Many civ. have a greater collection capacity of natural resources in the short term as the lakota, haudenosaunee or African, but much lower in the long term lagging behind other civ. only having a good echo depending on the resources of the map, so I propose to not have to improve their collection in the farms, field and estate, have in fourth age the ability to send infinitely game animals such as lakota and gold mines.
Ex: 6 bison and a gold mine or 6 giraffes/elephants and a gold mine.
That way it would not be a civ op like the Aztecs who collecting game 150% and gold 130% faster, and %50 faster food on the farms than the rest of the other civs and collect the same amount of gold on the estates than the European civs (much more than many native, Asian and African civs).
This table shows the percentage of improvement of resource collecting of various civs.
eu uso em jogos longos e curtos com lakotas esse deck por exemplo lakotas tem bisão infinito se caso o jogo fique longo eu movo 60 aldeãos para plantações 25 para coletar bisões e 14 em madeira dessa forma minha ecomonia fica muito bem balanceada na imperial e na isdustrial a card bisão infinito e obrigatoria
cards de aumento de coleta de caças e obrigatório para lakota, oque eu acho que deveriam fazer com haudenosuane era adicionar 15 cervos infinitos para a civi porque lakota e haudenosuane tem esse upgrade que e muito melhor que rota comerciais : @BusiestCarp6234
in the lakota’s dipper they are already fine, since they receive infinite bison, I would only add the possibility of sending infinite shipments of mines in the fourth age, since these civs have a very low rate of gold collecting in estates.
How aztecs get to gather as fast as Euro civs on estates?? Natives have less upgrades on estates, also aztecs need more cards for the same effect that euro get with 1 or 2
having a better economy than 90% of the other civilizations if this op, and I am not so sure how strong they are militarily but that does not justify the economic strength.
Aside for, this forum is not about your military units, this is about your economy.
aztecs lack factories, and their farms have a lower base gather rate than mills. don’t exaggerate their gather rates. Aztec eco is average at best. they miss out on 20v of eco from lacking factories, and 15v of eco from the disco. their military trains slowly and they have very expensive lategame units
also you just picked 4 random cards, of course the food rate will be higher than the euro, you have 4 farm cards for azzy and only 2 food cards for euro lol
check a postgame graph with aztec vs literally any euro where the game goes late. its not even close, aztec usually has half the resources of brits
I play mostly Aztecs in treaty and have never gotten to 1.63 gather rate for food and I sent all their farm cards. At best Ive only gotten 1.57 food p/s on farms. European civs also have factories.
as I did:
1-placing the game in industrial post
2-send you the cards in the picture
3-pass to imperial with the sage
4-develop the missing technologies
5-thanks for commenting
Yea but I actually play them in 40 min treaty not some scenario. In treaty I’m always behind in eco compared to euro civs even with all the upgrades and wise woman +20 % I still don’t get 1.63 my boi. Play enough Aztec 40 min treaty and you’ll get to see a pattern just check the graph at the end of the game you’ll see what I’m talking about.
1- Factories and wonders, etc. that generate resources are not taken into account since they are specific buffoons of each civilization and are non-replenishable. If I would have to take into account a building would be banks, Inca houses and sanctuaries (without animals) as they are replenishable.
2-The Aztecs collect food slower than a European but they do not suffer movement penalty so their rate is the SAME.
3-I ALREADY ANSWERED IT IN ANOTHER FORUM THIS IS ECONOMICS IF YOU HAVE A COMPLAINT ABOUT THE MILITARY THAT FORUM IS NEXT TO IT.
4-
The 4 cards chosen were as much as possible the best economic cards of each civ. Prioritizing the collection of plantations, mills, etc. and secondly the natural resources.if you have another complaint tell me which cards you would choose.
5.I can’t quantify your skill my that of the opponent. I will only say that every civ. has a buff and it is up to you how much you will exploit it or let them do it.
I can’t quantify your skill my that of the opponent. I will only say that every civ. has a buff and it is up to you how much you will exploit it or let them do it.
Aztecs eco cards are very good for a native americans
Farms: (0.5f/s)+ 95% upgrades+ 80% from cards + 20% from age up
Estate: (0.5c/s) + 80% upgrares + 30% from farms + 20% from estates
Sadly, it may not be enough to compete with europeans, as EU got better base farming (0.67 + 95% upgrades ) and estates (0.5 + 110% upgrades). They usually get around 80% for estate cards and 45% from mill cards, plus 2 factories.
The strengh of NA eco is mostly from the fact that farms/estate upgrades also impacts mines/hunt, so in suprenacy.
The problem is that many people play treaty, where they pick all eco cards and make as if hunts/mines were irrelevant.
PS: I am a supremacy player and usually pick up to 3 eco cards (+factories as EU). As Aztecs, it is 40% mines, 20% farm/estate, and sometimes 10% farm/estate. So I am happy with aztecs eco.
When I play treaty I make sure to use up all the natural resources and coin mines first then transition to farms/estates. The other guy is showing the gather rate of animals not farms.
1- Factories and wonders, etc. that generate resources are not taken into account since they are specific buffoons of each civilization and are non-replenishable. If I would have to take into account a building would be banks, Inca houses and sanctuaries (without animals) as they are replenishable.
2-The Aztecs collect food slower than a European but they do not suffer movement penalty so their rate is the SAME.
the other forum is also the natural resource collection rate.
Make a better chart. Actually label them correctly and put dots or points in between the numbers. Add % labels and be more clear because your chart is barely understandable without getting any clarifications. If not don’t make a chart at all thank you for your effort but it’s not a finished product amigo.
sorry I thought it was understood that they were improvement percentages, which affront the base numbers that are in the first 2 columns. What are you thinking it was?
quite clearly you are not familiar with the civ, or you would never claim aztec as an op eco civ. I am one of the most experienced aztec players lategame and their eco is fairly average. by excluding wonders and factories you paint a distorted picture of a civs eco.
“oh yeah when you remove 20 vills worth of unlimited coin or wood from a euro civ then aztec is almost the same if aztec also happens to not be maxing their firepit”
bruh
their farms are good, very good, but their coin eco is very poor so you end up with like, 70 vills on coin to try to keep up your eagle runner and arrow knight production and like 15 vills on food, so your resource total gets tanked
you either use your firepit maxed, which makes all your units more cost effective, or you only use the warrior priests, which means you get more resources but have less cost effective units. you don’t get both.
ignoring factories is also comical, of course the euro civs look weaker instantly, thats 20v of eco! every single deck of every euro player will have both factories, its not negotiable. yes they can lose them but generally speaking you wont lose factories until you’ve likely already lost. every supremacy and treaty game will feature factories if the game goes late.
finally: aztec has so many eco cards it is entirely unreasonable to fit them into a deck outside of treaty. great chinampa and grain market are the only 2 i keep in a 1v1 deck. A euro will outclass aztecs eco with literally just their 2 factories. mix in refrig and royal mint, maybe eco theory and its not even close. most 1v1s as aztec i have roughly 2/3 to 1/2 the resources of most opponents.
in conclusion your numbers are essentially a meaningless, myopic approach that does not at all represent actual in-game results, entirely excludes vast components of other civs economic potential, and is irrelevant to any balance discussion
