Concepts: Armenians and Georgians

Age of Empires II: DE II - Discussion
1

I don’t necessarily have a very clear historical background to the designs, but want to emphasize their civilizational identity and possible strategies. It might be a little unbalanced, but hopefully it will inspire community creativity.

Edited: Some modifications were made as suggested.

Armenians

Caucasus aggressive civilization

Mainly based on Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia. The Crusaders employed Armenian siege engineers throughout their campaigns, so I want them to be aggressive, like a sharp blade for the Crusaders, to help them take Muslim bases. They will be good at Man-at-arms rush at early Feudal age, and at Pikeman-monk-siege rush at Castle age, and also be decent at Imperial age.

Civ bonuses:

  • Monasteries can fast heal nearby units one by one. (Inspired by @Apocalypso4826.)
  • Free infantry armor upgrades.
  • Monks regain faith 25% faster.
  • Siege weapons (include Trebuchets) and Petards train 66% faster.

Team Bonus: Mounted units can be garrisoned in TCs, Towers, Rams and Siege Towers.
Wonders: Etchmiadzin Cathedral

UU: Maceman (50F 40G)
Ram-like Melee infantry, good at siege, with trample damage and high armor, but slightly slower movement.
The maces are the most important traditional weapon of the Armenians. However, the armor breaking feature already exists, and I’m trying to give them a new one.

  • HP: 50 → 65
  • Attack: 10 → 12, +8 vs Eagles, +32 → +50 vs Buildings, +20 → +30 vs Siege weapons
  • Rate of Fire: 2.03
  • Armor: 4/3 → 8/4
  • Speed: 0.85
  • LoS: 4
  • Upgrade cost: 800F 700G, 35 seconds

Castle UT: “Ayrudzi” (400F 400G)
Knights, Cavaliers and Paladins +1 attack vs cavalry and +8 attack vs camel units.
Armenian heavy cavalry will be more survivable against pagan cavalry and especially camels.

Imperial UT: ''Havedic Machines" (800F 450G)
The cost of Siege Towers and Rams are changed to just 200 wood; Scorpions have the ballistic effect.
Havedic was an Armenian siege engineer who designed the machines used to attack Tyre in 1124.

Tech Tree:

  • Economy: no Two-Man Saw and Guilds.
  • Blacksmith: no Bracer.
  • Castle: no Hoardings.
  • Barrack: full.
  • Stable: No Heavy Camel and Lancer line.
  • Archery Range: full.
  • Siege workshop: no Siege Ram.
  • Monastery: no Illumination.
  • University: no Keep, Bombard Tower and Architecture.
  • Dock: no Cannon Galleon line and Shipwright.

Georgians

Caucasus defensive civilization

Refer to the design in CIV6. Georgians had resisted numerous attacks by Muslims. Take advantage of your defenses in the early game and use the powerful units to fight back in the late game, or actively use your towers and castles to control the map.

Civ bonuses:

  • TCs have the ballistic effect when firing arrows.
  • Fortifications are built 33% faster, Or Watch Tower line fire 33% faster. (I’m not sure.)
  • Buildings absorb 50% of all incoming bonus damage.
  • Free Fortified Wall upgrade.
  • Techs (excluding advancing ages, castle techs and monastery techs) cost -50% gold.

Team bonus: Outposts, Houses, Palisade Walls and Stone Walls +3 LoS.
Wonders: Svetitskhoveli Cathedral or Gelati Monastery

UU: Khevsur or Monaspa (70F 30G)
Swordsman who does +100% damage when attacking from higher elevations, and ignores the +25% damage when being attacked at lower elevations. When they are not in combat, enemy buildings and units need to be within 4 tiles to reveal them.
The warriors from Georgia’s Khevsureti territory maintained their traditions for countless generations. These fierce Georgians dressed in chainmail and carried swords, axes, and small, black bucklers adorned with crosses for nighttime raids—due to the shield’s color, the warriors were practically invisible in the moonlight.

