Ofc. If it is not worthy but the unit is, then the problem is the upgrade and there is no need to buff the unit. Just reduce the upgrade cost.
If instead the unit is bad, then just buff the elite version with range, attack or whatever.
Are they? Letās compare them with the 2 main cavalry counter, the pike line and the camel line:
Camels cost 60g, and have 9 bonus damage vs cav, but their main advantage is that they are a bit faster than the knight, giving them the ability to pursue them and force engagements.
The pikes on the other hand canāt force engagements (unless you encircle the knights) or pursue, but donāt cost gold and have a bigger bonus damage.
GC are the middle of the road, they are slow like the pike but their range allows to hit the cav while this approach and retreat. Still, this isnāt enough to force engagements, and cav after getting a few hits can simply retreat. They arenāt either as cheap as the pikes are, and they cost gold.
So now they cost 40g, having them cost 35 (almost half of a camel) could at least make them actually more cost effective in the long term (I mean, CKN cost 35gā¦).
Still, the main problem is that their elite upgrade is 2 times and a half the cost of the arbs upgrade, while the unit also costs more wood, and is less flexible overall.
Still, italians are better now, so we should consider that maybe GC can be left as they are, or receive just a really really minor buff, or no buff at all and simply change other aspects of the civ.
This!
1 Like
Here we are discussing 2 possible buffs: SE or 20% age discount.
I thought of another minor and circumstantial one I have suggested before, but now it makes more sense: free stone mining upgrades!
The idea of this buff is making two circumstantial strategies more viable for them: tower rushing and turtling. Extra stone combines handy with their new university discount: (tower upgrades, fortified wall, murder holes, arrowslits, heated shotā¦ even architecture and masonry).
This would make Italians feel a bit similar to Koreans, which wood discount is not very noticeable in feudal age unless they go skirms. Actually, after this buff, their trush would be a hybrid between the Korean one (extra stone gathering and free upgrades) and Teuton one (free murder holes). They would have to pay for each upgrade, but less, and would have more stone for towers, castles, and TCs. (and save 33 stone from murder holes).
Maybe it would be enough with the first stone upgrade like Malians have only one free gold upgrade.
However, I am conscious that we need to wait before asking for buffs again. Maybe the university discount is enough for them to be viable on land maps.
(i know devs wanted to nerf trush, but then they added donjon rush to the game, so lets give this a try. At least, it is not a noboru rush)
This may suit better the sicilians, who are dangerously vulnerable to tower rushes. Even just the first one as you said may help them.
As another option for the Italians I would consider cheap uni building, probably the smallest of the buff, but still useful.
It could be useful for sicilians but in that case there may be a dangerous side effect if someone uses the bonus to build a castle and 5 TCs ASAP for the crusade UT.
Thw univwrsity reduction price also helps to use the university bonus but also applies for archers, not only turtling
First crusade should be nerfed, thatās mandatory for any circumstance that we may speculateā¦
I fear thay sicilians simply are weak to tower rushes, since a donjon cost more than a tower, you force them to build them defensively, and to put more vill on stone for TC/donjonsā¦
And they are particularly vulnerable to civs like incas, koreans and bulgarians, that have a stone bonus. Having at least free stone mining can help them a bitā¦
Yes, I am not sure what would be better. Tbh 20% age up is more what the civ needs, but SE is much more meaningful considering the university theme and it jusifies a weak early start
2 Likes
But itās something that could easily be changed into something that could give the Civ more late game potential or identity, and more of an incentive to turtle up and rush towards Imperial with their age-up bonuses, if a tech that actually affected the game significantly were present. And SR is already a perfectly adequate team bonus too if its values are tweaked. I can see no reason to let this idle when the change would be so appropriate, you would only give the Italian player more interesting options for gameplay.
Yeah, but itās still holding the place for a bonus that could be even more significant to their more central military units. The best military buffs generally seem to be those that affect the most active bulk of the army produced. In comparison, a small buff to the gunpowder economy is rather miniscule. Iād rather see their crossbowman and arbalesters buffed in some other way.
Iāve played around and read a few posts on the matter, and I agree more with people who say that itās simply a bad unit with bad stats.
4 less attack is remarkably significant and outweighs the 10 higher HP and +1 MA (that you have to get Pavise to have) by a lot, especially when compared to the overall stat pool of something like the Sicilian Elite Serjeant (a unit of virtually equal cost), who has 1+ attack to the Condo but massively more defense (and the special ability to produce Donjons). They cost a significant 15 more gold than Champions, which almost mitigates entirely the offset from not needing to go through a staggered upgrade line throughout the ages. And they still are going to need infantry Blacksmith techs to compete with other Imperial Age units.
