Concepts of Central/East Asian DLCs

As far as eco bonuses go this os quite bad imo. I think you could be a bit more ambitious tham that

I was going to say that this is totally broken for knights but without +2 it may actually be balanceable. The problem rn is that its expensive, and really omly strong against archer civs since against melee civs you will need to get way more resources to have an advantage. Im not sure whats best compared at but most strong knight civs have really strong early castle age knights, with Liths being the only civ I can think of which is diferent, and Liths have a better eco

Eh, not a fan. Too weird imo

This bonus is bad, its basically an auto win

And I wouldnt be too concerned about conversions. Monks arent good agsinst most feudal age units since they are cheap

I feel like it needs to be a bit more unique, Slingers are añready in the game afterall

Its fine, but it would never happen with China being what it is, and it seems a bit meh

Seems kinda meh too. Its useful ofc, but its just a bit dull

Do we really need more auras. Its fine I guess, although a bit close to the Romans/Celts

A bit uninspired for a late game tech but fine

2 Likes

Your thoughts on other sections are always welcome.

You are on the same page. I’m fine with more Yaks, as long as it doesn’t allow players to age up too quickly.

The earlier armors don’t seem to be favored by people, at least you two. This seems to be something I didn’t encounter when I gave it to Khitans a long time ago.

This does make them more likely to use Knights in practice. So, if a better economy basis like more Yaks and/or a little nerf for Knights like removing Bloodlines or Husbandry can help balance the whole thing, I would be happy to.

When I originally conceived it, it was based on high risk and high reward so there is no discount for armors. It is supposed to be a strong bonus in the early game, but if used carelessly, such as researching too early or researching too much, it will be a serious investment mistake.

If this needs to be removed, then we have to make sure they have other early advantages. I’m not sure if the Yaks only can do this or if new bonuses are needed there.

Considered with the Malian free extra pierce armors, I’m not sure if this will encourage players to use Militia-line more, but free first infantry armor can indeed encourage M@A use.

I’ve considered a similar one: double effect on Supplies-line techs. But I’m not sure if that’s balanced, especially compared to Goths. The civ may have to lost Champion for this. Probabaly neither this nor your suggestion strikes me as likely enough to constitute an advantageous early game.

I try to introduce a new mechanic. An AoE3 player may not be so concerned about the trickle of resources.

This is based on a certain historical reference that nomads bought armors from Tibetans, and that the Song Dynasty also purchased armors from Qiang people.

The later games of this civ are less powerful, so I hope there is a helpful late game bonus. No problem to change, just I wish there’s still a way to continue to reflect the historical reference.

What does auto win mean?

My initial idea was that this would help players start preparing for Castle age Monk Rush early, much like Camel Scouts help players prepare for Camel Riders early. It’s not really encouraged to perform Monk Rush or collect Relics in the Feudal, as that would be an expensive and easily blocked strategy, but if the player insists on doing so, at least the opponent needs to respond to it rather than to ignore it, such as being forced to train more Scouts.
In my opinion, this is not broken, so far.

Frankly speaking, I try to introduce Lamas not mainly for the superior statistics than the generic monks, but actually to enable the monk unit to build unique buildings. Making generic units buildable seems a little intuitively weird to me. If there are Lamas who can build Gompas, they can become a monk version of Serjeants and Donjons. I lock this ability behind the UT, which may be why I don’t let Lamas directly replace Monks.

If Lama is a risky term, it can be replaced with Khenpo, or simply Abbot.

Auras of buildings are acceptable to me, such as Folwarks, since they don’t move and can be clearly shown.

The current aura of Gompas is indeed a reference to Centurions. I want to make it beneficial for infantry, especially the Militia-line, to push Lamas + Gompas + Champions into their ideal best lineup, so you can also see that I have Gompas training Militia-line as well. It certainly could have dropped the Centurion reference if there is another way.

The healing aura of Monasteries should also be a part of the latest Saracen UT, Bimaristan, in my opinion.
Less damage taken aura can be considered (btw it is very similar to the auras of Japanese and Indian monks in AoE3), although it is not a direct buff.

Their basic stats are definitely better than Inca Slingers.
As I stated, they could be mounted units instead if people wish.
If having a bonus against camels doesn’t make it unique enough, maybe add a bonus against elephants.
Or, give their projectiles a blast radius. This will make them act like grenadiers lol.

