If you checked my post, I have been watched Burmese long time ago. What I can see is that dev just keep nerffing this fun civ with merely compensation. And now depriving the most unique part of this civ even Arambai has been got nerffed hard several time. It can’t break through stone wall in arena anymore, it takes double time to destruct tc. Imperial UT is the last only way to preserve its uniqueness.
When compared to Malian Imperial UT, it seems it is pretty unfair. However, people are still willing to invent the UT with same cost. I am 100% sure, it is effective on Arambai is the biggest selling point of this UT. The bonus on other cavalry is just the complimentary of this UT
It is hard to see it in arabi and arena anymore. What I ask for is to buff this civ a bit without destroying its speciality.
It is happy to see someone open a survey in reddit which i plan to do so. Let’s vote for your opinion.
Keep Manipur cavalry +5 vs archer
and change to
→ castle age UT and also lower the cost (400 food 200 gold) like Bulgarians Castle age UT
CA+6 vs building, Arambai +3 vs building
Cavalry are not included because cavalry attack with no delay, and this bonus are granted for free. It is too op if it is effective on cavalry too.
So if it is effective on Cavalry archer, it make a bit more sense because the cavalry archer line is deficient. They lack thumb ring , it act as a character like mini-arambai. So Burmese can choose to use CA and this ca carry a uniqueness like arambai but much easier to mass, +6vs building, I think is good enough when it is much higher when compared to the old saracens but with low accuracy, armor, reload time.
Also arambai got big nerf attack from 17 -->12
19–> 15, this compensation bonus to building is reasonable.
At least in old days, I use non-elite arambai to extinct paladin but now I can’t.
I would like to see manipil cav to be changed to +1 normal damage and +4 anti archer dmasge, totalling again a +5 against archer, so no change here but granting them +1 against everything else.
I would not put +2 because the tusk sword Elefant upgrade from Khemer and the Malian cav attack upgrade still need to be different enough.
Additionally the Elefant upgrade that gives +1/+2 currently could be returned down to +1/+1 and slightly increased trample damage (currently its 25%, long time ago it was 50% and op, now the tech could increase it back for Burmese to 35%.
One the one hand I don’t like overloading techs with multiple effects, but on the other hand Elefant rams suck and the +2 pierce armor must go
Switch the UTs so you can get extra dmg vs arch in castle age and give part of former manipur cav effect as a free civ bonus. Not the whole but like +2 or +3. Would still be a boring civ (as most of the time you’d go all in knights and maybe siege) and probably still not great but at least a bit better.
Keep it like currently and incorporate the previous Manipur Cavalry as a new civ bonus, with cavalry getting +1/+3/+5 attack vs buildings for Feudal/Castle/Imperial and Arambai getting +1/+3 in Castle/Imperial. That lets them handle archers with the UT, and still destroy bases with cav. Maybe nerf the UT to only +3 damage vs buildings though.
I would prefer the old Manipur cavalry with +6 vs building, then switch it to a castle UT, make parthian tactics effective on Arambai.
This is what I regard as a most prefect buff on Burmese. Also the most interesting way to play this civ.
One more special request, change the UT to all mounted unit, then that would be 100% prefect. Actually I really don’t care about the bonus on archer, the armor on eleghant, all I want is just to play UU if i play this civ, the bonus on building give me much much more fun.
Just make Manipur Cavalry the Castle Age UT so they can kill all those Xbows before they are turned into arbalests, and nobody ever uses Howdah in Castle age though, but t could kill the theme of Battle eles civ UTs all being researched in castle age.
+5 against Archer Is a lot. A FU hussar does 13 (vs 8) damage and a FU cavalier 18 (vs 13) against a FU arbalester (40hp). But after the latest arambais changes they are very good against Archer…
The problem with burmese (0.91%, the lowest playrate, aoestats) Is that no one want to play them because they are a very non versatile, hard to play civ with scarce eco bonus and military bonus on underused/situational unit (infantry, Elephant, nono) and also they have bad archery range. They were a clown civ on arena but other than that they are not considered. The best use for them is m@a into arambai in my opinion, more or less like mongols and spanish (i play a lot with burmese, 1300-1400 Elo 1vs1 RM)
I totally agree to these 3 points. I don’t know why someone just keep suggesting buffing eleghant armor is a big good buff to this civ. More attractive fast moving and cheap eleghant is out there, poeple still use BE situationally.
The infantry buff is great but only get advantage at early feudal and late imp.
Also +5 at bonus vs archer isn’t that great when compared to Bulgarians stirrups and malian farimba
Burmese are solid in team games as a pocket now. Their cavalier can shred archers and their halbs can come in very handy against franks pokets etc. The wood eco bonus is very nice. Moving that tech to castle age might be nice though.
I think the only way to make all rajas civs more viable is to make elephants cost 2 population but make them cheaper. It’s the best way to balance elephants for 1v1 vs TGs. All rajas civs have below average play rate and win rate overall and this would help. Also would see the rare war elephants/ballista elephants/elephant archers more often.
Something specifically for Burmese is to give +1 pierce armor for every relic up to +4 or allow monks to heal siege. Manipur cavalry comes in too late after Burmese is already dead.
Manipur Cavalry has to be changed to the castle age and get cheaper maybe, otherwise it would be too late. The crossbowmen could already kill the Burmese before hitting the imperial age.
On the other hand, the infantry attack bonus could be the bargaining chip to be changed into the another bonus, for example that cavalry and UU +1/+2/+3 attack against the buildings in the feudal/castle/imperial age. It’s a little bit ironic for me that the strongest halberdier belongs to the Burmese rather than other classic infantry civ.
Right, burmese were also good on arena before arambai Nerf… now they have small niche in which are at least decent both in open as in closed Maps…
Personally i like burmese for their UUs play, like Spanish and Mongols, but with DE and the introduction of Skirm bonus damage against conq and arambai both Spanish and Burmese have never had a compensation
I feel Burmese is the civ in the worst spot at the moment.
Can go monk+siege, which is a bit difficult due to monk micro required, in closed maps, but even halb+siege is somewhat lacking, as they miss both siege ram and siege onager. Cavalry is just average with nothing special about it, elephants are almost useless in 1v1. Arambai was nerfed into oblivion and the new Manipur tech imho comes into play too late to make a difference. If only Arambai at least benefitted from Parthian Tactics (which feels like a bad joke in Burmese tech tree).
For team games they have elephants but I’m not sure they can carry the civ alone.
Spanish isn’t really considered strong on arena anymore. Conqs got nerfed and probably more importantly since we have usually little lag on DE monk defense is rather easy.
The only map on which spanish is a top civ would be nomad. On arena I’d call them pretty average. But yeah turks are definitely top tier here and portuguese are pretty good at least (also on water maps).