Posted this on reddit. Would also like to discuss it here.
I want to raise some points regarding the civ bonuses of the RUS and the HRE. With this post I hope to show why the HRE is lacking inspiration. My intention is not to proof that the RUS is OP by any means. I also want to question some game balance decisions.
I picked the RUS as a comparison, because I think the civilisation is a prime example for good game design.
There are a few things which do not make much sense to me in regards to balance and distribution of unique techs and units. Please note that the following points do not take historic accuracy into consideration:
-
In feudal and the dark age the only real defensive structures you have are palisades and outposts. I find it odd that both of those structures are plain vanilla for the HRE although they are supposed to be a defensive civ. Compare that to the RUS who have improved palisades and an improved tower and more importantly towers with more capacity for vills while also having acess to the early knight. Shouldnât civs with immobile armies in feudal who are vulnerable to early knight raids get high capacity towers instead? Cheaper emplacement costs as well as a (very boring) auto repair function seem like a cheap way to justify the âdefensiveâ keyword of the HRE.
-
In regards to unique techs and unique units the HRE are lacking a lot of diversity and to be blunt âcool techsâ for their civ apart from the M@A techs (which are buggy). The Landsknecht is pretty expensive for how squishy it is, the unique techs regarding defensive bonuses and the monastery techs lack inspiration and seem less useful compared to other unique techs from other civs (abbasid longer spear range, french cavalry techs as well as french arbalests, Delhi being Delhi). I get that the HRE is supposed to have a slow moving army but a little bit of love to any other unit or a little bit of variety is much needed. Now comming to the RUS they get the best springals in the game, cavalry archers, early knights (the strongest unit in the game besides springalds), a unique water approach, warrior monks and to top it all off the Streltsy. I am a little bit confused why the RUS have the unique gunpowder unit although it would fit perfectly into the HRE concept of having a slow moving infantry army and would provide the HRE with some much needed diversity. The RUS seem well rounded in every age (powerful early knigths as well as defensive tools in feudal, strong castle age springalds and a lategame deathball win condition with the Streltsys) while the HRE lacks inspiration in imp and feudal. I want to make it clear here that that I donât want the RUS to loose the Streltsy or anything like that. My intention here is just to show a bad example and a good one regarding civ design.
-
The HRE are also supposed to be a religous civ and they do have a strong eco bonus with their prelates. However when it comes to the synergies with military units the warrior monk is not only way easier to use (it doesnât slow down the whole army, it is a-cklickable and wololos are much easier to set up) but also has the better buff for land units. The RUS also have the best potential for collecting relics which are vital for the HRE. My point here is that the RUS approach to religion ingame seems better thought out and more colorful although I think in this particular case the matchup seems also unbalanced.
-
One thing I see mentioned a lot is that the HRE eco is supposed to be very good. What many people tend to forget though is that every other civ also has ways to boost their eco and I would argue cooler ways too. The RUS have the bounty system which not only allows them to stay off gold in the dark age but boosts their eco passively as well by a great margin. When it comes to gold I was pretty hyped about the Regnitz Cathedral and the 200% relic bonus. I thought it was a great way to spice up the early castle age and that it would create a cool dynamic of little skirmishes for map control. I still think it is a great concept, however, over the time I saw that almost every civ has a way to boost their gold income in some way making HRE not as unique as I originally thought. Comparing the passive gold income of the hunting cabins with that, how easy they are to set up as well as the bounty system and the free gold in dark age it seems the RUS have a way more colorful approach to their economic bonuses than the HRE. The HRE bonus might be stronger in total but they are also harder to use/access.
Is it just me or does the HRE feel like a rushed faction that had to be done fast before the release? This would also explain why they have a hidden carry capacity increase on their villagers which is not mentioned anywhere.
I would love to hear other opinions about that.