Well… we can’t agree then. In my opinion they are very strong countering cav. and cav archers.
Italians were already fine before this patch. Now, after the patch, GC cost less and university is cheaper. More than enough.
I’m not sure that it’s enough, but I think so, and if it’s not they really need just something small more, so at least on this point we agree more or less…
Well, for CA skirms are simply better (cheaper, more range, easier to train…).
As for the rest, let’s agree to disagree…
But skirms die to an easy knight /light cavalry switch from enemy.
GC can be tough for civs like franks, huns, persians, tatars etc.
1 Like
No, the EGC is barely any better than the non-elite version. Check the stats.
2 Likes
It goes from having +5 bonus damage against cavalry to +7. Do you think that is a small difference? In my opinion, it is significant. We don’t agree then.
And: 900 food + 750 gold is not that expensive actually imo.
It is a small difference: remember that you are paying 900f 750g for that. That’s a lot for some minor improvement.
GC are not weak by any means, but that doesn’t change the fact that the elite upgrade is probably the most overpriced one among all of the unique units.
4 Likes
To be precise:
It’s a 25% difference in damage against cav, while costing roughly as much as 20 genoese crossbows. So in terms of raw cost it is only worth it if you only fight cav and already have 80 genoese crossbows. In terms of production time it is already worth it if you are having 12 genoese crossbows.
5 Likes
It is a huge investment in 1vs1 game. It is nearly the price of aging up to imperial age. In 1v1 game, many players do not upgrade to paladin/ siege onagers as they cost too much. GC as a counter unit, which is subpar to arbs, cost that much to upgrade but do not improve a lot for Elite version. That does not make sense.
3 Likes
You know the aoe 2 inflation concept right?
It´s natural in the game that all kind of upgrades become more and more expensive while the game advances.
Take the samurai for example (900 food 875 gold). They upgrade significantly, but they are not as usable as GC are. Same with many many other UU.
750 Golds is very expensive in 1v1 games no matter which age. You cannot trade to produce gold. Arbalest upgrade just cost 300 Gold
Samurai are a situational unit which could use some buff imo, but even so this does not detract anything to what I said: the EGC upgrade is probably the most overpriced UU upgrade. In a 1vs1 I cannot really justify upgrading to elite over having more units.
Okey, I will agree, but then Elite throwing axeman, war elephant, teutonic knight, samurai, shotel warrior, ratan archer and some other UU need a cheaper elite upgrade aswell in order to be viable in a 1v1.
The point is Elite GC do not get enough stat improvement despite the high cost. Teutonic Knight, war elephant, shotel warrior, samurai get their atk and HP improved a lot. Rattan archer and Throwing axeman get their attack and range improved. Elite GC does not but only +2 bonus attack which is negated by the last cavalry armor upgrade.
Ofc they are not. Overall, something like 20% age up and SE may have some sense. 20% is 100f, the bare minimum to survive. Consider that Lithuanians have 150f and a military bonus.
SE would make Italian BBCs similar to Portuguese ones. And it would give them a more powerful late game unit which at least justifies being so weak in feudal.
Also it is really stupid having a university civ without SE, it is basically the only important university tech that you can miss
I think this is clear, either you buff the stats, like +1 range or you reduce the price.
People were complaining about GC being hard to mass. Devs reduced their training time.
Now people complain about being too expensive… GC literally just got cheaper in this patch…
1 Like
Yeah but you can’t compare GC to the WE, TA and SW, all those are units with big differences in stats and use.
Rattans ara a good comparison, and it’s elite cost more, but also give +5HP, +2PA, +1 atk and +1 range.
I’m not saying that there are just one way to buff the unit, you can even further reduce the gold or wood cost, so the elite at least becomes more achievable.
Or you can leave it as they are, and eventually give the Italians some other small buff in the future if it’ll be needed.
And I agree with you, but 5g alone doesn’t really help that way. For what GC offers, arbs are still the better option…
I mean, the cost itself isn’t the problem, with the exception of the CKN, all foot archers cost more or less the same. The problem is that all other foot archers civs (mayans, britons, viets,chinese…) have arguably way better eco thanks to their bonuses.
Italians go in the right direction with the last patch, and I’m not saying that they need more right away.
They need to be tested, then we are just speculating on what may be needed in the future, since before this update the Italians had big problems, and especially the GC…
However, I’m the first to say that they need to be seriously tested for a long period of time before suggesting any serious buff/change. What we are doing now it more or less theory crafting, based on the pre-patch data.
1 Like
But lithuanians don’t have anything else after that 150f. Italians have 75f, 120f and 160f, for a total of 335f, which is more than what etiopians get (300f), just to name another comparison.
If the age up discount would be buffed to 20%, that would make 100f, 160f and 200f, so 460f. I would take this bonus over the lithuanian or ethiopians one all the time.
The gold is just 200, but on that cheaper uni come helping in the right moment.
Yeah, theory crafting is fun.
In the end we are just putting ideas on the table, and see which ones appeals the most to the majority.
Interesting. But imo armor for pike is actually not that effective against cav. Unless your pike survive long enough to deal one more hit than generic one like Vikings.
I just think that people are using Italians wrong in land maps, drushing or doing maa into archers without delaying your next age or eco upgrades by that much is good, drush fc is easier and now basically having a discount in ballistics and chemistry when your resources need to be stretched in possibly closed games, yeah they are not mayans or a top tier civ but they aren’t weak as many people here think.
And as for GC, no they don’t need attack or range, they need extra armour and more HP or maybe more speed in the elite upgrade, GC are supposed to be a COUNTER to cavalry and most useful in TG situations, not a better arbalest that can easily deal with cavalry.
Which is negated by chemistry and bracer.
1 Like