I’m not denying that, I just wanted to be accurate.
Completely agree with you on that…
That’s may be because people stubbornly play all the easy win civs, like japs (the God of hybrid maps), persians, malay, mongols and vikings…
Civs that are being used with the same strategies for years without any will of going outside of their comfort zone, and so they never try to develop new strategies with new civs.
Exactly, players should also experiment more with more civs…
The late game is not very good as well. No SR, SO, HCA, Paladins, halbs, SE. But yeah, the early game is even worse. At least in 1v1 they can go hussars+arbs, like a weak variant of the saracens, with much weaker siege, no HCA, and the need of several castles to counter cavalry…
Ok, just kidding, Saracens are much better in all the stages of the game 11
Still I totally agree that the early game is a big issue. Late game may be always fixed with some siege addition, but that is another story.
I agree, but unfortunately several bonuses are taken…
Arabia-like maps are almost 80% of the games. It means that Italians are almost always weak. I would say this is enough to say that they need a buff…
Just having a look. If we double the age up discount, in feudal it is equivalent to a 150 resources. Like Lithuanians of free farm upgrades of franks, or Burmese… except that these civs have military bonuses.
In castle/imp age it is similar to free xbow/arbs + the current age up discount. But more versatile…
I think that it may actually work, but it would be a bit boring.
Also I would not dislike something more durable in the later stages, where Italians are still a bit under average. Why is a straight +1 attack on archers a problem?
I was meaning that double age up discount is similar to free xbow in terms of resources. As hypothetical buffs. Free xbow is stronger if going archers. Better age up is more versatile since it is useful also for knights or booming.
Archer +1 attack would affect GCs as well. +1 attack is the same of rattan, longbowman. Still weaker than ckns. These UUs require a castle ofc, but have much better stats also in terms of armor and/or range.
Consider also that almost every civ has a superior eco to Italians, so you could just deny the +1 advantage by researching the armor in advance.
Yeah but they have FU hussars and skirms, cavaliers (paladins have no place in 1v1), cheaper BBC and HC, FU arbs and condos, good monks and onagers and capped rams are still enough against some civs.
Their late game is fine, not perfect but decisively above average.
That’s not true, there are possibilities, and several were already named…
And all those are one trick pony civs, franks always go for scouts into knights, burmese for arambai, lithuanians for their knights+relics…
Franks would be more versitile than free xbows+cheap age up? How, they would have only knights with “free” BL, italians knights would be on pair with franks ones until chivalry.
Franks are strongher, no doubt on that, but not because of their versatility.
Because it’s easy to snowball, archers are super easy to mass, and because it would discourage even more the use of GC and HC.
I was meaning that doubled age up discount and free xbow/arbs are two similar hypothetical buffs. Free xbow is stronger in a pure archer play ofc, while doubled age up would be more versatile since it may be useful even, for instance, to go knights.
+1 attack can be applied also to GCs, if needed just nerf by 1 the attack bonus vs cavalry (not needed imo).
Several archer UUs have +1 attack over archers. They require a castle, but are typically much better in the other stats (extra range, armor, speed…).
Also every civ has a better eco than Italians. In the early stages, the +1 attack can be denied by researching the armor.
In general, a civ with a good eco (vikings, aztecs, china…) could still handle with no issue an archer fight just by outnumbering Italian archers even with +1…
Ah ok, then I didn’t understand it, sorry…
That’s why with free xbow I want to add free elite skirms, since you usually always add some skirms with knights.
But yes, more savings in the cheaper age will be better for pure knight play.
The UU is another thing, they have to be trained at castles, so it’s more difficult to mass them, which xbows are super easy to mass.
And you would regain it with the blacksmith techs
Mmm I doubt it… +1PA wasn’t a problem, those civs could overcome it with sheer numbers, but +1atk is is strong, those civs would have to have really big numbers to overcome this advantage.
Then at some point you would grab pavise, and you archers wouldn’t just dealing more damage, but they would also take less.
A xbows dies after 7 hits from another xbows, italians that way would kill other xbows in 6 hits, and would die after 9. There is a 3 hit difference that could really snowball out of control.
