This unique tech isn’t so nuts. You need a castle to research it and you need to spend some ressources to even get this discount. By the time this tech is really useful your opponent(s) is probably hitting imperial age and then your cav just sucks with the lack of upgrades.
Most of your points make no sense at all tbh. Goths have no weak early game? Pretty much everyone considers this civ to be bottom tier and most of the points you mention doesn’t make them special, except boar laming maybe. Having loom instand researched is one of the most underwhelming eco bonus there is.
And saying a civ scaling bad in lategame is just not a good cav civ for TG is also false. Burgundians are still a solid pocket pick and their palas are not that good.
Are you comparing Burgundian palas against Poles cavaliers for teamgames? ^^
Ok lets do the math.
Burgundian Palas can tank 160 / 3 = 54 Arbalest shots.
Poles Cavalier can tank 140 / 6 = 24 Arbalest shots.
Thats the stat matters most in TG lategame.
Claiming Burgs would scale bad in Teamgames is just… weird. They still have Paladin, very strong eco. And they get Paladin faster than all the other civs, too.
Maybe their Paladins are a bit weaker than “Generic”. But there are only 8 Civs with FU Paladin and some of them lack eco, so…
This comparison is just weird to say the least.
It’s a solid eco bonus, Goths can have one more vill than most other civs, It’s for sure not the best eco bonus ever, but it’s solid enough to state that goths don’t have a “weak” early game.
Edit: Especially as it isn’t just a eco bonus… Almost tricked me there. Nice try. Utility of early loom is extremely strong bonus in the early game actually.
Ok they fall a bit apart when transitioning into the midgame as I stated, that they don’t have the best raiding tools. So you can damage them more with your rushes than they can damage you. But the initial early game isn’t weak in comparison to other civs.
At pro level… Is everybody here a pro or what? Even at high elo goths are no joke. Stating that is just ignorant.
Guess it’s no point to argue with u about this. I just stated that a civ doesn’t need to have super powerful palas to be decent in teamgames. If this unique tech is so powerful, how are they bad in teamgames? Berbers are quite decent too.
And yes, goths are bottom tier. Ask every pro and look every tierlist up…and goths suck at pretty much every elo except low elo. YOu know why? because there is no civ which is more predictable. No real eco bonus, nothing special until imp. Give me 5 civs which have worse eco bonus than goths. Except low elo, where people boom to minute 70 until they start playing, they are just bad.
Still goths see much more drafts than a lot of other civs which are ranked higher in that “tier lists”.
For a good reason. Cause besides they are overall considered “low tier” they counter several of the top tier civs which just don’t have anything to counter the goth flood.
Cause the Goth flood (The thing we actually discussing) is real at all Elo. Not only low elo. Somebody stating that the goth flood isn’t real must have never encountered it. I literally saw a 2v2 teamgame where the goth player 1v2 with his flood and won his team the game. That was pro level.
Stating that
They are still an overall decent civ. And just look at their winrate at 40+ minutes.
That’s why everybody with a civ that isn’t specified as a “goth counter” must take goth serious. Even at the highest level there are just some civs which get completely destroyed by goths.
Stating that goths are just trash outside low elo just reveals yourself as someone who doesn’t has much experience. Cause it’s just wrong. Totally wrong.
Magyars, Byzantines, Turks, Koreans, Portuguese, Saracens, even Berbers have worse eco in the early game.
And still, eco isn’t everything. Having loom that early gives a lot of utility in the early game. You can’t even drush a goth player eg.
I could not agree more with you. I hope the devs reconsider their current tech tree and lack of specific strength, especially in the Imperial Age.
Szlachta Privileges possibly allows for too easy Knight rushes in Castle Age and should get somewhat nerfed.
However their Imperial Age is lacking a lot. No Siege Engineers and Onagers means they are weaker to Archers, which isn’t helped by their Skirmishers and Archers missing the last Armor Upgrade and Thumb Ring.
Trash Cavaliers means they basically are irrelevant if replaced by Hussars.
As you get neither Paladins nor Plate Barding Armor, their Cavalry is prone to arrows from Defensive Structures and Archers, hence is worse at raiding and can’t compete with stronger opposing Heavy Cavalry and Camels - especially when population efficiency and unit production speed become more important.
Since they don’t get Halberdiers either, the Poles have no cost effective answers and must rely on Obuchs for which you need many Castles to produce fast enough. Otherwise these are overpowered in small numbers.
Just to say that IF Folwark feels too much comitting and needs a buff, there is one simple thing that can be done : let it garrison villagers (without firing of course, like Khmer house)
I would advocate that they should be able to garrison EXACTLY 8 villagers in this case, for obvious PERFECTION reasons.
I’m not saying it should be done, it’s just a backup plan.
