, but much less gold because nobody wants to pay 35G for a single Infantry unit. I think Pavise should give them +1/2 armor because Condotteiri are trash against Archers. Even worse than Champions. I’d give them +4 damage against Eagles. They would be unique Eagle killer because of their mobility. I’d remove their Champions to compensate this

Genoese Crossbowman: A counter unit that takes forever to be created. In a 1v1 Paladins could be viable against Italians because you can’t mass them. I think they should be created as fast as Chu Ko Nus. Remember Italians don’t get Halbs

Siege Towers: They need a drastic cost decrease. I don’t have to expain that. I have created Siege Tower once in my aoe2 "carrier

Turtle Ships: They should be cheaper. You just can’t mass them. With an extended wood discount and -20G you still wouldn’t mass them easily but It would be more likely possible. I want to see an Italian/Viking contender. Also Panokseon should give them 25% speed boost. They still would be much slower than other ships but mobility is very important in this game and it would be a nice boost

Mamelukes: I think they deserve -5G/-10G +5F change. I feel that they die too easily to skirms but they are incredibly expensive and Zeolotry should be much cheaper because it gives weaker effect than Farimba while Farimba is much cheaper.

Cataphracts: They are insane but they are too expensive. Elite upgrade should cost -400F and Logistica should cost -200F. It would give Byztantines an unique style because they don’t have good Cavalry options currently

Longswordsman: Against Castle Age Eagles you would never make them while they supposed to counter them. Knights kill Eagles much easier than Longswords and Knights have mobility and better against everything (expect Halbs and Camels). I’d give Longswords +1 damage and +2 against Eagles. It would change Indians mostly.

2 Likes
44

And again, you act like the only things that mattere here is unit balance, while there are more pressuring problems like pathing, inability to click vills that are building in certain spots or the fact that sometimes units just decide to patrol into a random house and completely ignore the fight around them. Those things are an actual big problem that should be fixed faster than any of your fantasy balance problems