1 Like

Here we have an excellent video on the rise of the Tibetan Empire. A campaign around Songtsen Gampo and Gar Tsongsen his prime minister would be excellent!

www. youtube.com/watch?v=WZJSKTRwDAI&list=WL&index=8

More herdable don’t let you age up fast for Feudal Age. Hunt is preferable regardless of how many herdable you have. It just saves you woods from not building farm. That may result in faster age up for Castle Age. But that won’t be faster than most civs nowadays.

The way I see the historical reference, better quality armor bonus is more suited than early access.

Very innovative. Still weaker than Saracens if you also buy resource though I think it can work.

A bit problematic in Arena. I’m not opposing though.

first one is Japanese spin off. And only 1 free farm is pretty hilariously underpowered today. Maybe start with 2 farms with adjacent to TC?

Not a fan. Encourages all in sling strategy with boomy flank civ. And sling is discouraged by the community, influencers as well as devs. I think just free Caravan is enough. Although I don’t know if they should get so many trade/market bonuses.

Already commented on the rest.

2 Likes

Like cavalry armors provide double the effect, but no plate barding armor?
In practice this may be a cheaper and stronger bonus than earlier armors.
It also reduces the total number of armors by -1, and the gold trickle would lose the pleasing number of 1 in the end.

A bit better than Saracens after getting the Guild.
Add another Market bonus might be fine, like Trade Carts cost no wood (or gold), or give their Market an aura to boost the nearby Villagers?

I used to consider the free Redemption. Maybe that or being able to convert buildings without Redemption could be an alternative. Not stronger in Arena but in open maps.

I notice the cheaper Monasteries is no longer available for Bohemians. Maybe…

Because it will use the space outside the building, there may be problems with automatic generation.
Would Farmers dropping +5% food be too powerful?

Maybe just make Caravan, Coinage and Guild free? If only Cavaran is free, it will be of no use in 1v1.
The sling strategy should have other ways to be controlled, such as game rules.
Their greatest achievement in history is the trading network, so it is not an exaggeration to become the civ that emphasizes Markets the most.

Yeah but I thought they are supposed to be better infantry armor. Maybe each infantry armor gives +10 HP to Militia line? In Feudal it is a paid Vikings bonus. But from Castle Age 80 HP LS and 100 HP Champion will be quite handy.

I’m not a fan of aura.

Cheaper monastery can work. And free redemption will be super OP. Converting building without redemption is pretty situational. So I think you can keep free atonement.

I think it’s fine. But seem like too good eco and monk.

There is no way Team Bonus should give you so many free techs. In fact no Team Bonus give you free tech.

Free Caravan doesn’t sound unreasonable. I don’t know how good it might be on execution, but on paper it really doesn’t sound as powerful as the Spanish or Bohemian TBs.

Not sure.
Given the current state of the Militia-line, I concern this may still not be enough to support them to be mainly used in the early game, but in the late game it will be very powerful, stronger than almost all existing infantry civs, especially there is still the effect that Gompas provide. As your reference, the closest would be Armenian Champions who can get the UT (+30HP), but that UT is not cheap.

I still think armors an age earlier would not be seriously broken in practice. Regardless of infantry and archer armors, the Bloodlines is still more worth researching before the second cavalry armor, so even if you want to get the 2nd armor for cavalry in the Feudal age, it’s almost time to hit the Castle age. If you want to get the last armor for knights very early in the Castle age, you may have fewer knights. The more Yaks can already help the economy better, but it’s still a pretty risky strategy if you try to get armors earlier for more than one type of unit.

Let they fight with armor superior to other civs of their time, reflecting their superior armor crafting. Later, after the advantages brought by armors have worn off, switch from cavalry to Champions + Lamas + Gompas with UU as an assist.

It would be nice if there was a bonus for armors in another way, consistent with developments like this. But it’s not easy to find.

So…
Two market bonuses: no fee for selling, and trade carts cost no gold.
A food bonus: farmers frop +5%.
A monk bonus: Monasteries cost 75 wood.
A military bonus: Parthian tactics provides double.
Team bonus: free caravan, coinage and guild.
Look fine.

But only free caravan is pretty weak and useless in 1v1 game.
Free coinage and guild might be okay. There is still Banking if you want to tribute.
If the ally has no guild in the tech tree, it still cannot get benefits from free guild.

I’d personally love to see both Tanguts and Tibetans. Europe already has these tiny split up civs like Sicilians, Bohemians, Poles, Burgundians etc.
The Nanzhao/Dali Kingdom is another civ I’d love.

2 Likes