Its okayish not great but not amazing. Its still with 1 TC only 1.5TC and 2TC 3 TC. Going 3TC only costs opponent 200 resources and they’re par with china
I am not of the idea of more villagers, it is op, many abbasid with 3TC cannot against a rush because all their food is invested in villagers and they do not have left for the army, it is a double-edged tool, it is not op
Im not exactly sure if I understood correctly, but you do understand if you go 2TC song you’re producing 3TC worth of villagers which is 150 food per cycle of villagers while abbasid makes them 50% cheaper. So you will always lose that race against abba.
Cost reduction for villagers is much better than training time.
yes, that’s why I put that example of abbasid because even though the villagers cost less, they do 3 tc but they still lose if they don’t lock up and defend well
Are you now comparing china 2TC song vs 3TC abba? Or are you talking about 1TC + Song vs 3TC abba or?!
It doesn’t matter spending on more villagers with more than one tc is not op, that’s the point
Have I said something about OP?
look min o:23 , so the price of the first dynasty is fine, change the subject
Yes, exactly this! i have posted the same thing in other threads (Note this thread was created months ago).
I have been experimenting how to use the civ bonuses in other ways and what i concluded is that the bonuses while good, scale poorly and don’t synergize.
China doesn’t outboom booming civs, song only gives an advantage on villager production if you do Song with 3TC vs opponent with 4 TC (roughly equivalent resources).
Another overlooked problem with dynasties is that because you can build 2 landmarks, they are designed to be worse than regular landmarks. For example imagine HRE building Reignitz AND Burgrave!! it would be insane. Now either the two landmarks are meh (Barbican+IA) or one is very strong an the other very weak (Astronomical Tower+IP), this makes even the price of one landmark overpriced (unless Astronomical Tower) yet you are supposed to make two of them.
Now, the real bonus of the Chinese (no dynasty needed) is building speed that enables quick aging up or tower rushing. Quick aging up is great, but to age up you need a lot of resources and the resource bonus is the IO which has its own problems.
IOs should help you gather resources very fast to age up faster except buying IOs slows down your inmediate aging time. On the other side, IOs benefit from having more villagers on a building yet having more villagers on a building reduces villager eficiency. And IOs in the late game gathering taxes are extremely ineficient unless you build you whole base centered around them.
Also related is the Chinese aggresion using 250% production speed from IOs, in paper it is insanely good but the reality is that it is limited to at most 4 buildings and it means giving up your economy bonus (which is what would allow boosted production). Comparing it to the Delhi or Mongol boosted production makes it obvious that is not on par. Even more, every civ can spend 150 resources(the IO price) to build a second production building achieving permament double production.
So what i think now is that the civ bonuses, while good, scale poorly and don’t synergize. I don’t mean that the civ should be streamlined or “simplified”, but the bonuses can be tweaked a little with this in mind and the civ would feel a lot better to play with or against.
3 Likes
At least someone gets what I said.
If we go to Song, we lose tang, if we go to yuan we lose song for example. Meanwhile every other civ gets 3x permanent bonuses from their landmarks. Like school of cavalry 20% reduction to training time and stables.
While I do agree that every chinese landmark outside of imperial has become long way. I actually like IP and I go IP every game because I hate the slow moving siege which is too easy to go around so I stopped making Clockwork. The great thing about IP is that it provides you vision around the location its build. Essentially when I play 2v2 it shows my quarter of map which is A LOT. In past it was worse because maps were bigger but with smaller maps its great.
Probably one of the simplest fix for dynasties would be allow china to keep old dynasty bonuses to some extend or even have some way to revert back to another. There is no flexibility. For a moment Id like to be in Yuan for movement speed and raiding but when actually wanting straight up fight I much rather have Ming.
2 Likes
because you mention that dynasties are lost, since pup dynasties are not exclusive
Eh? Not sure if I follow you but dynasty bonuses are lost when entering to new dynasty. Now Im talking about -35% villager production, 10% movement speed, 10% HP, nothing else not unique buildings or units.
I did not know that economic bonuses are lost, but you do not lose the zhuge nu truth
It used to be the way that you lose everything.
You had to build 3 villages during song and if they got destroyed u had no chance of replacing them. Also spirit way allowed unlocking already unlocked dynasty units.
But because dynasty units are meh and throw away trash and only useless unique building is granaries whats the point of even going for anything else than Song?
Well, Ming gives extra hp to all your units, so is not a bad buff… But very, very expensive
Song dynasty use to be too slow. Partly bc IOs took up precious song dynasty TC time. Now that we can make IO from IA we not only keep the TC pumping vils but it also removes IO (at least 2nd thru 4th) as representing TC villagers.
This means you legit get 20% increase drops at a location for only 150 resources, no TC idle time, no effective villager to calculate. Its now similar to how RUS gets 20% on wood by building a tower (but better bc no vil idle time buikding required for IOs).
Next let’s consider 2 things.
Firstly, Song isnt just 13s villagers queues. We shouldn’t forget the granary!! A stand alone granary of 12 farms is worth at minimum 13 farms around mills; when you consider you cant make half a mill you actually end up saving 25w and 1 villager going granary 12 farms as opposed to 2 mills 13 farms. Now that granaries are 100 wood cheaper!! The transition is almost twice as fast as before. This faster transition feeds into turtle base building 2TC song.
Secondly, only abbasid can go 3 TC vs 2TC song and beat you eco for eco. Everyone else has to pressure you feudal or FC, but with siege nerf I’m skeptical ram feudal will punish song 2Tc? So who gonna beat new china??
I have been testing some things, and making IO from the IA is a great change but to try things like fast castle you still need a IO before feudal. Granaries i have not get used to its new price, it still bothers me that they require a lot of space but the price reduction is another very good buff.
Still i don’t think China is an exceptional boomer civ, as you said Abbasid beats your eco and HRE still is faster. Its too soon to make any conclusions but still buffs to the early game are always welcome.
Yup this meta is so much fun. Build keeps behind walls and put towers wrongside to have them heal up your buildings and stuff and have trebs sniping any siege unit that comes close. If they happen to overwhelm your trebs then just throw some horses there and u win.
Culverins useless, springalds useless, bombards useless ftw trebs
And ofc the typical comment from one of the opponents after the game “chinese so op”
1 Like