Then Georgians can do instant drush like Lithuanians. Devs may wanna prevent it.
Lithuanians canāt do the instant drush anymore since the last change.
A change that I am still upset about.
Thatās fine. Such rushes are hard with a complicated build for the rusher itself. And Georgians donāt get much of a bonus till castle age. So a small lead from the drush is good too.
not just this event. Meso are top drafted on most events.
Incas are almost as popular as Mayans in tournaments these days though, atleast for Arabia.
Thatās a good point. Mongol hunt bonus needs a heavy nerf. Iād say knights need 1 more upgrade either for cost or p.armor to get to their current stats. That can help a lot with knight meta balance.
Thatās a good idea too. Iād still nerf their hunt bonus more.
I believe its because archer pathing is fixed, he proposes nerf to eagles a common anti-archer generic unit.
For conqs and other gunpowder, Iād simply propose chemistry gives them +3 and reduce their current base attack by 2. Buff to imp while a strong nerf to their castle age versions. Revert the previous patch change and set organ gun and hussite base attack by +1 if needed.
Or Iād simply make non-elite conqs slower to train.
This has to be food wood, wouldnāt mind switching it to castle age.
blast radius, base damage should increase moderately.
Barrack and workshop discount totally unnecessary. Militia line fix is needed for most of these infantry civs.
2 Likes
Revert 150 food on start. Remove fire ship line from tech tree.
Uhā¦ Make adjustment to generic unit due to the three meso civs 
make the meta favor knight play more?
No. Iāve mentioned that there needs to be nerfs to knights and camels too further down in my comment.
What about an general indirect nerf to camels and knights and a buff to spearmanline like some extra dmg vs caveraly
Yes, letās add two units associated with deserts to a civ associated with jungles -_-
No lets try to replicate history by making some civs insanely overpowered and others terribly weak. And use the game to teach a history class.
Anyways this can also be a secondary unique unit. Lets say melee only ratha from stable that doesnāt have archer class armor, no trample damage and -15 hp compared to castle rathas.
I think I proposed the same thing once back in 2022 even before free Orthodoxy become a civ bonus for them. Melee only Ratha with no archer or cav archer armor class and cost food instead of wood. But we are way past that point.
1 Like
The Japanese CA bonus is not really niche in my opinion.
Foot archers are a natual counter to CAs, by the cost and range, but it does not well work for Japanese now. They remain their quality when against melee units like Knights, and now even better when against ranged units. The Japanese were not so bad balanced at the beginning. They were just a bland civ, at most having the UU that does not work pretty ideally but still fine, then get this pretty good bonus.
Now I think people would always switch to CAs rather than to keep using crossbowmen when needing ranged units in the Castle age. Removing Husbandry is a nerf with minimal impact, gently prompts CAs to have a clear strength and minor weakness, which gives their arbalester a reason to be used. There donāt seem to be many civs that have both useful CAs and arbalesters, so I hope they arenāt simply pushed to be a CA civ.
I still like this bonus. It is a nice feature which I personally think is also an answer from the devs that they wonāt give Samurais an archer mode. They encourage using CAs against ranged UUs if needed.
Compared with other places, before the Meiji era, the native Japanese horses were said that small in size, good at climbing hills due to the environment, but could not run really fast. This may be one of the reasons why they developed in mounted archery more than in charging, and could also be a reference for removing Husbandry.
1 Like
Fair enough, maybe it is less niche than I thought. But Iād still be wary about removing husbandry, though. It seems to me like one of those almost essential techs.
I definitely agree with this:
The other east Asian civs feel more interesting to me. The cavalry archer bonus definitely makes Japanese feel less bland.
Itās not āteaching a history classā or whatever strawman people who donāt like history existing say to try and put down arguments against them.
Itās the simple fact that:
- Bengal exists. It does not have desert animals in a mostly jungle, river and marshy biome
- Like it or not, the civs have some basis in history and reality, they all do
- You can make balance changes without doing things wildly off a civās design or reality
4 Likes
Except for some reason the Armenians.
So, no balance changes until the end of HCV and/or VaV DLC released I assumed.
2 Likes
make poles viable again.
Shrivamsha rider is a horse and Bengalis get full cavalry upgrades.
Thatās fine but its not fully history based and primary focus should be game balance over historical accuracy. Civs that had bombard canons have lost them, civs which didnāt have got them. Japan initially were not supposed to have decent cavalry once upon a time but suddenly that changed.
Yes you can and adding a unit like Shrivamsha rider, knight, lancer, or any new unit that fits the role of being a strong cavalry unit for mid game.
On the other hand trying to replicate history leads to broken Mongol steppe lancers like situations or terribly weak Bengali/Dravidian situation.
Itās also a breed from the Deccan area, a vast plateau. Not Bengal, which is not the kind of environment suitable for fast horse breeds to be developed.
I get that things canāt be perfectly historically accurate, I have never suggested that they should be. Just keeping to a civās themes or at least obeying the geography of the area should be the bare minimum.
Bengalis should not have strong horse-based cavalry units. That is why they even have chariots in the Middle Ages, because horse breeds in the area are not as good as elsewhere.
If they need a solution, then something like putting the Ratha in the stable and giving them a different UU at the Castle would be a much better solution.
Where do you keep getting this from? No civ is balanced based on how strong they were historically. Thatās utter nonsense.
3 Likes
I think you know well that all these 3 can be fixed within history. Balance team just doesnāt want to do that as they think all 3 civs are fine.
1 Like