The fact that Condos are only usable as a switch-in, since Italians donāt usually focus on infantry, makes them more costly than Champions (who have to be planned for early) or a Serjeant. But for that added cost, they present little benefit, so you might as well keep to Siege or Hussar or Cavalier instead to protect your archers. Theyāre not strong enough to serve as a late-game switch, nor to exist as the bulk of Italian defensive formation in Imperial Age. They serve only as a counter to gunpowder units, which is a shame.
Giving them a little more armor and attack would go a long way into making them a viable alternative to investing early on Militia and later into Champions. Maybe also even add a costly Elite version for late imperial, if it ever gets that far.
I get what you mean, but that seems futile when you consider that āItaliansā is the name of this civ. Although separating Sicilians may indicate that they might five āItaliansā more definition in the future.
Sure, true. I think they should have very strong xbows. And the university bonus is very accurate and thematically appropriate. The uni bonus even doubles as an indirect gunpowder bonus so that makes it even finer in my eyes (could open up space for more foot archer and infantry bonuses). Iād probably even like to see it a little buffed, 33% still seems a bit low in impact considering the state of Italians in the overall game. I mean yeah, some uni techs there are indeed fundamental like ballistics, but 33% less cost ballistics/chemistry is not THAT impactful. Weāll see how it reflects on games and win rates I suppose.
But the Condo is a heavy infantry unit. Itās a man decked-out in full plate. Itās ostensibly based on a 16th-17th century Condottiero, mercenary captains who were exceptionally armored because of the technology of of the era. Although I guess Italians donāt need to be classified as a foot-unit civilization to have a strong specialized mercenary infantry.
That bonus affects the bulk of their army, arbs+BBC is a common and good combo, probably the best that the Italians can field, thatās why some of us push for them to get SE.
Also, on water, having cheaper CG helps, they are probably the only civ that they can actually afford them.
A bit earlier, more like 1500, 1600 and 1700 are out of the timeframe of AoE2.
And still, they perform their armored infantry role, they have 5/5 armor, and few units have that high and balanced armor (except for the serjeant), like TK have high MA, but low PA, while huskarls have high PA, but low MA.
Condos are also faster than most infantry, and super cheap since they donāt require line upgrades.
They are actually in a good spot right now, situational, like the GC, but not bad.
Which is broken and will probably be nerfed. Also, condos arenāt a castle UU, so itās only right that they arenāt strong as a champ or as a berserker, to name someā¦
Nobody goes for champ, unless you are against eagles. Condos donāt cost more, even with little to none blacksmith upgrades a switch can still be powerful.
Whatever UT you would give them, it would be either OP or useless, since by that point Italians donāt really need anything.
1 Like
Italians now suck on Water, and still are not a top tier Land civ, or ever will be.
Do they? I didnāt test them but on paper they lost only 400 resources in imp.
They lost more, but 400 resources is a lot.
They now have to pay much closer to normal numbers to get FU Galleons, for example, and then get nothing to help them keep up production, while Vikings get Cheap Galleons and Longboats, and Ports get Super Galleons and Caravels.
Italians are now dead on Water, Water balance is THAT cutthroat.
This is why the game should have dedicated Water civs.
Even Shipwright is a lopt more expensive for them now, and cheap Shipwright was their compensations against Viings discount and Ports Super Ships.
33% on Uni is just a meme bonus, it is nothing. -100W/25G on Ballistics that is the only good stuff, but its nothing compared to Mayan, Ethiopian etc.
3 Likes
Yes, unless you are going for defenses, University techs are not even that crucial.
I guess you can make Keeps now, and then lose badly to Cannon Galleons, as Italians on Water.
1 Like
I agree. These are the important techs:
Ballistics cost is just a minor bonus and it is nothing compared to other Archer civs
Chemistry. I mean who cares of the cost if this tech takes forever to research
They donāt have Siege Engineers
Others are just very situational or you get them in the super lategame
1 Like
I disagree with giving them SE, since they already have cheap BBC, and that is good enough for Siege.
The devs made a mistake giving them this tech. We proposed so many better ideas.
1 Like
That do hurt, but if the age discount will be buffed to 20% itāll compensate for that, or the bonus can be adjusted to 35%, 40% or 45%.
Minus 58g, not 25g, and also chemistry is discounted.
That they should get as a future buff.
They can still afford FFS and galleon at a discounted price, and CG are almost never seen in water mapsā¦
They are, as soon as anyone sees a Tower or Castle, a couple of CGs will clean it up.
CGs are seen, because Galleons cannot kill Castles.