  • HP: 70 → 85
  • Attack: 8 → 10, +5 vs Eagles, +5 vs Siege weapons, +5 to Buildings
  • Rate of Fire: 2.03
  • Armor: 1/1 → 2/2
  • Speed: 1.15
  • LoS: 6
  • Upgrade cost: 900F 400G, 35 seconds

Castle UT: “Tsikhe” (200G 200S)
TCs, Castles and Wonders +20% HP; Towers and Castles’ main projectile become a scorpion bolt (and have Scorpion-like effect); Militia line, Spearman line, Archer line and Skirmisher line can be trained at Towers (but still only Villagers can build Towers).

Imperial UT: “Sword of the Messiah” (800F 600G)
Khevsurs, Militia line, and Knight line have +15 HP.
“King of Kings, David, son of George, Sword of the Messiah.”
I love what this king had accomplished, and it might be a good campaign theme.

Tech Tree:

  • Economy: no Gold Shaft Mining and Guilds.
  • Blacksmith: full.
  • Castle: no Sappers.
  • Barrack: full.
  • Stable: No Heavy Camel and lancers.
  • Archery Range: no Thumb Ring.
  • Siege workshop: no Siege Onager and Bombard Cannon.
  • Monastery: no Block Printing and Theocracy.
  • University: no Siege Engineers and Bombard Tower.
  • Dock: no Cannon Galleon line, Fast Fire Ship and Dry Dock.
6 Likes
2

The Georgian UU should be, in my opinion, the Monaspa. I have done extensive research on the Georgians and Armenians if you’re interested.

3

it is just a name so of course it can be renamed to another one if more suitable.

4

Interestingly, your unique unit concept has almost an identical mechanic to my Monaspa unit, so when I share my idea, it’ll look like I copied you, when we actually came up with those ideas independently. Great minds think alike, I guess.

5

That cant be done, @Apocalypso4826 offered a new building, in order to implement this it HAS to cost Stone, or else the abuse potential is big. (unless you use an absurd minimal healing rate which wont matter anyways, you want the core identity-feature of the civ to be meaningful and noticeable, it has to be decent numbers wise, therefore cant be Monasteries)

That’s solid!

Solid as well!

Very Celts, but since Celts have it as a Team Bonus I get it, it’s nice, very versatile and useful, in order to increase diversity I’d just make it 60% or even 80%.
I remind you, this civ does not have an eco bonus, they need a militaristic power-spike, all you gave them are just some fragments of bonuses which is not too strategic, nothing to play with.
*Dont get me wrong, I adore civ designs that lack eco bonus, it’s bold and needed.

Most Infantries are Ram-like, that’s part of their role, they’re much more efficient against buildings than Cavalry. So you chose to take it to the extreme, which I like.
However I’m not sure I like the stats, they’re basically Champions with luxurious abilities, you didnt go far enough to fully differentiate them.
Considering the high gold cost (which I love, since it’s an anti-building unit) and considering how generic of a Champ it is, here is what I suggest:
HP: 80 flat.
Attack: 6 → 8 || +18 → +28 vs. Buildings || +25 → +35 vs. Siege
Armor: 0/4 → 0/6
Speed: 0.85

Now this unit has an actual place in the game, without needing to be massively massed to have some sort of an impact against buildings, just like every other generic Infantry. And if you mass these guys they act as a horde of city-eaters that’re mostly good against buildings. Which makes it balancable.
Further more mixing these guys with Champs is wonderful when dealing with Ranged units, they soak way too much.

Try not to make UU that will end up just being plain better than the generic one, but a different one, an actual unique one, let me know what you think.

*Regarding tech tree, I’d remove Arson obviously to further differentiate them from Infantry and also since it’s quite meaningless on them.
I love the fact they dont have Bracer! Devs are really scared to introduce us with a new civ that lacks it, ALL new civs have it.
And one more thing, in order to make it more elegant, I’d take away access to Herbal Medicine.

You further kill the diversity and turn the Champion into a Maceman. Not needed, I gave it to the Maceman for free.

