Yes last time they also put the PUP up and then adjust the value in final release so Gurj can have a further nerf on it
I like the change.
It would have been better if there was a cav nerf in the patch too (eg knights -5 hp and something for the indian civs)
but such changes can always be implemented in the next patch.
Not as bad as it sounds tbh, they only struggle against archer civs (which are now nerfed) or if they canât wall at all
Once they got a castle up, cav civs melt under the Genoese crossbows, and in the lategame they have FU Hussar and BBC to counter siege
It should be 225F and 150G to be fair. Of course it deserves a nerf
Devs logic -
If you canât nerf Franks, add 2 civs that absolutely destroy Franks.
If you canât nerf britons, nerf xbow and arbalester.
1 Like
Then nerf them because Franks players complain. 11
This patch is nothing but a stealth buff to Franks.
3 Likes
I still think that the main reason for the xbow/arb powerspikes is that skirms only âpassivelyâ counter archers with the armor.
This causes that problem that skirms of one age before canât counter xbow / arb as they just take too much damage from them whilst still dealing only mediocre damage to them.
2 Likes
It will but not a big impact. If the crossbow unit cost itself was increased by 10 resources that would have caused a big impact. But this is a one time upgrade and shouldnât be much of a setback. The reason why those 15 civs are probably going to lag behind some of the strong cavalry civs like Franks, is the magnitude of eco bonuses being much higher for those civs. But between a mid-tier cavalry civ and mid-tier archer civ this wonât have a big impact.
Definitely not as low as Dravidians or Bengalis. Civ has fu hussar and cavalier, fu arbs with extra p.armor, cheaper gunpowder, and quite decent balance between eco bonuses and tech tree for the early to mid game.
3 Likes
What?! Can anyone confirm this? Everyone will afford 2 mills easily.
Definitely an indirect buff to franks
Even though franks can and do go xbows occasionally theyâre so geared towards knights that everything is just a buff for them (including the hopefully better pathing)
Maybe now, Devs will finally remove their berry bonus. And give it to Mayans 
No.
https://www.ageofstatistics.com/statistics/individual?game=aoe2&period=p03_v08&filter=rm_solo_open
They actually suffer against cav civs. Because GC are very difficult to mass and donât have the mobility, and are even easier countered by archer hard counters⊠skirms and mangos (specifically with their dwarf range)
Italians donât automatically spawn with BBC. Chemistry is slow and BBC are slow to train. Meaning even in imperial thereâs a window to wipe GC . Nevermind the rest of the game, where Italians just die
Someone made a great meme on Reddit about how players try and explain how Italians are balanced on land maps, even though no one picks them and they have a bad WR, and we canât blame it on âdifficult to playâ like Chinese.
3 Likes
I wonder if it is finally time for this (or something else to nerf knights, like increased TT) especially considering if pathing is actually fixed for once
imo it would be the most controversial change to the game, since so many players are so dependent on knights
And they have such different power levels depending on ranked Vs pros.
Would franks suffer the most from it? They would finally have weaker knights than every other BL civ? Meaning thereâs finally a cost for the instant free BL?
1 Like
so archers get a 1 time cost nerf, but knights get a permanent nerf? doesnât really seem fair.
2 Likes
I think itâs more to do with when the units are better. Archer lines generally rely on powerspikes
Knights on generally survivability
Also knight civs are almost always dominant on the ladder(as youâre aware)
3 Likes
Yeah this sounds like an awful thing to do. Leave knights HP alone. Just nerf them by increasing the train time or perhaps cost. But nothing as outlandish as changing their HP.
Or simply do something controversial like removing the Franks berry bonus. Or simply nerfing the berry bonus to the ground to like 5% faster.
In the late game knights require masss of trade carts and many farms to be mass produced. Where has pike and halb only require farms and wood.
and knights are more expensive, not massible until castle age, more expensive to upgrade.
yeah? but at the top level we see archers dominating. i see even knight civs going archers.
balancing around 1200 elo ladders isnât the answer. Itâs literally impossible to balance around both low and high skill. so where does balance matter the most?
those create the same issue. youâre giving knights a PERMANENT nerf as opposed to archers which just pays a 1 time extra 50 food and gold for xbow and a little bit more for arbs.
4 Likes
Amazing change. Watching pro games the power of crossbows and arbalests are less in a straight fight, but rather the value they get over the game:
Can harass villagers over walls, buildings and wood lines.
Can attack repairing villagers, preventing them from keeping your ranged units from their base.
Any villager kills slows down enemy tech, several kills early can usually decide them game.
Not costing food, not slowing down teching nearly as much as food-intensive units.
Strong power-spikes, arbalester have no counter if opponent is still in castle age. I have watched many games where an early advantage, usually from villager kills with crossbows leads to reaching imperial age, arbalester, bracer etc and there is no counterplay really.
I think the strength of ranged units mainly lie in how difficult it can be to keep them from damaging your economy and how hard it can be to keep them out of your base, since you canât really repair walls and buildings with them in range.
With the knight-line, good walling can keep them out from your villagers. So if mounted units are stronger in a straight up fight in the open field, that makes much sense to me. They still have a much harder time reaching your eco if walling.
Ranged units are much stronger than stats say in this game, because of chokepoints, doing damage without getting hurt themselves, and pathing. But they should not be strong in all situations.
Perhaps this might lead to a different meta, where vs knight civs walling becomes much more important, playing defensively, but against archer civs you need to, and are able to meet them head on in the open field.
2 Likes
