Is there any dev who play treaty?

“”“”‘First of all i will give my hearty thanks to map development team , they made so many good maps for treaty and fixed old map , that stuff is amazing , love u all map development team “”“”’’

I have doubt that there is hardly any dev that actually know how to play treaty , becoz game balancing for treaty is going worse day by day .

I don’t think Dev’s have idea about what they r fixing apart from map development team .

Usa and mexico still not fixed even after so many updates , they r still , cancer op

Euthopia never get any nerf .they get one pop goons that match in stat with 2 pop goons , skirmishers with best stats in game , , highest hp skirmishers is given seige resistance ???

Otto , india , is not playable outside Andes , due to their slow train time , ( unless u r fighting some who is way lower in skill level )

Still Dev’s decided to nerf jans and abus Gund , without any compensation for late games , i don’t know what is the logic behind nerfing one of the weakest civ in treaty even more ???

Aztec was most weak civ in treaty and dev decided to make mortors 8 pop for them .

Haudasone was pretty average civ on Andes and weak civ outside Andes and still they give them 8 pop mortors ???

And the deletion of Sioux . The new change for Sioux was disaster , it was so bad that , it deleted Sioux from tr match pool . Massive nerfs and no bonus for a civ that was below average cheessy civ already .

I will make a separate thread on how they delete Sioux .

But why can’t Dev’s just talk to some treaty players before balancing , if they don’t know how to play the game mode ???

Yes u see treaty lobbies are like 20-25% of all lobbies , but players spend 3-4x more time on treaty due to game length ,

Can u Dev’s please , not kill treaty community ???


Pretty sure Otto and India in the hands of good players are very good. Otto doesnt even have to be as they are pretty decent and I see them played pretty often.

I mean they didnt have them before didnt they? Why complain about this? Aztecs have arrow knight which is already decent enough for mortar job. Mortar is an extra, dont make it if you dont think its worth it.

Same for Iroqouis.

I still see them get played and I would say the previous teepee spam was pretty strong close to OP if not OP so I am ok with the nerf. They have decent units and their hunting economy is also pretty good.

You dont even list that many problems, its an exaguration to say its killing the mode, just ban civs in your lobby you find OP, I agree that Mexico is OP and it shouls be nerfed, but I dont see why it kills the entire treaty genre.


I don’t know if u can read , otto and india only playable if u r fighting players of lower skill level . . When two good players are fighting , u will have a miserable slow lost when playing those civs .

If u think arrow knight are good at seige , that simple tells u don’t know how treaty works .

Arrow knights are useless . They have pretty shiity range .

They can’t even outrange artillery , trading arrow knight vs artillery , u need lots of arrow , that make ur army combo very bad . And 22-24 range seige units . How do u think it’s even remotely good , u can’t kill any player who make walls and camp with artillery , arrow don’t do a thing . And if u mass too much arrow , any cav spam can kill them …

Not to mention horse artillery have bonus vs them , horse artillery one shot kills more arrow than the cost of artillery .

Only good way to counter artillery is cyote , but that doesn’t work vs walls .

Dude if u wanna learn tr , i can teach u .

Haudasone has same issue , no good wal to counter wall camping .

And if u think teepee spam was op , u never played
as or vs Lakota .

Don’t look at photo of crazy stat units , in real game u can’t stack more than 5-6 teppe vs good player , and not to mention , if u make alkota split , Lakota just die , Lakota can’t fight at multiple places .

Not to mention , Lakota has almost no eco cards with just 74 vill gathering resources , they need strong units to actually have a chance at winning .

If u think treaty is balance , u never played treaty ,. Not in a moment of aoe3 was tr balanced . Not at least u can play more maps , but tr balance is worse .


If you dont get the wall down then make the mortars, simple as.

Also Arrow knight has more range then Horse artillery. If you cant manage to target the horse arty before they target your arrow knights its not the games fault, but yours.

So this is simply false. If you are not sure there is an entire wiki you can look at to make sure what you say is true.

