I think it is fair that if Indians got a nerf on shorefish, Mongols get it too on hunting

According to some calculations done for the previous fisherman of the old indians, the gathering rate of their food on a shorefish was 29.7 food/min. And it was pretty big (slav handcart food collection is 27.4 f/min) as they could carry 10+15 = 25 food in feudal too and also save up a bit for the villagers costing less.
It was nerfed and that is ok, kinda.
BUT the current mongol hunt bonus gives them the incredible amount of 34.4F/MIN gathering rate. And hunters already carry 35 food in feudal.

I mean what? And this is left untouched but Indians, a civ almost nobody picked is nerfed?

Obviously i would suggest some sort of balance for this, like scout more hp starting from feudal with +15% hp, light cav +25% and hussar +30%


Indians didn’t get nerfed because it was overpowered, it got nerfed because of the dock change which would have made fishing even more effective.
Mongol Hunting has already been nerfed.

1 Like

The mongol bonus is calculated on this patch.

And dock really doesn’t change anything as the gathering rate is still that and you can build a mill attached to the water and gather there if you want. With 2 shorefish nearby, a mill is worth the investment. Currently it is 28,4 which is still better than slav farm but they lose 15 carry capacity so they have standard 10. And i remark hunting carry capacity is 35.


yeah? and let me ask you this.
don’t you think having 10% faster farming OVER THE ENTIRE GAME is better then 40% faster early game hunt?
don’t you think having to not drop off at a mill is better then 40% faster early game hunt?
don’t you think that faster wood cutting/gold mining is better then faster early game hunt?
the mongol bonus literally has a shelf life that expires before you leave the dark age. thus why its stronger. but other bonuses last way longer.

it saves you the mill. which is 100 wood. and normally people don’t shore fish on maps with water and land play, the dock change actually encourages it.


I don’t think indians is the meta in a lot of maps where you might actually build a dock to go water. Indians were picked a lot for bedouins, aztlan and slopes I think being some of the more recent maps I remember. There it’s always pools with shorefish, and it’s something you go for instead of berries.

Edit: Or is that what you’re saying actually, that indians could be a better pick now with dropping off at the dock?


that’s what i’m saying. think 4 lakes.
build a dock, go shore fish nearby


Mongol hunting bonus has already been nerfed, and are you really comparing them to Slav farms? Something you can do whole game vs hunt thats exhausted by dark age? Shorefishing isthe fastest source, and 15% on that is over the top. And Indians have another big eco bonus, Mongols only have one



Who said it isn’t? Even though you need wheelbarrow to be better than aztecs at gathering from farms and slav is best after that, Iwas comparing the fastest gathering food rate late in castle to what the two civs have in comparison at Feudal.
I am putting a reference in comparing.

Indians aren’t a water civ (even though their dock isn’t bad, they don’t have any dock bonus) so if they are not planning to go heavy fishing ships or there isn’t deep fish and only shorefish, there is no reason for a dock. Dock also costs 175 wood.

Don’t you think it is ironic that you claim they can only use it in feudal and completely ignore that it is the same for the Indians? I am not comparing them to the slav farms. I am comparing the two with an intermediary which is the slav farm. The whole point of the title is this.
Shore fish is also only a bit faster than hunting and here we are talking about a difference of 25 carry capacity and 30% more speed. For instance the old indians were still slower than mongols.

It isn’t incorrect. They have one of the lowest picking rate and that is probably because people choose random and sometimes they get indians.

You dont seem to understand what you are talking about. Not sure how skilled you are at the game, but some of your comparisons actually works against your point. Have a good think about what you are suggesting here.

1 Like

Why don’t you try to explain instead of saying that?

1 Like

Mongols is a civ designed to benefit of dark age bonuses (hunt + scout), which should transition into a good early game - their power spike - The hunting bonus is designed to put Mongols in this spot. During castle age its a civ that struggles as they have no bonuses and are at their weakest.
Slavs is quite the opposite. Its a civ that start to shine on Castle age due to the farm bonus and transitions really well into Imp… But its a slower civ. Its part of the civ design.

You farm on all maps, starting around minute 10 until the game is done. You usually hunt between minutes 3-10, if the map has hunt and most times put your villagers at risk to do so… and thats it. On a standard map an income of 700f (4 deer) a bit faster than the oponnent. Its just a boost to allow the civ a power spike - if you take it away, you need to address its weak castle age by giving them some other boost or you end up with a civ without a purpose.

