I dont think it would make them better than vikings.
First upgrade cost 100 gold so they would save only 50. For the later upgrades, i agree it is more powerful. And byzantines have better fire galleys.
Italians discount is better (33% from both resources and also for techs besides upgrades)
If this change adds more variety in water maps, lets do it.
You would be buffing the 5th strongest civ on water, how can this add variety on water?
Because instead of havin 2 or 3 clearly dominant ones, there would be 3 or 4.
Is actualy 7th (Italians, Vikings, Portuguese, Japanese, Koreans, Malay are above).
I referred to viper tier list, one may agree or disagree, it was to use a “standard” point. But even if it would the 8th, out of 37, it wouldn’t add more variety on water.
In any case, is arguably, in my opinion are even 4th, considering how strong FS are nowdays.
Thema in reason why italians and portos are always used on water maps is because they are basically useless in any other maps. Vikings for example, you often see them on land maps too, and are now seen more rarely in water maps.
All the civ having knights have +2 armor but Malay. Civs with solid knights are bloodline civs.
It does to me. Being aggressive is in general much better. If your bonuses are not helpful in this direction, the civ tends to perform poorly… the majority of the bad civs misses an early aggressive bonus.
Here I perfectly agree. Also the knight line is better than the generic one vs archers in the late game if you research paladin. The problem is in castle age for me.
I still prefer by far bloodlines, but 25% cheaper unit upgrades would be very good and much better than house discounts imo. It really fits the adaptive game style of the civ. Does this really include navy and siege?
Siege or navy can be excluded if needed. It wouldnt be the first cov bonus that excluded them
Cheaper Houses are Dark Age bonus, what Byz needs desperatly. This would be also deffensive bonus (cheaper housewalling) and naval bonus (15 wood on each house mean few first Fishing Ships are discountet)
I think yes, should be included.
I do not really feel it as what they need. I mean, still better than nothing, but I would see several other options:
All of this comes later in the game. Byz are always behind in DA and FA. On land maps this is very important. On Hybrid is better, because they have Fish and can fight water with their stronger FG, but pure land open maps are very bad for them.
Byz are literaly the slowest Civ in the game.
In a pure FC maybe, but there are civs like Italians which are still very behind on Arabia…
Said that, I am very favorable to a byz buff.
Maybe putting the discount also on scouts instead of camels.
This depends on how much the feudal fights involve skyrms and spears
I the past I proposed a bonus for Italians (intended as open tech tree civ), saying that all units attack slightly faster (between 5 and 10%). This may work for byzantines as well. It kicks in in the first fights
Not sure about this. Bonuses in this type are too strong for Dark Age - there is reason why Japs bonus starts in Feudal. Also, remember about late game - faster fireing Onagers are hard to deal with, and Cataphract is already fastest attacking unit in the game without any upgrade.
If the value is small it means that you just win the fight with equal numbers, if the opponent has more he will win. In my opinion, if a civ has an open tech tree and misses a generalized eco bonus (as Chinese or malians) it should have some sort of generalized military bonus (like Sicilians).
This is easily fixed by removing the siege and tuning in a proper way the attack speed of catas. Both things would be unnecessary imo but still possible.
The bonus on houses and the discount unit upgrades still work, but I think the civ should get something helping more along all the stages of the game
I like the idea of houses being cheaper. It is a good little eco bonus that will help them a bit in Dark Age.
The bonus I always had in my mind that would be perfect for Byzantines is somewhat similar. It would be to let them start with some extra resources. I think +25 of each resource would fit perfectly. It has a lot of ingame variety.Just some examples: You could dock 1 villager earlier on hybrid/water maps, you could perform a drush a lot easier (especially premill drush) on open maps, or you could defend with a tower a still place a TC in Castle Age (Incas and Bulgarians can do the same already). This would also strengthen their identity as a defensive civ. Last but not least this would have a nice historical background since the Byzantines were the remnants of the Eastern Roman Empire which still had a lot of influence in the Dark Ages.
In my eyes Bloodlines surely wouldnt hurt them but it still would not make them a civ you would want to go for Knights with. So I don’t see it being very fitting for Byzantines. I think their military units, techs and bonuses are fine as they are.
25% cheaper scout is busted. Even if it is 20%, it will be border line OP.
Byz scouts suck and Berbers are fine with FU 20% cheaper hussar. I dont want Byzantines getting it but its not busted
And Magyars still manage to be mediocre with free forging and 15% cheaper bloodlines scouts as well, so if Byzantines end up broken it wont be because of this bonus on itself
25% cheaper scout in Feudal is completely busted. From Castle it will be okay as they don’t have BL.
BL is not that important for scout rush as you rarely research it in Feudal.
I agree, it is true that bloodlines is missing and that byzantines miss other early feudal bonuses.
But I would give another buff. Bloodlines or something else…
Having all 3 armor I meant.
So let’s make all civs identical, let’s give them the same bonuses and be done with it.
Again, this is nonsense. Just because the average civ goes in one direction, it doesn’t mean that with the right set of bonuses and tools another can’t overcome the general meta and go in the opposite direction.
What you may want to mean is that byz bring you out of you comfort zone, because it encourages you to play differently (which isn’t completely true, because they still have a ton of possibilities, just name one)
Lacking BL makes their knight rush below average yes, which I don’t think that it would be a problem anyway, since not all civs need to be strong on everything they do (next thing do you want franks to perform a good archer rush?) but knights are still a strong unit even without BL, and if you have the possibility to upgrade them in imp (with armor and line upgrades) are a perfectly viable choice.
Of course, you need to adjust you strategy for this, like adding some monks or camels to you knights armies, both with good bonuses. If you want to play a pure knight rush, play with franks, lithuanians or berbers.
If you think that the byz knights are either way too weak, go for xbows, a trash push, and monk+siege, cataphracts. Don’t tell me that byz doesn’t have options.
But even in castle age they do fine vs archers, if you have the +2. BL makes your knights tank 40 shots from xbows instead of 34, now for its price 6 shots more isn’t bad, but it’s not that big of a lose if you don’t have it.
BL is necessary against melee units, in particular other knights or pikes, since it’s about one shot more from a pike. But I already said, byz have other solutions to overcome the disadvantage in melee.
Cheaper trash, tankier buildings, free TW as you hit feudal…
Don’t tell that they don’t have feudal bonuses. Tell me that they are not conventional bonuses or that you don’t like them.
Also, wasn’t the title of the topic “Byzantine late game buff”, how is that all of a sudden we are discussing early game buffs…