There is this unit called the light cannon, which also has more range then other fighting artillery except for the Culverin. They deal like 90+ damage against buildings, without upgrades or cards which is enough, as its a culverin and falconet in one basically already, not to mention Iroqouis also have battle ram and mantlet. You should be able to micro them if you think you are so good.

And again just train the captured mortar if you think this isnt enough.

I mainly play team games treaty, and I can tell from experience that the Sioux can definatly be extremely strong with teepees if the opponent knows what they are doing.

Its called micro, and people do it, with the card your infantry can build the teepees, which you most likely already know so I dont know how you think they cant spam the teepees.

Where did I say it was balanced? I wonder wether you actually read what I wrote or just the bare minimum.

I even said Mexico is OP so again, no idea where you got this from unless you decided to make it up.

1 Like

Lmao , dude u have no idea about how treaty is played at higher level .

Do u really think u can shoot arrow knight with ■■■■■■ animation to instant shooting horse artillery ??? Do u have any idea how many arrow is needed to one shot horse artillery ???
U need tons of arrow to one shot horse artillery , as arrow knight does range demage not seige demage and if u have enough arrow knight to one shot horse artillery then ur army composition will be very bad vs cav or even skirmishers .

Of atleast u admissed light cannon has lower range than culverin , so how will u destroy walls guarded by culverins …

Don’t count 8 pop mortors , u make 4 mortors and u lost 32 pop .

Do u know captured mortors are 8 pop ???

And if u feel Lakota is op , u never played at good level , just spam walls and mortors , it’s so easy to body block warchierf , and spread ur mortor , i could have teach u how to fight Lakota , but Lakota is deleted .

1 Like

índia sempre foi uma piada em tratado

I wouldnt go as far to say they have killed the treaty community lol. But yes Treaty balance is an after thought. There are players that give (or try to give) feedback to the devs directly, but not much gets through. Myself and others have come up with ideas in detail to help balance, but nothing ever comes of it unfortunately.

The one thing I can say, the developer “vividly” is a suberb map maker for treaty. I wish the balancing teams were as good as he is in that department.

P.s How they thought that giving Lakota a 10%~ eco buff to offset effectively loosing 19 stackable tepee auras just shows how little they know about Treaty balance and how Lakota was played at a high level.


Devs gived them mortars because aztecs need them to take down walls effectively. Villagers can spam walls faster than AKs take them down. Remember that mortars have a greater Area of damage.

Aztecs have a hard time vs walls because their only counter to skirmishers are coyotes (that are weak enough), that are blocked by walls.
Also AKs arent that effective vs canons, cause these ones have x1.25 vs AKs.

Captured mortars were far from being OP

Why u would build them if they dont stack anymore??

Did you say that you play treaty games?? Rams are far from being usable as they are expensive on wood, a scarce resource for Hauds while arent game changing. Flail elephants are better, at least can kill artillery and skirmishers


I am going to say something a bit controversial, but the treaty in AOE 3 does not make sense, the civilizations are not the same, some are better than others depending on the situation, Rush, Eco and FF, also by not sharing the same mechanics there are civilizations with clear advantages and disadvantages in treaty.

The only way I can think of to fix the treaty in AOE 3 is to alter how the imperial age works and adapt it to represent a more substantial change.

For example.
It would remove all the economic advantages of the capitol and allow the imperial ages to have their own customizable deck.

What the capitol would have is the ability to create construction carts that would only cost gold, in this way we would not waste wood.

Imperial civs would have unique units and buffs of their own to compensate for where they tend to be weak, for example the English should gain access to the Rager automatically in Imperial.

Imperial decks could have more powerful cards, for example a 3 Royal Cannon (Inf) shipment.

Obviously duplicate economy cards cannot be resent.

This would guarantee that in long-term treaties all civilizations have exactly the same power, but without destroying what makes them unique.