I feel cheaper age up better only if it is actually large. It is more versatile and acts in feudal. But it has to be large.
I mean, there will be still a large amount of time where the civ with a better eco has the armor and Italians do not.
The difference would be 7 hits vs 6, until the UT. Then it becomes larger, ofc. So, instead of being equal to vietnamese archers, AFTER the UT, italians would have better archers. And this sounds fair.
Tbh I think that, either Italians get a good bonus on archers, which can carry the civ (+1 attack may work) or they get a decent eco bonus which may help to use the open tech tree (like doubled age uo discount or all units 10% cheaper in food from feudal age).
Free xbow is in the middle. In 80% of the games (arabia) you will still be very behind since in feudal you will be in real trouble. I know have said this already, but all the other civs tend to have a stronger eco bonus than the negligible 75f AND a military bonus. In some cases you may not have a military bonus (like china or slavs) but a way stronger eco (for chinese this means vill lead + cheaper techs + better farms).
The strength of +1attack is more huge other than archer vs archer fight.
If you propose that change start from Feudal. Italian Feudal archer will take +50% damage against scout compared to other archers, and +100% damage against skirms with researching armor.
It will also huge in imp. Italian archer will take +33% damage against Paladin, and +50% damage against Eagle.
For comparison, Ethiopian archer take only +18% damage than other archers, and Ethiopians have very limited tech tree that they are only good at foot archers and Siege.
It depends on the researched and involved armors. If you are vs a skyrm with the proper armor, you may read in two ways: a huge bonus (+100% damage) or a minimum amount of extra damage (+1, which is the minimum you can do). In any case skyrms would still destroy archers.
The fact that +1 attack is not game breaking is also related to the fact that several other archers have it.
Overall I am more for some eco bonus for them, it would fit the civ better, like several proposals in this thread:
Every option require a tuning of the dock discount
Ethiopians have better eco a d better siege. Italians have better cavalry (unless you like camels). Still I think Italians theme is more on the booming aspect, that is why I am more for an eco bonus for them.
+1 attack may work to carry the civ, but it also does not make the open tech tree to shine
Yeah, but those who play Italians still arent getting near 50%
Yes but you can afford Fletching earlier than others. Currently Italians don’t have any water bonus in feudal. Well, if you add some more FS only then. So a buff in feudal will balance out a little nerf in imp. Even if it’s not, a little water nerf for them is actually necessary due to above mentioned reasons.
Yeah, and the civ do have problems, but so do the player base…
Especially on ranked, all people just play the same build orders with the same 3-4 civs over and over…
Discounted bracer is a good bonus in imp, but half priced shipwright is a lot better.
Onestly is basically the advantage that you can afford that tech so early on that give Italians their power.
That being said, if the total amount of resources is the same, then it could work…
Just paying only 10% more on shipwright is not that bad when you have 40% cheaper bracer.
Now you can afford both bracer and shipwright/Galleon upgrade pretty comfortably.
I didn’t calculate that yet but obviously you are not researching all the blacksmith techs in water maps and maybe not even land maps. In water you are researching fletching, bodkin and bracer for sure and the saving from them is smaller if you have to pay 10% more on war galley + galley + gillnets + careening + shipwright. But I’m taking this as I want a dock tech discount reduction.
You should see if that 10% lost on dock techs is roughly equal to the 40% that you spare on bracer.
The 10% is 354.5 resources, while the 40% of bracer is 200 resources, so it’s 150 resources less, so it’s nerf.
Also, in that 10% I didn’t factor in CG and ECG upgrades, since those are usually researched later on, but if you consider those too, the difference is even bigger, since the 10% becomes 547 resources, and the difference 347.
Sounds pretty good to me. Probably exactly what I wanted.
That’s a very minor thing that can be ignored completely.
But you are saving 60 in feudal. So you are paying only 90 more resources. Then you need to calculate saving from bodkin and the extra resource you are paying for war galley+gillnets and see the final result.
Also saving 60 resources is way better than saving 150 in imp.
And we always have the option of increasing the FS discount to 20% again or give them Heavy Demo. Honestly I wonder why no “Naval” civ have the full dock tree?
