Dravidians are a poor/lazy designed civ

Almost, but not quite.

The easy example is(and always will be) how non cav or archer civs will almost always use cav or xbow if the situation calls for it. Infantry? Not even infantry civs use infantry.

Basically Khmer… and we saw what happened there. But scorps would never be buffed to that level, so they gave Khmer the hauberk treatment.(turned them into a pure cav civ)

Shameless plug: Byzantine Greek fire should increase petard stats. :rofl: Like +2/2 armour

I would still like to see a PUP with LS onwards going from 1/1 armour to 2/1. Archers will remain the hard counter. But becomes a much harder matchup for cavalry civs Vs infantry civs. And most heavily affects the interaction with 2/3 trash types (which they’re intended to counter)

3 Likes

Japanese save 200 wood in dark age with 2 lumbercamps (2nd added on the way up) mill and mining camp. Woodwise they’re probably slightly better than dravidians until castle because they get the 200 wood earlier allowing for tighter builds.

4 Likes

Yeah, missed that. A small time frame when they are stronger.

That unit needs nerf. But 175 wood barracks and 650 stone is a big difference. You can always justify UU being strong compared to the cost bcz of this.

With cheaper MAA upgrade (50f 20g saved), Pikeman upgrade (108f 45g saved) and 25% attacking Skirmisher and another +200w in Castle, Dravidians is stronger than Japanese until mid Castle Age. Then, Japanese is better than Dravidians.

We have statistics that say that isnt true. They are very similar in winrate across all time periods but japanese is slightly better all around.


3 Likes

Wow. I’m honoured. I never knew he said that. Feels good.