Why? There are other civs with insane Castle Age potential and a terrible late-imp. It’s rather refreshing than to get 2 Arena boom civs. (I mean, Bohemians is clearly an Arena clown civ, so if Poles were also an Arena civ, the DLC would be pretty boring for those who dont only play Arena)
Agreed, not every game needs to end in post imp. There are players who enjoy games ending in castle age. Look at Hoang as an example, who wants the game to finish in castle age. I know of plenty players who thrive in the castle age, but are terrible at post imp. The game shouldn’t always be boom and then throw out 80 kts or arbs at your enemies.
Some people don’t like the turtling strategy and want aggression, some people want to sit back and boom to post imp. Having civs that thrive at different strategies, isn’t that the whole point of a “strategy” game?
Poles crap tech tree for late game, just means they need to do lots of damage in the mid game so that when they do reach imp, they can finish the job.
Polish Hussar is totally unique unit with Turkish mace (Bozdoğan), sword (kılıç), saddle, Tatar bow, half-breed Polish-Tatar horse. Polish Hussar is basically mix of European Knights and Turk-Tatar Cavalries. If you research military history, you will see that there is no original weapon, unit or techniques. Military warfare is related to adapting, improving, maintaining military tactics and technologies not so-called 100% original units.
No. Strategy shall develop by interacting with the opponent. Civs that are too good at cerain phases of the game, completely dominate there, are just bad in that respect.
It is ok if different civs have different powerspikes, this is something interactive. But a powerspike so big that if that civ just reaches that point it totally dominates, is just a terrible idea, cause it reduces the game to just fighting about trying to get to that point and trying to not let that civ come to that point.
Exactly that gameplay we often see for example with goths.
It’s also why we criticized the original frist crusade. And also the current one has in theory too much potential just because of the curretnly very agressive meta it already comes often “too late” cause you need to make 5 tcs plus a full tech switch to make it work.
First crusade is a bit difference cause it cames with a serious tradeoff that can’t be ignored. However the sheer power of that tech is so high, that it forces the opponent to preemptively prepare for that one specific powerspike, set up a very specific defense. This is not good for strategy, as it is repetitive and always the same, as the opponent has no choice but doing exactly this. Other strats just can’t work against that UT. Either you prepare for it or you die. (I’m speaking about even games, ofc first crusade can’t flip an already lost game.)
So too big Powerspikes aren’t good for strategy, they destroy strategy as the game is basically only about trying to get to that powerspike or don’t allow to come to this powerspike for the other player.
imo poles are fine having an arguably weaker imperial age for TGs, they have the tools to finish the game before then, and by changing their kt/hussar dynamic you forcethem to become more generic and lose flavour
between the discounted weaker cavalier and the SIGNIFICANTLY stronger winged hussar, they are definitely a medium cav civ, which fits the description
the stone to gold, obuch and the fulwark could do with some tweaking, but for crying out loud i wish this forum would stop trying to turn everything into a vanilla soup… rather find someway to tweak the existing dynamic, than create yet another buffed cavalier civ…
look at burgundy… they had something going for them with an absolutely unique UU, but instead it gets nerfed into the ground (now is never seen) and it becomes a literal frank clone because people are too lazy to balance a civ around anything except kt/xbow
Have you read my proposals? I just don’t think you can aplly your rant on that.
With my proposals poles still have a lot of weaknesses in the lategame. Plus the imp UT is so expensive that poles first need to sacrifice a lot to get to that.
But I litterally changed nothing about them missing the last armor upgrades, having one of the worst trash in the game and also their comparably weak general lategame versatility with lacking a lot of neat lategame upgrades.
But you keep going off on the assumption that this power spike is the be all end all for the civ. It’s not. Getting to this point where you can spam kts doesn’t just come over night (no pun intended). It takes a lot of resources/time to invest into it. I’ve seen it work and I’ve seen it fail, and usually it fails because the other player has already out boomed.
Poles can go xbows → UU which are more satisfying to play into, or xbows → hussar/UU and skirms, they can drop countless castles.
Keep in mind there’s more than just ONE map in the game, different maps means different strategies. I like nomad and I like picking poles on nomad (if given the chance) because I can easily drop 10 castles and still have 4k gold in the bank. Whilst spamming UU. I’ve gone the whole kt spam like once in my nomad games.
That’s not what I talk about. I think the Power spike is just too big. It makes polish knights COUNTER their supposed counters, camels and pikes. That’s just too much for any castle age UT. This just can’t be a part of the game. It’s that easy.
A tech that makes a single unit type basically uncounterable in the midgame is just the perfect example for a “strategy destroying” powerspike. It’s too much, even if it comes with that high cost.
Here is example of an awesome game where the “OP Poles UT” was not even used to win the game. And these players are clearly know what they are doing too. (The Point is that Poles don’t have to revolve around making Knights at all)
