Discussion about the Arambai

In last updates, the Arambai get nerfed so hard, i actually now think it is not even worthy to use it as before, so i want to discuss with you about it.

Do you think the nerf was necessary? If yes then why? If no what do you suggest?

Yes it was totally necessary. Ask any pro and they will tell you the same.
Arambai was op. Now we don’t know.

1 Like

They still do fight units just fine, without being the fastest siege weapon in the game at the same time, so it looks good so far. Even if they end up deemed overnerfed hopefully people will adapt and use different Burmese options.

1 Like

I don’t know, they seem weak now but still usable, maybe it’s the time that they’ll get the second archer armor, so their skirms won’t be that bad any more.

In the end, 1 more MA wouldn’t be a big deal, since they are now way worse at close range than before, and 1 PA isn’t game breaking either, since thay are pretty squishi.


Yeah exactly this is what i mean, they are very weak and die to anything and their attack was nerfed too, i really think the Burmese need the 2nd archer armor

1 Like

They don’t. Burmese are fine. If they had 2nd archer armor, they would be too powerfull

1 Like

Rework the unit somehow because it really lacks a niche, in what form are better than the Conquistador?


If too weak in win rate after change(will take a couple weeks at least to see) all they need to do is add back 1-2 points of damage to arambai, no need to change anything else besides what they already changed to nerf them in the first place, they can just adjust the value until it is not too weak or too strong

Gotta agree. They arenr even widely used at the pro level, wouldn’t call Burmese anything close to op

1 Like

Well it does have a better gimmick now, it’s not just “more extreme conq” anymore. And they still have the advantage of being a wood+gold unit that requires less eco.

Burmese are a trash civ right now, after Arambais are being more balanced. They need the second archer armor the least.

Maybe we have to see more data and if they nerfed so hard, we have to give them other buffs…
But I am against 2nd archer armor. Bad archer/Skirms are also kind of their identity and it is better to buff their strength rather than remove their weakness. Civs become too similar if they buff civs in that way. Some other civs such as Franks, Celts have weaker skirms than Burmese but they still be fine.

1 Like

Frank and Celt skirmishers are much better than Burmese skirms, because they have the second armor in Castle Age, which is extremely important, skirmishers are trash without +2 armor.

Arambai was op. All pros were happy to see arambai nerfed.

Me too, I banned Burmese(and Cuman) pickers from my lobbies, but the civ itself is just trash.

Uses wood instead of food.
Better when massed against massed troops.

They are alike, but also are wood raiders and berserks

That’s not true. In arabia, at least, they are good. I don’t know if they are good in arena or other map, but in arabia they are even a good civ.

How? They just lose to archer civs all the time. Arambai got nerfed hard vs Camels too.

Being able to see relics, half cost monk upgrades and free wood upgrades are all insanely good bonuses for Arena.


1 Like