Why do you think that 11 banks of 3.25c/s each does not compensate for 34 villagers ?
Is it that oppressive after the first battle ? Haudenosaunee habe to choose between 25 pop and other danses.
China also have +20 pop, are their units that much weaker that it doesnt matter for them ?
Would it be fine to “just” increase the shipment cost ?
You are asking for a lot here.
Why do you need a 1 pop skirm that badly ? If you really do, Swede is probably not your playstyle
Why do you need a 2 pop lansknecht ? If so, why don’t civs like British, India, Ottomans, Haudenosaune, USA, etc need an halberdier equivalent unit as well ?
If you want to make Swedes that much more similar to other civs, why arent you advocating for removing the age 4 card to decrease artillery pop by 1 ?
Not that OP when they need to send wood crates and keep your castles to not lose momentum
Lol, Im for a nerf, their eco plus more pop become them very strong (mmm similar to Japan)
Not a fan of their accesibility to that amount of new units, they have a great eco that is compensated with 2/3 pop units
They are far from OPness, not effective against skirmishers. A wall just disable any oportunity go aztecs. 6 pop mortars are unfair for same stats.
They shouldnt got healers buff at the plaza, they have arsenal upgrades and tepees. Healers dancing is enough, not the buff card.
About Hauds I would just remove canon pop reduction.
They dont need skirmishers, that role is for leather canons.
If caroleans are counters of heavy cavalry at range, hakkas should be counters to light cav at melee.
This would make them unique.
2 pop landknechts would be OP. The church tech and special attack should be remove then. Maybe train time too.
Just to let you know, this post triggered me and im really trying to turn a corner into being a better human. So im gonna pretend I never saw it and do some breathing excerises.
i am quiet rusty so i will somewhat base my opinion on a mixture of this and my own knowledge of the game.
ive never seen anyone think this is broken, its a good card but among the best players some skip this card.
that is way too much eco for the dutch.
so british is OP but france somehow isnt? spain and germany also are at least as good as british.
they are chronically towards the lower end of civs, usually stated as THE reason the tournament community only wants to play Andes.
Russia is a fort and cavalry civ, NOT an infantry civ. i generally despise the idea of buffing the weak aspects of civs. they have some good match ups and some bad ones, i think they are rather balanced.
i think ATM they are considered pretty busted, esp. since a lot of the anti inf civs got nerfed.
i agree
no. part of the civs identity is they dont have skirmishers, this goes back to the russia argument: factions should not be made generic, even for the sake of balance.
but haudenosaunee now are reaally strong, this 25 extra vills allow them have the biggest economy of the game, his units arent weak, the mantelets and the spam of light cannons are really dificult to counter.
The Advanced Lombards card should be made an Age III tech and the Usury card should make the Lombards produce a constant gold investment.
The Papal Arsenal card should be an Age III Tech and at the same time it should reduce the arrival time of Papal shipments by -35%
With these changes I think Italy will be much more competitive both economically and militarily.
That’s why I want Papal Arsenal to be an accessible technology for the Basilica in Age 3, because that way it frees up deck space for us while also improving and making it easier to access Papal units.
Regarding a potential new factory for Italy, I think the changes I add would make the lombards a proper equivalent, but if it’s the papal bombard that bothers you, I think the Venetian Arsenal card should affect the production of the papal bombard.
One thing I’d like to propose is that the Papal Arsenal also give priests the deflection ability.
PS: With regard to the usury card, what I want this card to do is produce an amount of gold directly in the investment fund, perhaps 2.0 gold for each lombard.
but the papal arsenal now increases the speed of Papal shipments by 33%. Is extremely difficult to see papal units in treaty games, for example, I saw Schiavone only two times since Italy was released, his train mechanics made them almost useless for that modality of the game, maybe a way to train them in limited numbers should work, those units are really good and could compensate to some extent the military weakness of Italy in treaty. The Lombard buff sounds nice to me, but I think that civ really needs a second factory.
is treaty, if u use the factory to make papal bombards u get drained so hard and papal bombards are awful, don’t worth it to make them. literally, they get destroyed so fast by culverins because of their low velocity. The changes you propose are not enough to make Italy playable in that modality. The army and economy are still weak, and the papal units are useless with that train mechanics.
That thing about making priests made me laugh, apart from the Spanish missionaries and the Ethiopian abunes nobody uses priests, literally, you lose soldiers so fast that it’s not worth healing them. Also, how much would a priest with the deflection ability last, the truth is that it only occupies a population space that could be used in another way. The Lombards do not make up much for the absence of the second factory, besides that Italy has too expensive units.
What ? Does the villager limit akso increae by 25 ? not only the military population ?!? I didnt know, I have to try that !
Anyways, the German probably still get a better economy who got way better eco upgrades, 2 factories, and up to 138 pop of villagers if you want. Haudenosaunee food eco might is only better if they can make use of there sheep cards.
The Haudenosaunee skirms, mantelets, and light cannons are great, but that’s it. They got subpar dragoons, and wood costing hussars and musketeers, and no pike/halberdier.
According to an above post, the treaty community do not see them as OP, albeit strong indeed. I wouldnd mind Haudenosaunee being a strong treaty civ due to their more limited options and wood problem. Contrary to incas and indians, they don’t have good wood shipments, and contrary to europeans/china/japan, they have no factory. And they must get by with their longer lasting wood.
yeah, haudenosaunee, that shipment of 10 dragoons arrives fast and cost food, are instant units. But the meta of haudenosaunee is always with cowing. Now they are one of the most broken civs.
Is the Dutch economy really bad in treaty? I had always thought that the Dutch were good at treaty.
I also think that wanderlust should be modified so that it doesn’t grow hp infinitely.
ERKs are arguably the best dragon type unit in the game. but the Aztec army is not so powerful in treaty. If the ERKs are nerfed, it would be fair that they also receive some military improvements.
I am not sure that the weakness of the Russian infantry is a problem in treaty; they are cheap and of instant production.
maybe weakening the aura of the daymios and the shogun would be fine.
Mexico is one of the best civilizations in treaty, what changes do you propose? perhaps the chinacos and the the flag should be weakened.
I also think that the mechanics of the holcan lancers should be modified so that their population does not grow indefinitely.
I think that Russia is an infantry civilization; their infantry units are weak but also quite efficient. I don’t think their infantry should be strengthened, just maybe the streeltzi.
