Well, Saracens team bonus is also OP in some team games, especially 4v4. You get 2 good Archer civ allies and rekt buildings way too easily.
I’m not a fan of “Bonus vs Buildings” as a Team Bonus… Last BO21 4v4 games I watched (Brazil vs China) they all used this bonus a lot.
Well those are archers, they break through walls and prevent the vills behind to wall again. The camel comparison is off
That bonus is to compensate for the lack of the knight line, since paladins (but even cavalier) are still a lot better vs buildings than IC, both for attack and HP-PA.
The bonus vs buildings is annoying but that doesn’t win games, it is the imperial upgrade that turns everything one sided, ask any 25++ player about indians and how they have to pick them to not lose the game, that is the definition of an OP civ, something you need to have to win or else you would lose, if the only solution is to pick indians in ur own team RIP, that is killing the civ diversity.
I am not asking for a huge nerf, just a small one that would prevent those camels to destroy other units that are not mounted, and that other camel civs doesn’t lose so bad vs them, they have ele archers with +9 pierce armor, they should be fine.
The guy saying that they don’t balance around tgs, lol what about all the battle eles nerf, all those have been because of team games, but well he would never accept that he is wrong, i think it is the same guy that wanted ETK to build towers, so whatever.
Devs have the stats and indians are being picked just too much, indicating they are broken, not the civ at all but the imperial camel by itself, giving the battle elephant would be the option they are missing in castle age, since in imperial they have camels with 5 pierce armor and just 55 food 60 gold, among cheap villagers that grants them more army and faster upping times.
Imperial Camels are fine, and they are not needed in any other civs. Even if the devs nerfed Imp Camels to worse than a Scout, Indians should still never get any kind of Heavy Cavalry unit, specially not the BE.
They went for more than “compensate” then… Because Imperial Camels cost less (both unit cost and upgrade cost) and yet they do 1 more dmg to buildings compared to Paladins.
Paladins take less damage from archers, have more health, and attack faster though.
I’d say increase their training time, it’s almost disgusting how easily Indians can spam imp camel in late game with trade with their 15 sec TT from multiple stables. That’s castle UU level TT. It’s so simple for Indians to boom faster than most civs and train and mass a rather cheap yet competent power unit.
Even if you’re against a non cavalry civ it’s okay to spam and overwhelm them with numbers
I think the Imperial camel is fine, but I think they´re caste age camels are to strong. With +1 pierce armour (20% less damage from crossbow) and +5 attack against buildings (stronger than knights against buildings) it´s to mutch, Change the bonus for the Indians and make them more flexible. Give them Elite Battleelefants. They have no technology for them like the other ele civs, so they are not overpowered. Instead of the +1 pierce armour for camels give them 25% faster training time for elephant units. And normal (not elite) battle elephants as team bonus or special indian mercenary elephants. Or +1 attack for infantery
That’s not true, castle age camels as a main unit are not that good, even with pierce armor they drop to xbows
they take more damage from archer then any cavalry unit that isn’t a cataphract does.
as for their building damage - okay so Indian camels are better then knights against 2 things. cavalry units and buildings. for a civ that lacks knights, this isn’t a big deal.
they literally still take 4 damage a shot from castle age crossbows. for comparison knights take 3 and have higher base attack.
so were going to change the entire design of the civilization just because you think they have overpowered camels?
It’s a tough call because Indians as pocket against no Indians pocket at the top level is as much as a civ win for TG that you can get.
If allowed picked civs for top TG tournaments, Indians will always be picked first for both teams. If it is a draft, then it’s almost a gg for the non Indian civ team. They are that important in team games.
The fact that they are not dominant in 1v1s makes this such a tricky problem to solve.
you mean like Mayans and Aztecs are auto picks in tournaments too? or Italians and Vikings on water maps? or Huns in death matches/
some civs are just going to be better in certain situations.
imo its the comibination of all 3 bon bons thats the issue… i dont think they should nerf more than 1 of the 3 bon bons. bonus building, bonus PA and then IC stack up to make beast cavalry
the IC can out run almost any response, tear down buildings at almost the same rate as paladins(15 at 2.0 ROF vs 14 dmg at 1.9 ROF), cost 80% of the gold of a paladin, and can generally counter the very units used for chasing away raiders.
so imo one of these changes could happen:
if it had lower building damage, their raids wouldnt be so terrible
no PA would mean raiders would get killed faster/IC less effective in pitched battles
increase the tt so it cant be spammed as much
im sorry but this is nuts… camels for every other civ need a buff of some form as it is, they take more damage already from counter cavalry due to the lack of MA, and they take more damage from archers, and they do less damage than hussars/light cavalry (HC/CR respectively)
so if anything only the indians/IC needs a nerf
Honestly from the TG I have watched, Aztecs aren’t a very high pick. It’s dominated by strong Calvary civ pockets with strong archer civ flanks. Aztecs don’t fit that role well.
i disagree, camels do what they are supposed to do and that is fine. yeah ethiopian camels suck but they also get free pikes.
i wasn’t talking team games. just tournaments. go watch 1v1 tournaments and you’ll see Mayans and Aztecs being a popular pick. go watch death match tournaments. you’ll see huns are very popular.
Yeah but I’m talking about TG which is why this thread exists. People aren’t wanting to rebalance IC for 1v1.
and the point is that it’s okay for civs to shine in different spots. Indians shine in team games. Aztecs and Mayans shine in 1v1. Huns shine in Death match.
Indians are a fairly mediocre civ in 1v1, but because of their “massive” 52.5% winrate in team games they should be nerfed?
52.5% winrate is actually fairly balanced all things considered, and they aren’t even the most popular team game civilization, despite your claims. you say they are picked all the time.
https://aoestats.io/stats/RM_TEAM/1650+
here they are not even a top 5 pick rate
https://aoestats.io/stats/RM_TEAM
here they are not even a top 15 pick rate.
But paladins can place more hits, since it survive more thanks to its higher HP and PA, so 1 more damage its not that big of a deal.
I had the impression that the Indian Eco is just really strong. In 1v1 it’s held back by not having any good units, but in team games Camels are strong.
Weren’t Zealotry Heavy Camel (HC), Farimba HC & 20% discounted Maghrabi HC approximately as good as ImpC? It’s only because Saracens, Malians & Berbers have worse eco (and better 1v1 options) that they aren’t in the same position as Indians.
PS: if this analysis is correct it suggests a ‘fix’ to make Indians worse in team games & better in 1v1: