I think Burmese should get “Heresy”. At least we will get one civilization with decent elephants.
Yes, I know they have 50% discount. And I think it’s ok. Elephants still weak against pikes. And even with “Heresy” monks are still not useless against slow moving units.
Or +0/10
Actually I fully agree with the need of an anti-archer buff
burmes were just buffed. u want them to become op??
With this you mean that the recent buff of +1 pierce armor to Elephants pushed them to the verge of being overpowered? 
Give Them imperial skirmisher upgrade
320 arbalester shots and +6 attack vs buildings=living ram
So yea is broken
A costly unit that still melts to halberdiers/onangers.
Battle Elephants are very hard to mass in 1v1 without trade.
I mean for TGs, In 1v1 eles are balanced, you mass Monks and halbs vs them eles are doomed.
But in TGs that is completely broken, especially in Arena/BF, you can’t go to halbs/Monks easily because your flanks help taking them down with archers and siege, Battle eles are naturally strong vs paladin and already tanky vs arrows, but archers still do ok as they can hit and run, with the +6 PA, they essentially can soak up all damage and force enemy flank to intensively micro with the burmese wishing the best of the luck, letting them prone to other attacks
Well +1 pa changed only dramatically only the number of arrows needed to civs that had FU arbalester (6+4 dmg, armor unimportant).
5+4 crossbows or 6+3 arbs already did 1 damage to 8 PA armor.
This leaves these civs brutally hit by that.
aztecs
bohemians
britons
byzantines
chinese
ethiopians
incas
italians
japanese
khmer
koreans
magyars
malay
mayans
mongols
poles
portuguese
saracens
sicilians
vietnamese
vikings
Now, speaking of damage alone (and of course thumb ring), Byzantines, Chinese, Ethiopians, Japanese, Koreans, Magyars, Mongols, Poles, Saracens, Vietnamese have FU (7+4) Heavy cavalry archers (or better units), not really an option maybe in 1v1, but in team games why not.
Britons and Italians have stronger foot archers (compared to arbalesters). Khmer and Malay have their own elephants, one is stronger, the other much, much cheaper and without the need of any castle or UT.
Incas have kamayuk which are better than halbs in big melee fights, Bohemians have super halbs that do 80+ damage with each strike.
Portuguese have FU hand cannoneer with even better accuracy which can, somehow fill the role of the arbs, if halberdiers alone are not enough.
This leaves out only 4 civs: aztecs, mayans, sicilians and vikings, 2 of them have only pikes, Vikings, Sicilians and Mayans have heavy scorpions though, and Aztecs have FU Siege onager.
Probably the most screwed are Aztecs, lacking heavy scorpions, heavy cav archers, halbs and having to rely on siege onagers alone, and maybe monks if the number of elephants are not that huge.
The real question is: what did the other civs that lacked arbs or bracer do against burmese battle elephants before? Did they all just miserably die in team games when burmese elephants popped out?
Discussion: old manipur cavarly effect was more "usefull"to gave an identity to the civ… with cavarly effective against Building (but lacking siete rams) and a good infantry they had a good late composition of mixed infantry and Cavarly (Elephant or cavalier + plus Champions needing Gold and Halhs+hussar as trash)…
Also arambais were nearly a must go unit for them while now they are more situational…
Possible changes for next PUP to keep in consideration (not all obviusly):
What do i think?
only you can know
Keep the new effect of Manipur since they need it indeed. Just switch it into the Castle age.
If people want the siege cavalry back, the infantry +1/+2/+3 attack bonus could be changed into the cavalry and Arambai +1/+2/+3 attack against buildings. The best Halberdier can be leaved for other classic infantry civs.
I guess you know the team bonus of the Persians.