That will be pretty ironic.
I’m neutral with Persians having good CA as originally ES thought CA without Bracer will be serviceable and Persians will use CA. but I don’t see any point removing PT to get a CA bonus.
Would be removing PT from persians Not be worse than having only serviceable CA from a History perspective?
Mahouts should be part of the elite WE upgrade and the imperial UT could be something useful for their stable units.
locking mahouts behind the elite upgrade is actually a big nerf for the elephants. if mahouts would be removed it has to be given to the standard war elephant as well.
1 Like
Why not split the effect in two? Half of the speed increase into the basic War Elephant, and the other half into the elite upgrade.
2 Likes
Unless I’m wrong, Chieftains is not added to elite, it is totally free. So non-elite Berserk also regenerates at 40HP/min.
What? How? Is Knight’s ROF that high?
Their extra resource is locked behind TC. So I don’t think that will happen.
I’d rather argue both have better military options than Persians in Castle Age.
Bengalis and Dravidians - “Nobody even knows we exist”.
NO the fatties just are so expensive it more than compensates for the bonus damage.
And ofc the Knights ROF helps a bit aswell ;).
Yeah. But I don’t think we need to remove PT from Persians to push a CA bonus. They can coexist.
They are known for having a lot of options in the late game. Also they are not as aggressive as other CA civs you have mentioned. Persians is rather slow to get to its full potential.
They are the only one with LS as maxed out militia line. Also lacking Bracer is huge.
Very bad choice as their camel is only generic and other infantry option is already handicapped.
Both are OP.
Yeah I saw that recently. Now there must be many top Nomad civs, which is a great thing.
Isnt it Camels availaility vs Sanctity availability ? It sounds like a fine compromise.
Well, if they are known for having good late game options, then they dont need late game buffs…
They are slower, yes. But they peak higher in late castle age.
Until now, the milicia line has never been such a must have except against eagles. Having only FU LS doesnt feel worse than having not FU 2HS like Tatars, Huns, Mayans,… when not against an eagle civ. And even then, you often rather go HC or knights.
It is huge on water maps and sad when you get raided. Besides that, not that huge for my standards when your army focus is neither Arbalesters nor HCA. For me, having FU hussars + FU halberdiers is a bigger advantage than missing Bracers is bad.
Spearman and camel themselves don’t count?
I partially disagree. Skill and BO don’t change the fact that you need to slow down your military production and upgrades to get the full advantage of the bonus.
For 1v1, the tech would just need to be priced reasonably to be balanced and useful. For instance, if the tech gives 5 EWEs for 500 food and 200 gold (they would still have to train them at the regular speed), it will help Persians in early Imp to get to their elephants without giving any long-term buff, which they don’t need. For team games, it can have scaling cost per ally.
Cuman Mercenaries is bad because Kipchaks are micro intensive and need a lot of upgrades that are usually not used by the ally and without them, the base stats of Kipchaks are underwhelming. In contrast, EWEs do not need micro and have great base stats without upgrades. In the worst case, your ally can just set the gather point in the enemy base and make the elephants and it could still destroy a few buildings.
Missing bracer is going to be a lot more significant once Gambesons is introduced. Xbows will lose 33% of their damage and I think TCs will lose 25%.
The civ is not fine in early Imp. Persians have generic cav and 1 eco bonus while other cav civs often have multiple eco bonuses and cav buffs. They often get to Imp faster and with better options than Persians. The only thing unique about Persians is their UU which is too expensive for 1v1 and even in TGs it takes a long time to get to EWEs. This tech would help them get to it a bit more easily. Also, remember that trashbows are getting indirectly nerfed due to Gambesons.
You rarely want to go Trashbows in imperial, as they already lose to so many units (same as skirms + skirms selmselves). For TCs, yeah, having no Bracers suck.
Can you give examples ?
- Lituanians only got last wood upgrade
- Franks only got hp bonus, as nobody wants crop rotation upon imperial age
- Magyars only got free BF + last wood upgrade, and free BF is compensated by their weakly scaling boni.
