Since some consider the Incas weak. What would you do to buff them? Since their villagers don’t get affected by blacksmith upgrades until castle age.
A very simple buff would be simply giving them two Lamas at the start of the game. This will act somewhat like the lithuanians bonus with plus 150 food start. If not slightly better.
Just revert the change and give them there bonus in feudal age back.
I think everyone (low elo) is sick of tower rushing. Which very powerful in low elo games. They can still rush fairly well with cheaper towers.
The tower rush strat is already nerfed by DE. No need to nerf it even further. Most people at lower elo that tower rush are pretty bad in tower rushing. It isnt powerful at all. If i play against a tower rusher, then i am pretty sure i will win most of those games.
Why to buff them? Devs not took away the bonus, just delayed it until castle age…
That is essentially nearly the same thing.
and yet the civ isn’t trash, despite your claims that it would be trash without trushes.
I said that it would be OK, not the worst when getting it on random, but no reason to ever pick. Anyway, I’m not going to waste time arguing about nothing,
you sure about that? “Completely remove the civ from the equation” sounds like you surely think they will be trash to me.
Eh, they already have a ton of bonus going on for their tower rush, I think removing the villager bonus from the civ kind of makes sense
I take no responsibility for the ability to misinterpret my words (but for clarify: the point was the there is no point to actually pick the civ, i.e. effectively removed from the equation)
and yet they are already proving to be stronger then people thought they were - that alone shows why they should be picked. people have underestimated their non tower rushing strategies because trushing is so strong.
maybe, but the playerbase disagrees with you, it gets picked ~1% of the time, so you can keep telling whatever you want about how good it is to pick them, almost no one picks the civ, and that’s that.
Maybe once rhe playerbase sees that they still have a solid winrate yhry will realize there is more then one reason to play incas
The fact a civ is viable does not mean it’s fine. For 95% people there is no reason to pick Incas now as almost everything Incas can do, another civ can do it better, or with a much simpler game plan. This just adds another civ to the embarrassing list of civs that you hope never rolling when going random: Italian & Portuguese & Malay (water civs), Indians (RIP Imp camel), Burmese (RIP Arambai).
By removing the main traits of certain civs for (dubious) balance reasons we have ended up in a state where now 5-10 civs are at the bottom stat-wise with extremely boring game plan and absolutely no incentive to play them.
Compare the pickrate with civs like Khmer, Cumans, Turks, these 3 show poor stats as well but still have okay pickrate because at least these civs have clear things that make them unique.
Not every civ should be excelent at something. Some people like to play versatile civs without obvious strength. Italians, Portugese, Magyars, Incas are exactly this type of civs on land maps.
That’s just not how the game works currently. Versatile civs with no further bonuses tend to all hang out in the bottom tier civs. The few versatile civs that are strong aren’t strong because they are versatile, but because of sick eco bonuses.
You’re mixing game and competition. Game means fun. Fun doesn’t care about win rate or if civ top or bottom. Yes, weak civ means a bit lower mmr. Don’t care if i like to play it.
People are different. And have different ways to enjoy game.
Versatile civs though weaker provides some new experience. And that’s great.
Well, sure. But most people don’t like to play with a civ that is simply an obsolete version of another civ.
Then your argument doesn’t hold because the old Incas were more fun before this change, seeing that their pickrate dropped by >2x.
Define “versatile”. Every top civ has at least 2 different main units (eg. Franks have knights and TAs, Mayans have archers and Eagles) with access to several FU units on the side, and sick eco bonuses that would make even some suboptimal strats viable.
If you want a civ that can go scouts/archers/xbows/knights depending on the situation, well Mongols can do that, while also having better eco bonus than the civs you mentioned, and the additional options to go for Mangudai, Hussars, Siege.