Also cheaper age up could be buffed to compensate a dock discount nerf… I did the computation in the past actually
I would be for a 30% age up and dock tech… still discounted/free archer attacks are good as well…
Many people suggest that Italians have only 75f discount for feudal (for land maps). While it is true, they also have cheaper castle age up cost. Isn’t this very useful for the Italian player? For example, maybe you’re slower than the briton player who has sheep and archery range speed bonus, but as Italians you should go to the next age about 1 min earlier.
That archers are UU. It is reasonable to buff GC to get +1 attack, but not Xbow, which is many people say so strong in Castle age (I am not agree with that statement though).
First is reasonable but I personally think 30% is too huge. Maybe 20-25% are reasonable with nerf on dock discount
And food discount on unit is just minor version of Indians and not fit to Italians. They are not famous for large population. Give them minor version of Saracens market bonus seems more fit to Italians that they are famous for merchant.
Also better infantry. Condos are more useful than Shotel and Italian also access to Champion which is useful against Goths or Aztecs/Mayans.
Also Ethiopians get 100f/100g for each age up and Italians save 75f on Feudal up and 120f/30g on Castle up. But we cannot say Ethiopians eco bonus are completely better than italians. They get extra resource when they finish age up, and Italians save resource when they click age up. It can make them faster age up which can be advantage over other civ.
30% it’s too much, it’s a 350f feudal age. 20% (400f) it’s ok, 25% (375f) it’s borderline…
I get it that you nerf the dock, but if you can age up super fast, even if your techs cost more you will get them sooner anyway…
I say 20/40% for age/dock, then in case add one or some free techs, or give them a discount on the tech of a building that doesn’t affect water play too much.
I’m still advocating for free xbow and skirm upgrades, but for example another idea, provided by viper that suggested a nerf on tartars, could be to give them free tumb ring.
A powerful and costly tech that doesn’t buff at all their ships, but help both xbows and GC plays.
The only remaining I can think about is University or AR. I guess cheaper AR techs and upgrades is also okay although you are not having anything in feudal just like now.
I heard that too. Honestly that would really help. But I’m really doubtful dev will take away this bonus instead of removing extra sheep spawn from building TC. (Feudal 2 r okay). And then again you have nothing in feudal.
They have lowest win rate at below 20 min mark. Obviously they need something in feudal.
Another interesting fact that in 1v1 Arabia they have 44.14% win rate which is not that bad tbh, especially if you think about Koreans having 38% win rate. If they (and all civs) manage to reach 45% mark, I’ll be completely fine with the balances. The shocking thing is they are the least picked civ in 1v1 Arabia (0.99%, not even 1%) which means everyone knows they suck here and water is their only specialty.
Edit : We don’t have the data of latest patch yet. All above mentioned data may change afterwards.
350 feudal age is 150 resources spared. As Burmese for instance, but without a military bonus. Less than Ethiopians. 150f advantage is exactly the same of Lithuanians, but without the bonus on trash units. I could continue with other examples 11
Still not affecting the feudal age, but it is fine. Tbh I am quite convinced that free archer attack in blacksmith is not op if locked behind the blacksmith. It is basically an eco bonus, since you research it anyway as soon as you can. I mean, free archer armor is a military bonus, since there will be a huge amount of time where you do not have the armor. Free archer attacks is more on eco bonus, the momentum is limited to some amount of seconds of research…
Italians miss halabs and Ethiopians have also free pikes.
I like the merchant theme. One thing I have proposed is to give Italians a gold trickle equal to one relic (say from feudal). In feudal age it is actually solid, since you can think of it as +1 vills (in general a bit worse since less versatile, but a bit better if you have all the golds Forward). In castle/imp is less powerful, but it may be solid in a trash war. I mean, as solid as having one relic more (definitely not OP).
Yes let us wait for the data…
Still I do not get what is the problem with free archer attack locked behind the blacksmith…
I mean, fletching takes 30 seconds. BA 35. Everyone, even noob like us, can avoid to take an archer battle against an opponent having 30 seconds advantage, especially since he does not have ballistics.
My point is that you basically spare the resources, but the advantage you have in terms of momentum is very limited, unless your super noob opponent decides to actually take the fight in those 30 secons…