The units helped by the nerf vary wildly. Interestingly, some of the biggest winners are light infantry. I do wonder, what was the nerf supposed to change? An unexplored possibility is that this was all about the late game and scaling. What do you think?
Given they buffed late game uhlan card by 5% im guessing this change was intentional. Weakens germany significantly vs cav openings and helps russia as you said not get easy rolled.
I’m not saying “Germany’s bad now” nor complaining. I just found the set of units it changes points on to be interesting and was wondering if the new interactions were intentional or a happy accident made from a mindset of “Germany needs a nerf, let’s nerf Uhlans and see how it goes.”
If the change was made with the intention of helping Russia in a bad MU and toning Germany down against Cav starts I think it’s a great nerf that was well executed. However, certain other balance decisions over the years make me wonder if we’re projecting specific intentions onto something that might not have been given much thought.
Small nerfs like these are almost always calculated as such. They may not have considered all the units it did affect, but I’m sure the primary reason are somewhere in that list.
My guess is villagers with GC and Russia. Probably hussars as well, but the difference is smaller. Especially GC which is essentially a nerf across the board for all Germany match ups.
GC is only 75 food, so an even greater value for that small Investment
Spirit/eastern medicine is 150
Btw: do we have data on the matchups since last patch? I also wonder if the other russian updates (huntsmen, russo-american company, poruchik cost) helped their winrate
i can say we have data but its probably not matured (ie not enough games) to make much analysis off of yet; from what i can see nothing really has shifted for most civs this patch but usa. from the civ grid info