I think you might misunderstand. The Scout Infantry → Light Infantry → Shock Infantry I suggested are same as the current Eagle line units. They are just renaming and have a new skin. The stats are completely same. They are not brand new version, so that we don’t have to tweak many civs for balance.
On the other hand, the new Eagle Warrior and Elite Eagle Warrior I suggested to be add to the Aztecs as unique upgrades. They will have different stats, like a bit more HP and pierce armor than the Light Infantry (current Eagle Warrior), so they are the brand new one although having the same name and skin of the current Eagle.
I was aware of your suggestion of making the Eagle warrior into an unique upgrade for the renamed Eagle line.
But based on how you wrote your previous response, I interpreted it as you changing your mind about this idea and came with this new suggestion that a revamped version of the Eagle warrior could be introduced to the game, which would be an unique unit for the Aztecs, while the renamed Eagle line becomes the general Scout cavalry replacement line for some civilisations.
Edit: Now that I think about it maybe a revamped Eagle warrior could be a good idea, where it is a ranged unit instead that is armed with an atlatl over a spear and will deal bonus damage to cavalry. It could function similar to the [Eagle Runner Knight] in “Age of Empires 3” and be trained from the Archery Range once reaching the Castle Age.
What I am proposing is that the Eagle warrior could be the [Cavalry Archer] replacement for the Aztecs, just like how the [Plumed Archer] is for the Mayans, while having access to the Scout Infantry → Light Infantry → Shock Infantry line as their scouts.
An “Atlatlist” unit line can be introduced to the other Native American civilisations who will serve as a general replacement of the [Cavalry Archer].
There are already some interesting conceptional ideas for new Eagle type units.
Often we see the name “Falcon Warrior” but doesn’t need to be that necessarily. I made myself probably 3 or 4 different designs specific to certain Civ concepts I made. One of which was a trash unit, one was Specialised more towards the heavy cav replacement (for a civ that gets acces to light cav in castle age), the others I think were more specialised versions of Eagles that had their destinct counters.
My question why he wants to stick with the current Eagle Line is reffering to the fact that he makes these really blown up civs concepts with really funky bonusses that look like he really though deep into it and chose them especially as they are only working together exactly how they are chosen.
But then he just uses a Line that has so many Issues in it’s current implementation, that it completely destroys any specialised concept. And in the end most of these Civs will practically just make or break if they can get their Eagle Spam going or not. As if we wouldn’t have enough of that already.
I don’t think a ranged scout can work in AOE2. On one side it probably would suck in the direct duel with other scouts. On the other hand the ranged attack can be super disruptive to enemy buildoerders. The Influence in the early game depending on little positioning choices are way too big. I also don’t think it would add much to the game.
@casusincorrabil I was unclear in my previous post. The idea that I had in mind was to change the Eagle warrior where it would be an unique unit that fills a similar role to the [Cavalry Archer] and not a scout.
I have edited my previous post where I am more clear about this.
I just recall now that the Malay Two-Handed Swordsmen are trash too. If they don’t have a big problem, I think the trash Light Infantry (current Eagle Warrior) should be fine too, so perhaps the UT won’t need to make them take more damage from spearmen. You might argue about their speed advantage, but other than speed, they’re not as good as Two-Handed Swordsmen. Moreover, in my concept, a trash Light Infantry even cost 5 more food than a Malay Two-Handed Swordsman.
Having the new EW as an alternative to CA is an interesting concept. Looks like it would also be affected by the UT Atlatl. I honestly like it, but I don’t sure how much of an impact this will have on Aztecs.
But I don’t think we should give other American civs an alternative to CA. This might be a little too much.
If you really think about it, the Plumed Archer is essentially an analogue to the CA. Fast moving archer unit able to be microed without fear of reprisal from infantry. So what if they’re on foot? They’re running, while generic archers are walking.
I knew it very well. The Plumed Archer is a UU, being trained in Castles, so the thing is different. Having the civs that are originally without CA gain the alternative in Archery Ranges is another thing.
Accepting the new EW to be the alternative to CA in Archery Ranges is because I regard it as a new UU that is supposed to be inaccessible for the other civs, and it might bring the Aztecs about drastic changes to the balance. If the others also have alternatives to CA in Archery Ranges, then the changes are even greater.
Well, then I have a question: if the Maya have an analogue, and this would become the Aztec’s analogue, why not add a CA equivalent to every Civ? I get the balance changes, yeah, but honestly even if civs have to change the balance, they’d have alternatives now. And honestly, they could be treated like the ca’s are; most of the time just kind of focused on, but missing critical upgrades or just left in castle age. It wouldn’t affect the UU’s, they would still be more powerful versions, but it would be just like the ca’s and the ca UU’s rather than taking those UU’s and making them regionally generic.
Um… Being in Castles and being in Archery Ranges is pretty different in my opinion. I won’t say that giving the Aztecs a new UU being alternative to CA is just same as the Mayans having the Plumed Archer.
On the other hand, for me, the thing is like giving an alternative to Camel Riders/Hand Cannoneers/Bombard Cannons to all of the civs that have no Camel Riders/Hand Cannoneers/Bombard Cannons. The civs now have other units to do the similar jobs of those units, but I feel receiving a direct alternative would still change a lot, like the build order, flavor and identity so far. There were 3 (or 6) civs that had had no speedy archer in Archery Ranges, and you try to give not only 1 (Aztecs) but all of them the speedy archer in Archery Ranges.
I’ve brought remade the Slinger as a regional unit to those civs, which would be quite a change. More new units is a bit over my intention. Giving only Aztec a speedy archer as a replacement for CA and a rebirth of EW is enough for me.
Well, this is just my personal opinion. If a lot of people want the speedy archer for all the American civs, maybe the devs will accept it.
Well the way I was interpreting it was that the Atlatlist/CA equivalent would be from the Archery Range, not the Castle. Unless you were intending to replace the Jaguar Warrior? At least, I don’t think you were intending to based on what I see.
Since you conpared the alternative to CA with the Plumed Archer, I mentioned the difference between Archery Ranges and Castles. My understanding is that you seem to think it’s no big deal to have all American civs have the alternative to CA in Archery Ranges because the Mayans have the Plumed Archer already.
I used the comparison to say that the concept has been done, and I do see the difference between a castle and an Archery Range.
I was not trying to imply this; what I was implying was that, given the PA template, it is entirely possible to use it as a CA analogue, and balance it between a generic variant and the Unique variants similarly to the CA generics and Uniques. Never did I say it wasn’t a big change, I was asking why not change. I was looking for your opinion as to why the CA would not be a good idea, as I don’t really see an issue in making a weaker variant of a PA for regional use, seeing as they would have the same relationship between Unique and Generic variants as the CA’s and the Unique CA’s.
If the concern is the disruption of the unique balancing surrounding the Meso-Civ play style, then hasn’t one of the biggest communal gripes always been the artificial forcedness surrounding the emphasis on Eagle Warriors to compensate the lack of stables?
This can also be achieved with the Atlatlist unit and the revamped Eagle warrior that I suggested. The Atlatlist can be the generic version of the new Eagle warrior, which will be the unique Atlatlist unit for the Aztecs.