That’s a wonderful idea, a trash Ram has a place in AOE II, BUT not for this civ, you already went for an awesome Unique Unit that is super reliable at doing this exact job, yeah it costs gold, but highly efficient. So why would you inflate the civs with similar options.

Solid.

Overall a great design, with some adjustments and a whole new Castle Age UT I can see this being implemented, I’d love to play it!!

6

You cant punish micro heavy players for being supirior, this is the type of features that encourage “Noobism” no offense Sir, it’s like “Mango deal less friendly fire damage”. Why not just giving TCs more damage vs. Units? It would be solid and wont make this civ a Douche one.

I wish Portuguese had this one. However you cant pay 25w for 1k HP building that is 1x1 tile. It’s not intuitive and not AOE II physics, I wouldn’t be too greedy, and keep it as is. Especially considering the next bonus…

That’s solid. However how different is it from Byz flat HP bonus? How about just Armor bonus rather than a global shield? (which is equivalent to HP practically)
Besides that bonus Armor would help Outposts DRASTICALLY, considering they’re known to have 0 Armor.

That’s where you overkilled the civ, too much Buildings bonuses make it seems like a themed park of ideas rather than an organic harmonic civ design. Rework is needed here, not even an adjustment.
Imagine Franks having an UU that’s also a Cavalry. Or Ethiopians having Ranged UU and Arbalester related UTs.

You did it again, overkill :frowning:

Interesting. I appreciate the high gold cost.

Tatarian Infantry?
Meh, it’s not really usable nor playable, since Infantry units are barely microable. Devs did the same mistake with the poorly designed (arguably the worst Infantry design in the game) Urumi.
You basically give them plain damage just like Urumi. Sorry but it’s another idea to throw to the garbage :slight_smile:

Overall you got here some nice ideas you can surely save, I’d really consider a redesign to the most of the features here, you sound like a smart guy, I’m sure you can figure it out, without falling into an overcommitment to one themed concept, no matter how justified it is historically, Thanks for sharing man!

7

I’m trying not to take it personally, but you seemed to appreciate this other guy’s Armenians design better than mine, even though I poured many hours of research into making my design as historically accurate as possible. Then again, it isn’t a competition, so I guess I should just be grateful that there’s someone else who wants the Armenians like I do.

8

It is not area healing. it would heal an unit. The efficience is just like a monk who cannot move but healing faster.
Not such a strong bonus but also not bad.
If we need it being more powerful, let the Monasteries can convert nearby enemy units.

There will always be occasions where you have difficulty using infantry or UU.
And don’t underestimate the siege weapons that can garrison mounted units.

My intention is not to make TC more lethal. TC’s attack is strong enough in the early game.
Instead, it was an attempt to be more effective at punishing the scouts that accidentally get too close to TC. To be an opponent of this defensive civilization, you must be extremely vigilant.

Give a cavalry more armor or more HP, any difference? You will find this kind of design a lot in the game.
In fact, even in the same direction, they are always different. Trebuchets can only do 100 damage, and you can’t break their walls with just 2 Petards in Castle age, etc. Regarding the -50% bonus damage, I think it will be better than the HP bonus in the late game. Of course, I’m not denying the potential for armor bonuses.

Maybe too much. But my original intention was to make them really a civilization that needed to actively build defensive stronghold-like bases. Although there are powerful late-stage units such as fully upgraded Paladins and Heavy Cavalry Archers, they do not have any economic bonuses, nor can they rely on trash to kill opponents like Byzantines. They’ll need to make good use of every bonus that will get their base through the early pressure, even making the building itself a fighting tool for them, so they can accumulate enough economy.

Of course, if they do need some bonuses that don’t emphasize buildings or defenses as much, I’d be inclined to help their cavalry.

I don’t know what you think about Urumi. But I think you should pay more attention to their ambush capabilities. If you don’t have any units or buildings less than 4 tiles away from them, and they’re not fighting, you won’t be able to see them. This may be actually very tactical potential and doesn’t necessarily require micro to every single unit. Especially against shooters, the fact that you can only shoot only after you see them should overturn the range advantage. The elevation bonus actually makes their ambush more shocking.