- Spanish only got last wood upgrade + cheaper techs, cheaper techs are compensated by weak boni before imperial
While Persians got the last wood upgrade + one well scaling eco bonus until you reach 200 pop (as you have 5 to 10 extra villagers).
All these civ should want to research PBA+Cavalier, then BF last wood upgrade + alchemy. Right ?
You know 500f+200g is extremely cheap ?
Cuman mercenaries cost like 10 Kipchaks of resources, you propose to get 5 EWE/castle for the price of 2.5 EWE.
I dont think that Kipchaks are that bad, especially as they do their job and most allies have better than regular Kipchaks (Bracers), plus Thumb rings is no necessary for them to perform contrary to CA.
I dont think many people want to go EWE in mid imperial 1v1.
1 Like
Knight with +2 attack vs archers + Camel vs Cheaper CA + Faster Stable + Tarkan in late Castle Age. Also the real point is Huns eco is really flexible for any army transition and sustain. While Persians eco is exact opposite. It is very tight. If you want more villagers, you can’t make military. If you build military, you may not have the advantage of more villagers.
Yeah right. They need some love in early Castle Age when you can safely put multiple TC or go for 1 TC push. Right now they are somewhat forced to play 1 TC push or delay the extra TC.
Yeah. I think someone got that balance change wrong before they posted the official patch log.
You are talking about Beserkkergang though not Chieftains, that’s the technology that adds bonus damage against Cavalry and now also Gold for killing civilians.
Both units do more damage against Cavalry then against Camels.
There is no unit that reverses that by doing more damage against Camels then Cavalry (besides Buildings).
I think that would be an interesting trait for a unit considering how many Camel civilisations the game already has.
Anti Elephant units already exist. Spearman do a lot more damage against Elephants and Scorpions have some bonus damage against them but not Cavalry or Camels at all.
You think taking Halberdier away would hurt them too much?
You can’t give them something without taking something.
Well, if a civ is bad you technically can.
1 Like
I thought the Persians were in a good spot.
Persians are midrange.
There are a lot of civilisations that are doing worse.
So you can’t give them something too good.
People don’t want to change Persia because it’s bad, they want to change it because some of the aspects are not the way they like them.
2 Likes
Yeah, my mistake.
I see. So non-Elite Berserk still regenerates at 20 HP/min?
Maybe remove one of the Imperial Age eco tech? I don’t really see their late game military options have variety. Anyway I don’t see why they need more options like CA either. Just make WE better and give “Lithuanians Treatment” to their eco.
Nope 40HP/second I just didn’t know because the official patchnotes were not released yet.
That’s an option too. It’s just harder for me to judge the impact of that.
1 Like
Yeah, Huns have a smoother eco.
But I wouldnt call Persian eco tight compared to many civs such as Spanish or Lituanians.
Persians are “tight” because they have fewer resources to work with compared to civ with stronger eco.
Upon castle age, Persians should be 2.5 villagers ahead + 1 farm + 200w + 50f (excluding the 150f needed for 3 villagers).
And something to always keep in mind as Persians is that we do not “have to” use the bonus at 100%, just ike Britons do not “have to add more TCs”.
If we get a couple of seconds idle time and do not make full use of the production speed (because we need military) in castle age, it is fine, we are already 2.5 vils ahead.
Yeah, early castle is a power hole (not a big hole though) because many other civs get a power spike in aditional resources or free tech, while Persians are ramping up. The problem though is that if we fill the hole, then they get a better economy at every stage of the game.
When playing Persians, it is often about surviving the 20 to 25 minutes interval until your eco carries you.
I think it is normal to delay your TCs until you can support them. Just like most xbow players wait for ballistics before adding TCs and most knight playersvbuild up his numbers on 3 stables before adding TCs, because they wont be able to sustain 2 or 3 stables production along with 3 TCs.
Agreed. I’d say they are lower than average on open land maps and above average on other maps.
I agree so much with this. It feels like so many people pick Persians but want to play a civ like Huns, with strong smooth mid game eco and a cavalry + CA play as go to strategy.