Balance's suggestions for the next patch

You can easily do it 21 pop, not 22. Try it for yourself, there’s no idle time too. You are underestimating how much wood income you have after the upgrades.
And I’m not making up numbers, I literally saw a 2k3 do the build 11.

This is simply not true 11. Again, you are underestimating the number of res you get. You won’t die because you’ll make the units. You are literally thinking of the old burgundians, this is their problem.

This is also not true. M@a archers, is still a very good build with them. Maybe you won’t find the res wheelbarrow right away, but you’ll easily fit horse collar and bow saw, which will still give you a way better eco than any other civ while doing it. The only reason why m@a archers is worse than scout is that you’ll have to make a tech switch in the direction of kts sooner rather than later

Once again, you are pretty wrong. You can do those builds, even at high elo because, as i said, the 21 pop scout with every eco up except heavy plow is taken by a 2k3 player.

You guys are talking like the optimal build for them has already being figured out. I already said it, this is not the moment where you can tell how strong this civ his. It has not passed enough time, and ranked are not a good indicator either, since according to that site goths are still a better civ on arabia than franks, while they clearly aren’t.

The only sure thing here is that someone is understimating how good this civ really is if they think they cannot make scout while squeezing in the eco upgrades in a 21 pop scrush

2 Likes

Yes for that same reason I would say they should be watched closely

1 Like

If the civ ends up being too overwhleming in either case ofc we will have to nerf it. But rn we shouldnt try to nerf anything else than Flemish Revolution

JUST AND IDEA!!!

When “balancing”, why not change a number from +5 to +4 instead of going directly to +3?
I see lots of ideas in here and many of them suggest changing stats by 2 or 3 points when they are currently only 5. That’s not a balance, that’s single shot, manual pump, dollar store, foam dart level of nerf. And also, Aztec win rate is at 49%, but that’s averaging in the months that they were higher, which also take up more of that graph if i recall, so overall it would seem like skipping the +4 mangled them too much. I see other ppl complaining about the monk techs +5hp “cauz rena”, and please don’t SKIP to +3hp like u did on the eco thing. NO REASON why you all cant “adjust” by a single point and see how it goes first. Same goes for you all and you giant list of ideas. Stop demanding major nerfs, like saying El Dorado needs to be dropped from +40 to +25? Are you kidding? They literally have no 0 cavalry, and 0 gunpowder. And also thier eco tech doesnt really apply as much in late game, exta vil is long gone, no more obsidian arrows… i guess they should just fight with 2 swords and onagers eh? At least they have FU halbs, jesus.

Also, why is everything needing to be nerfed or reduced or diluted? I suggest instead of nerfing civs, how about buff some of the ones that need it.

ALSO just because the stats say that they are winning or losing here or there doesn’t really mean a whole lot. Maybe theres one clan or something that only play that civ and they always win and it messes with the stats, hypothetical, but you get the idea. There really needs to be more emphasis put on making sure the ALL the civs truly have an identity. Too many times I’m trying to decide what to build and it feels like lots of techs and units buffs etc are just kinda randomly sprinkled around with honestly too much thought put into balancing everything.

btw does anyone play all techs option? for any reason? or is there any kind of reason to play it? i was thinking instead of that you could have an option for “historical mode” or possibly “competitive mode” and then just make an extra civ that has all units and techs available.

I know it might sound strange, but there might be too much focus on the ranked competitive scene. Remember, that’s really just a super specific basic game mode that garners almost ALL of the weight in making any of these changes. Not saying ranked is bad or should be neglected, on the contrary. Im saying the focus to any more changes or “balances” needs to be on buffing civs that don’t have good options. The entire “this civ should be nerfed because x” is probably because the civs those players are choosing just have weak options and nothing useful or interesting to use.

Seriously, if they keep nerfing everything you all might as well just play all techs mod because it’s going to get so watered down that’s exactly what it’s going to be.