1 Like

Let me talk about the treaty, the United States and Mexico must be weakened, the United States has the cheapest but too powerful scattered troops, I do not understand that the French scattered army with so many bonuses is still inferior to the state citizens who just stand under the flag. The Texas option of the United States is even more of a cancer of the treaty. Didn’t the developer really consider that the Marine Corps’s attributes were too strong, I can’t find an infantry that is stronger than the Marines in this game, such an infantry is actually given away for free? Just build the building, wait for the opponent to blow up the building, and then win, because the free Marines will sweep everything. Mexico has been weakened, which is good but not enough, the multiplier of the exchange card has been reduced to 1.3, but Mexico has 5 logging enhancement cards, which will lead to the coins he can exchange for far more than the average country, and I think Mexico’s logging efficiency must also be weakened to get his economy back to normal levels, so that his opponents do not have to take excessive pressure.


Ethiopia’s strength in the treaty was not as exaggerated as people thought, he lacked influence in the 1v1 competition to produce indigenous people, the same indigenous training speed was also very slow, making it difficult for him to compete with indigenous powers such as France, Spain and Japan, his soldiers were strong but expensive, and the efficiency of african farming was very low, the same Ethiopia did not have good cavalry, the artillery production speed was also slow and expensive, he sacrificed many aspects in exchange for javelin cavalry and powerful scattered troops, This is a country with obvious advantages and disadvantages, because the reason for the ranking has been weakened for half a year, and I don’t think it is necessary to weaken his only remaining advantage

The common problem in aboriginal countries is that they cannot face the powerful artillery fire of Europe. Unlike Asian countries that have countermeasures, the countermeasures of aborigines are quite worrying. They have to sacrifice 25 peasants to dance in exchange for the original use of enhanced cards. The thing that can be done, the Aztecs and the Incas have this problem, it is a stupid design to use infantry to counter artillery fire, and now Lakota has lost what it can rely on in the treaty, no more With the bonus of tents, weak arms cannot face any European countries. So far only the Iroquois have been able to remain strong in the treaty because of their more European-like force system

1 Like

11 unupgraded arrow knights should be able to one shot an unupgraded horse artillery. Arrow knights have 1.5 attack speed while the horse artillery only has 4, which means the Arrow knight shoots 2 times, close to 3 before the horse artillery shoots once. So basically you only need 6. Which is 12 pop, which is only 4 pop more then 2 culverins. When most of your units only cost 1-2 pop, then those 4 extra pop shouldnt be a huge blow.

The initial firing still lies by the Arrow Knight as they have 4 more range and the Horse arty needs to unpack first. Even if the Horse arty shoots first or after first arrow volley, you should have easily microed the arrow knight to prevent more then 2 units from being hit. Also if they are defending their walls they would have to go outside their walls which will allow other troops to come in.

Battle rams, mantlet, captured mortar, not to mention you can move your light cannon up, I mean you say you can move the horse artillery up for arrow knighy so why not for light cannon? Light cannon in fact does shoot instantly as they dont need to unpack.

Where did I say Lakota were OP? I said the Teepee spam was pretty strong near to if not OP, didnt say the Lakota as a civ were OP.

I didnt say they were OP, I just dont see how they kill the treaty game, its already an extra unit which those civs didnt have access to previously. I wouldnt mind a pop reduction card or upgrade.

We were talking about pre-update.

I mean its an option, 150 siege damage is decent enough to mix them with other troops while sieging down walls. If you use a mixture of mantlets, rams and other support units you will also be able to defens your light cannons shooting at the wall or enwmy units.

Also they only cost 20 more wood then most artillery units. I would also say that you can eaisly get a wood buffer up before end of treaty.

Having them with 8pop slots is like not having them, because arent worth it. Devs shouldnt change their pop cost

1 Like

Ok i take it , we cabt say @devs are intentionally trying to kill tr .

They did good job balancing , spain and British .

But most of their changes completely avoid tr balancing .

And some low level players keep posting units stats of 19-20 stackable teepee to hypothetical senerio ( impractical ) . And it make dev kill teepees without even knowing Lakota game play .

It’s not worth to explain treaty to someone who doesn’t know anything about treaty , so u r right asting time , like i did on him

Euthopia has best goons , best skirmishers , they don’t even need influence to win most match up , even if they just keep some culv to strip enemy art , just skirmishers goon can alone make them win most mu.

And imagine something like ottoman , ottoman can’t even kill jevelin riders , how r they even dream about winning .