Indians do not need such a power spike because they still have an additional eco bonus in the form of cheaper villagers - that apply to all maps, during all ages of the game, as you pointed out. Its ‘free’ 125f during an average dark age. Its ‘free’ 500-700f over the course of a game. Mongols don’t get resources for free, just collect them seconds faster.

Have in mind that balance is done based on standard resources. If a map instead of 4 deer and 2 boars has 3 boars and 12 deer (scandinavia) then the powerspike becomes too OP - but thats due to the map, not due to gathering speed. It allows a small buff to be carried over for too long. If instead of 3 boars and 12 deer you had 25 berries, Franks would be OP. if 12 additional sheep, Britons would be OP. Actually, look at the new map pool, Wolf Hunt has a lot of sheep - I can bet you we will see more Britons than Mongols. The sheep collection rate is high and its a very safe resource as you can herd it to the safety of your TC. Should Britons be nerfed because of it?

Its just how the civs are designed to have their advantages and some maps simply cause imbalances as they deviate from standard.


First, i am writing that i am not comparing the civs to slavs. I am using slavs as an intermediate to compare them. As a reference.

The reason why Indians have less costing villagers is because the shorefish isn’t guaranteed in all the maps ( while hunts yes) and they have a huge heavy food costing UU, which is EA. For example to save some houses late game and villagers wasting time to build instead of chopping, mongols have the tech that allows them to not build house.

No all the other things you mentioned are simply not true. Franks gathering rate in berries are still worse than NORMAL hunting and britons sheep gather rate is the same as hunting. Mongols have 10 more F/min collection rate comparing to all of the others civs with bonus ( except indians which is 6 f/m). And not only they gather faster, they carry more which is a huge bonus itself as it lets them waste less time to move (with wheelbarrow you can carry 44 food by hunting, with handcart 60).

No, their tech allow them to not have to replace lost houses, which means the upfront cost to get the house in the first place is still there. And it’s a pretty bad tech, as the point is to fill the second UT slot for flavour without buffing the civ.

Sure. But you know, Franks have another eco bonus thx to the free farm upgrades.

This one is not only super easy to use (it allows you to start with only 5 vils on sheep) but on top of that Britons also have a second eco bonus (discount on TC)

Since the boar is supposed to go under the TC that carry capacity just means that you will have to force drop them, that’s pretty much it.


No point arguing. He has made his mind and thinks he is correct even though every single post here contradicts and provides arguments for it. As I said, he doesnt know what he is talking about, as per his argument regarding Mongols houses.


The Indian nerf was not just because of the Dock change or because Indians op but because it broke the balance on the rare maps that have shorefish that can be gathered with vills, Aztlan and Slopes are still infamous for it. They don’t benefit from the bonus on most maps at all so it wasn’t really a nerf to the indians but to make these maps playable, which have become popular on tournaments recently. The Mongol bonus on the other hand is designed to help Mongols on all maps as 99% of the Maps have multiple boars and deers. It prevents making maps playable who have more boars/deer as starting food ressource so that’s an argument for nerfing it. Mongols rely on this bonus however, they would need something as compensation like cheaper Feudal Age but it probably will never happen as the Mongol hunting bonus is very iconic.


I think they should nerf the attack speed of cav archer. The Mangudai are too strong.

My mistake on writing. But the Mongols also save pop from castles.

Yeah like mongols house saving from further building tech. Still saving some wood and food doesn’t mean frank farmers are faster.

Which kicks in castle? It is not strictly an ecobonus, as you still need the same amount of stone so you need vills on stone for more than 2 tc. And that means delayed castle.

Everybody needs to do that for boars. But hunts aren’t just boars? Also it means they gather faster and finish faster and can put villagers on other tasks.

What about feudal scout +15% hp, light cav +25% and hussars +30% instead of starting from light cav +30%?

But Indians have another early economy bonus with cheaper villagers it won’t be fair nerfing a civs only economic bonus with a such example imo.

The problem is that it is too strong as for now. We can try to discuss some suggestion for compensating early mongols that is balanced in all maps instead of being a little powerful on most maps and too much powerful on the others.