Okay let’s say hypothetically this is true. yeah you have extra wood income. yeah you have wheelbarrow.

But the fact is you still invested 150 extra wood into upgrades, so even with your extra wood income, you will still need to chop around 700 just to break even on where your total wood is at. its really simple math. for example if you would have without upgrades chopped 100 wood, your opponent is instead getting 120 and you are getting 140. sounds great. you got 20 extra wood. but he also invested 150 less wood as well, so he’s still 130 wood ahead of you at that point. and that’s assuming generic and not a civ like celts, who would get 15% extra wood production for free, who has chopped 135 wood to your 140. or a civ like Burmese who get the wood upgrade for free, who is 200 wood ahead of you. or a civ like Franks who got the farm tech for free. or Japanese who spent half the wood on their resource camps. the list goes on. they also, since you grabbed wheelbarrow, are 3 villagers ahead of you. I want to see how this civ does in tournaments before we nerf the crap out of them. I’d still rather see the civ nerfed elsewhere not at the eco, like say at the stable tech discount or Flemish Revolution.

I’d really like to see this game you are referring too because i am sure there are weaknesses that could be exploited.

1 Like

FINALLY someone speaks some sense. Some of the “”"“balance”""" threads floating around in the forums are insane. (not singling out this thread, there’s others too)
E.g.

YES yes yes yes. It feels nice to hear that someone else is also annoyed with this.

Exactly what I have been saying to people too

yeah i agree with some of what equalizer wants, but for example, why buff cav archer build time? they are already strong as is.

Damn u guys are heated over this Burgundian thing. On that subject I thought it would be cooler to make the eco techs available 1 age early, cost the same, but allow the tc to upgrade to wheelbarrow or handcart while it is also aging up. I would prefer that instead of cheaper axe and such, and since those would cost the same, ud have to have the resources to get it so soon after spending most on teching up, so it wouldn’t be super powerful unless someone had the extra res, planned it out right, and remembered to do it.

other options:
eco techs cost 1/2, research %100 faster?
wheel and handcart are instant, but still cost?
wheel/cart are free but u have to research them still

dark age techs require no wood/gold … feudal techs require no wood?

I haven’t looked much into the Burgundian thing, might try some stuff out, let you know what i come up with.;

we had this before and NO ONE USED THE bonus because it just wasn’t cost effective to get anything because it was so expensive. and the civ was complete garbage

don’t know if you could feasibly find the extra food laying around to grab wheelbarrow while aging up.

i think that could be interesting for a new civ.

worse versions of the vikings bonus.

1 Like

Blockquote You
that’s the point, u need to grab a little extra food, etc, age up, and while aging save a little more res, thenclick it and hopefully have it done by the time ur at feudal or something close to that, it’s not perfect, gimme a sec to look into it
-Quote coding man

Well I saw Viper doing this in arabia invitational…
Except Viper made the ultimate greed and ONLY got all the eco upgrades, no military (!).
Of course if the opponent does nothing you get away with the greed. But we are talking over openings which need to work if your opponent puts pressure on you. And I don’t see this working. The build is just too tight and every little bit of pressire would kill it immediately.
This is the crux with burgs. Looks like they could do everything - but the truth is, they don’t get away with it if pressured. They just die if you are too greedy with gettin too many of th upgrades.

you’re talking about doing an insanely greedy opening - but the problem is that other civs will be aging up faster and able to apply pressure that requires a response. i don’t think it will work well at all.

1 Like

Everyone is whining about Burgundians having a 50% food reduction and an age earlier. This would have 15 threads about how broken no matter how crappy the military is

You can literally watch any good level streamer playing with burgundians, even tho there’s still no consensus on what the best build is atm. Some ven say 7 on sheep and bit axe right away, for example.
Twitch here’s one, that was his first time trying the new burgundians, he’s a 2k3 player. Obviously the build became better and better after he tried it off stream

Also, since it looked so impossbile to some of you, i just tried. Arrived up with a 21 pop scrush while walling with a whole lot 4 in game sec of idle (instead of 9:40 it was 9:44). i built the stable, made one vill and then did both bow saw and wheelbarrow. Along that i made 4 scouts and 1 spear while also full walling. It’s not as hard as you believe it is.

