‘Villagers effected by blacksmith upgrades starting in castle age’
changed to →
‘Villagers effected by infantry upgrades starting in castle age’
Effects: blacksmith upgrades, squires and arson will all effect them and perhaps even supplies to cheapen their price to give their villagers a real grin on their faces.
Whether or not Fabric Shields would effect them would depend on balance.
This gives them further ability to take down buildings, a decent eco boost from increased movement speed, and would make them the eagle civ that happens to be similar to indians in the ability to have cheaper villagers. (35 food after supplies) that being said with supplies would probably be too much - would be fun. Squires and arson + blacksmith upgrades for sure tho, and I’d advocate for fabric shields as well.
Eh too strong for vills as the others have pointed out. Honestly I would remove the villager bonus entirely and buff their eco. Maybe swap the Chinese and IncaTB (and revert the extra food on farm TB nerf) and give them an extra starting llama as well as free caravan, guilds and treadmill crane as civ bonuses
Squires (basically Berber villagers after spending 100 food in Castle Age) and Arson (mini sappers available one age earlier) could be very interesting. I do think they need an eco bonus, and I’m not sure the 10% speed increase that starts midway through the game would be enough. Their main issue is gold in the late game.
Supplies and Fabric Shields don’t apply universally to infantry, and I don’t think either would be a good idea for villagers.
Incas are very weak actually in a lot of games. Kamayuks don’t have the durability needed, even if they are good against cav. Paladin just has more HP and is faster as well. The Incan lategame is also too dependent on gold for anything good, and even then, it tends to be fairly fragile. Although I know you tend to play uncommon maps or team games, not everyone else does, and Incas can do quite badly in 1v1s. They are certainly weaker than the other two meso civs.
Aztecs and Mayans are. Incas aren’t really anymore. They are normally just played as a generic archer civ with some quirks and eagles. They lost a lot of their identity with the nerfs to tower rushes and Feudal vil rushes. I’m not saying we should add that back, just that they are very much overshadowed by the other meso civs, and indeed, most civs.
I think that incas are fine as they are. A slightly below average civ that becomes above average in weird maps (nomad, megarandom, and maps where you start with low resource availability) or in maps favoring eagles.
If we really need to buff them this way, I would still be fine with having villagers affected by arson and/or squires. Squires would be as strong eco buff.
Supplies would be way too much. You would then have to consider removing the house bonus and the lama bonus (which makes them weaker in open maps but stronger in closed maps).
Yeah, Incas are well known for being the weakest of the 3 american civs.
For but for team games, gold is not a problem (especially for an arbalest civ). And for 1v1, late game is more often than not a problem.
You cannot only compare the paladin with the Kamayuks to decide whether or the civ is good in team games or 1v1.
I don’t believe the blacksmith bonus needs to be removed. The speed bonus can be added to the imperial tech with just enough speed% to make them(eagle warriors specifically) as fast as husbandry knights.
The smaller farms can be an additional bonus.
And if you’re just looking to replace the castle age tech, than instead of no minimum range on their slingers and the like, I would suggest instead no minimum range on their scorpions.
I’d actually like to hear some numbers on that one. Everyone seems to think Bohemian Fervor villagers are strong, but for years the consensus was that Berbers didn’t have a good eco bonus. I’m not sure which is true, but these statements seem incompatible.
I believe the impact on resource gathering is pretty minimal, the only thing that matters with 10%+ more speed is the ability to evade regular infantry and archers. I don’t know if the bonuses stack multiplicatively or additively, if they are multiplicative in theory villagers with fervor should outrun halbs with squires.
But this is hardly an eco bonus, more defensive bonus I’d say.
worth a try, but i think it might be safer to set it to either one of the two, or reduce the value for start…
i keep forgetting to remind people, all mesos inherently have an eco advantage: they only need to tech infantry armour and squires (both of which are cheaper than cav equivalent) while benefitting from really good infantry, and a more than good enough equivalent of cav. if just that factor by itself is an eco boost, and part of the reason incas with their “one of the weakest” ecos arent at the bottom…
That is an interesting point. I’m not sure I fully agree with it, since technically any civ could play without making stables or investing in cavalry techs. Still, the meso civs have eagles so they’re not crippling themselves like other civs would by ignoring cavalry.
I guess I do something similar with Ethopians, using Shotels as an eagle/cav substitute raiding unit since I generally have infantry upgrades for pikes (not a perfect replacement since they die quickly if they go near castles or archers). To a lesser extend, Celts can do this as well with the Woad Raider. I do see most players mixing in some cavalry as Celts, despite their missing Bloodlines and Plate Barding Armor. To that point, would it be considered an eco bonus that Celts do not spend resources on Bloodlines and Plate Barding, even if they are going cav? Weaker military, more resources available. Not a great trade IMO.
mesos dont have a weaker military, the eagle out performs scouts, and in many many cases out performs knights (factoring unit cost, and harvest of required resources) or vs specific targets: harder to convert, the main counter to kts is monks in castle age. better vs siege for the cost of each unit. better vs archers than kts are.
of course they could, but how would franks fair if they didnt go stables? most of the ladder is dominated by the best cav civs, and… mesos…
im not saying you have to use the advantage in every single game for the advantage to exist… conversely you dont even have to use the advantage AT ALL for the advantage to help you…
most extreme case for clarity: jaguars… aztecs never have to make jaguars, because the threat of their existence is enough to deter players from making infantry in numerous situations…