Take it easy. I don’t have any intention of comparing.
The devs will likely come up with something new if they are willing to introduce Armenians.

9

Oh I see, I get you.

That’s why they also have Trebs… and even BBC… This doesnt make sense. You’re creating an one trick pony.

It doesnt worth the gimmick, and you basically punish players who already get punished by the RNG, this Arabia is the most deserted we’ve had, sometimes they truly dont know where the TC is.

Of course! Armor makes them MUCH more effective vs. Archers and Hussars, it proffesionalize them, while HP is more flat and general. It’s simple math.

That’s very hard to judge on paper, need to see it in action.

10

I think you had great ideas there, but as a whole, this version of Armenian is more implementable, less gimmicky. I didn’t try to compare you two, each one with his own creative style…

11

Why wasn’t mine implementable? It was actually a pretty simple concept compared to this guy’s.

12

This idea is much more established:
Your unique unit is practically a generic camel, or rather a boyar, cant tell its unique role in this game. Unlike his UU which is much more defined.
Your aging bonus is too similar to Italians.
And the Mangonel bonus is not AOE.

Again, you have nice ideas, they just need to be redefined and adjusted a little to be get a solid score… And again, your description is less detailed.

13

Trash Rams and Siege Towers can be massively trained more quickly at Siege Workshops.
On the other hand, in my opinion, Macemen should have decent melee stats and extremely high siege damage that can’t be replaced, but not too high pierce armor. They are still differentiated from Champions, which stand out for their higher mobility and cost-effectiveness in pure unit fighting. If the opponent only has melee units, it will be difficult for him to stop Macemen from approaching the building and razing the castle to the ground in the blink of an eye. If the opponent has a large number of marksmen, traditional siege weapons still have their value.

How would you design the effects that fit the name of Havedic Machines?

Losing scouts in the Dark age can be a huge disadvantage. This would be an interesting trap, helping the player on the open map but not so powerful that the player would be encouraged to TC rush. On the other hand, on the closed map Georgians already have an advantage so it doesn’t matter that this bonus becomes less useful.

14

Stop with the “It isn’t AoE” argument. If the mechanic is fun and balanced, it’s fine, no need to spread your idealogy everywhere. Besides, if you could do such a good job at civ design, why haven’t you?

3 Likes
15

The Armenians are not the Armenians without the Ayruzdi, and the Ayruzdi is not the Ayruzdi without an anti-cavalry bonus. There’s nothing I can do.

16

It can be if he’s done extensive research into every aspect of Armenian culture, military, and history like I have.

17

You can do more with it. Remember, this is a mameluke.

image

You can also do more multiquoting to prevent bloating up post count replying to every post individually.

18

Fair point.

Also a fair point, and I do it if I remember. But I think of what I want to say on the fly, usually after I thought I was done.

19

Not enough, it reminds me of Berserk - Champion syndrome, too similar, I’d give Vikings a 10/10 design wise if only Berserk was a little more differeniated from Champion. Ideally you want an UU that’s noticably different and fully justified diversity wise. Proffesionalize them a little more and they won’t become another Obuch/Serjeant/Huskarl/Champion like. Or else the anti-building feature will end up being just a gimmick rather than an actual identity element.

It’s very tempting to give them a bonus to their Monks/Siege/Infantry, but I feel like this civ does great in this regard already, I wouldn’t want them to end up too Gothy, streamlined into one place.
Perhaps machines in the aspect of industry, military production, like:
Skirmishers worth half the pop, and being trained 100% faster (11 sec instead of 22 sec)
They dont have Bracer nor Thumbring, so it’s quite handy. I’d make it an Imp tech, and move Ayrudzi to Castle Age to allow a nice prolonged All-In Castle Age style.

And I’d even consider giving this civ one more passive bonus.

How is it a trap? if there is only a prey. The hunter has no playable mean to micro with or use. There’s no hunter but the system.
Again, it’s pure RNG considering how deserted Arabia is.

20

This is not a history simulation.none of the civis ingame are historically accurate.