You can also hear Viper saying that atm is simply hard to punish Burgundians (2:33: 25), and that’s even after he played a super greedy game Twitch

1 Like

And yet viper picks burgs about at position 8 or so. Not even close to the best arabia civs.
What tells this to you.
If there is one player able to get away with greed, it’s viper. But even he doesn’t value burgs in the highest spots for arabia.

Why aren’t we talking about the other 7 civs picked before burgs to be nerfed?

And of course burgs will fall of in value because it’s pretty clear they need to nerf flemish revolution, it’s just too strong in arena.

let me ask you this though - if the civ is nerfed in its eco - do you think it should be compensated by a buff elsewhere? because that civ is going to fall off hard in the late game, especially in team game situations where they lack bloodlines.

i still want to see more data on it and not just go based on “feelings” and two weeks worth of games.

1 Like

yes, even tho it’s hard to find a way to buff them in other ways that won’t break everything else

it’s way too early to know how really good they ar in arabia. Again, no one ha sfigured out the optimal build order to play them. One thing that now is 100% certain is that they can compete against the top dogs on arabia. Yes, atm i think that the only really bad matchup they have are mayans.

The only civs that atm really needs a nerf are the chinese, that has to be hit in their eco somehow.

Nope. They still have really valuable options in 1v1 arabia. A paladin without bloodlines is still a paladin, and while it might sucks to end up in a tgs where your pocket has subotpimal palas in the late game, in 1v1 that upgrade for them is a no brainer. Let people figure out how to play them at their best, before telling they should not be nerfed. Hell, you were not believing they could do a 21 pop scout with eco upgrades, and yet they easily can.

Once again i do believe that this bonus is way too strong and it should be tweaked, but i also believe that time needs to pass before understanding how to make the best use out of that food discount

4 Likes

I feel like this is an overlooked point. The discount on the upgrade means it’s reasonably possible to grab this upgrade in a 1v1 that has gone late, while normally for other civs that have this upgrade, it is expensive enough to be a rather risky move.

(I’m not saying that Burgundians need a nerf though, for me it’s just simply too early to say anything about that. Seems like they have enough ‘holes’ in their tech tree to not become overwhelmingly strong in Imperial.)

From my personal gameplays I find that they are pretty strong in Castle Age thanks to the Cavalier upgrade. It is often a big enough power spike for me to get the gg before anyone hits Imp.

It’s the other way around. Some people here demand nerfs, but there is NO evidence yet Burgs need any nerfs. They just hypothetically make “OP builds” with them. But they don’t perform as OP as they are called.

To nerf a Civ you need evidence, and there is no evidence the civ need to be nerfed in arabia.

Only in Arena they seem to be too strong, and there are various videos in the net to show it’s flemish revolution what makes them so strong in this particular map.
Yes, this can and should be adressed. But there is NO EVIDENCE the eco discount would be too strong right now.
And opposed to your expectations, the winrate of burgs is constantly DROPPING the last week.

Maybe there will be figured out a better build for burgs. But until then, you can’t just claim there would be an op build and preventively demand a nerf. Only IF there is evidence such a build exist, you could argue in favor of a nerf.
The obligation to proof is by the accuser, not the defender.

1 Like

I literally saw Tatoh and Viper and Daut did a sick things with last Burgundians buff, they even researched all lumber camp and mill in both dark and feudal with wheelbarrow and some of them researched handcart, and no they weren’t punished as many people say, actually they won all these game with very smoothy eco and military too. In Arena too Burgudnians are sick and much better than Arabia. Their eco bonus need a nerf for sure.

1 Like