From what I’ve seen of people playing pup last night the maltese xbow no longer beats cav efficiently.
Here are their new maxed out stats:
2 Shotels have 56.25dps vs infantry and 45dps vs everything else while Oromo has 52.8dps vs everything.
2 Shotels have 860.2 ranged health while an Oromo has 978.9.
If you’re fighting heavy infantry Shotels are the better pick (but you should probably use Neftenyas anyways), but I’d say Oromos are the better pick in every other matchup. But they’re also more expensive so it makes sense.
So it’s a heavy nerf to all light infantry thereby being a big buff to all cavalry.
To get critical mass with xbows as Malta isn’t easy, and they weren’t overpowered in any way to begin with due to their economy being slow.
I had expected them to have eggs linked with AOE2 and update some AOE3 versions of AOE2 campaign
Such an uber lame strategy, I’m so glad they nerfed it. Units are supposed to have counters, they fixed a lot of that in this patch- Gatlings don’t counter cav anymore and light infantry get countered by cav like they are supposed to. Maybe now Malta players will use all of the other super cool Malta units which no one other than myself ever seems to use (except people do seem to use the fixed gun). I can’t remember ever seeing anyone other than myself even build hospitaliers.
It would take a lot of work to do campaigns like that in AoE3…also Moctezuma’s campaign, is narrated by Cuauhtemoc, Aztec leader in AoE 3, that is, finish that campaign and automatically start AoE 3…Pachacuti and Sforza, despite occurring in the fifteenth century, they are purely medieval campaigns; so they don’t fit with AoE 3…Babur fits in that he is the creator of the Mughal Empire (which would be the Indians of AoE 3), while in AoE 3 we already have an Indian campaign, symbolizing the fall of the Mughal Empire in the midst of the Sepoy Rebellion of 1857 and a campaign by Francisco de Almeida is not so necessary, since
that we have the two historical battles with the Portuguese…
this is not a right comprasion, most units have more bonus against cav and lower bonus against shock infantry.
Sforza can refer to the historical map of the Italian war, set the age limit to limit the era to the fortress era, let people use the shield crossbow to fight, and add some map elements of the Italian war. These two events are closely related;
Pachacuti is the civil war of the Inca civilization. It can be used directly by removing the elements of cavalry and artillery, and adding some units of Central and South American aborigines and Aztec to enrich the forces of both sides
Yes, but Sforza predates the Italian wars… Sforza is from the 1440s-1450s and the Italian wars are 50 years later… what Sforza achieved was a period of peace in Italy in 1452, which was only broken when the French invaded Italy in 1494 starting the Italian wars and giving rise to the pre-modern Italian period…with Pachacuti this is even more pronounced…with Pachacuti the Inca Empire began in 1438, which would fall a century later, in 1532, when was conquered by Pizarro… what AoE 3 would lack would be an Inca campaign showing this, for example you play with Huascar fighting against Atahualpa, until the latter is captured by Pizarro (whose skin you have in the scenario editor) and then you start to fight against the Spanish until you flee Cusco and Lima towards Vilcabamba in 1540…
In fact, sforza is the precursor of the new era in Italy. As a story of the beginning of a European campaign, it is quite suitable. As for Pachacuti, if the official is willing to make another Inca campaign, it is also good. If not, it is also an available option
Of course, what AoE 3 lacks are campaigns that connect with those of AoE 2…Pavia, for example, as a historical battle in 1525 that connects with Sforza and the battle of the Maule River as a historical battle in 1485 that connects with Pachacuti…
As a player with 1100 elo ,I think the -20% nerf for light infantry units against heavy cavary is bad for some civ such as the Netherlands.Should I use hussar fight against heavy cavalry and heavy infantry in age 2?
Well skirms aren’t supposed to be good against heavy cavalry. So as the Dutch you will need to build Ruyters, halberdiers, or possibly pikemen early game to fight heavy cavalry. Heavy infantry you will want to still build skirms until you can age up and get artillery.
In fact the heavy cavalry devastates the light infantry (that is, skirmishers)…
You can check out competitive players stream, Ethiopia has around 100% win ratio now, brit is far from being playable, India has multiple balance issues and same as the all other changes listed here, approved by more than 30 competitive players together, hopefully these clear game breaking balance changes will be taken into consideration again.
As an experienced player, I think beginning 100f nerfed, manor increase to 140w, lb deduct 1 attack, and remove 3 vils card are too much, especially 3 vils card, this will make British player stay in a passive situation, will be afraid opponent hard rush too much.
Compared to passive type civ Itlay, be able to continuously train army and age up just stay at home without map control, still can defeat enemy, I don’t know why Italy can be buffed in next patch, Malta also doesn’t have obviously nerf, is due to DLC?
Brit has been nerfed from many aspects since DE came out, despite not having any game breaking units or having unit counter system breaking stuffs, while as you also add, italy, malta and all those civilisations have clear balance issues either getting buffed or not getting enough change to be in a balanced spot.
Brits were probably nerfed because people whined that they were OP. Even though they aren’t
There is not one competitive top player that agrees with how many changes brit gets at once, a civ that almost had no balance issues and being played around macro management in a balanced way since 15+ years is getting heaviliy changed is a lot.
Where did I say anything about top competitive players? Usually more casual player i think