no se por que hay gente que dice que la rev de los piratas berberiscos esta rota, jugue contra un lakota y a pesar de que le ataque con 70 soldados berberiscos y 40 guerrilleros ni les hicismos cosquillas, y esa es la unica o una de las pocas estrategias viables para italia ya que su ejercito estandar es una basura pinchada en un palo, rotos estan los lakotas, sinceramente por que no dejan que los italianos tengan al bersaglieri en III o que sus pavisiers sean mas baratos? venga ya su ejercito ni merece la pena hasta 4ta
The barbary revolt is broken because it boosts their stats by like an extra 50% basically giving you imperial units.
Judging by recent tournament performance italy performed a lot better than malta so if they need a buff then malta need a buff first.
Tournaments arent representative of the community.
A civ could be god tier in pro players hands, and mediocre in the hands of an average player and vice versa.
I’d expect pro players in a $9K tournament to at least use a civ to it’s maximum potential, malta had a very low win rate even compared to italy IIRC. I’d also assume based on past info that malta in casual/ladder games has a low win rate because at average or lower level it’s civs that rush that have disproportionately high win rates like aztec/lakota.
If you are pro you generally know more ways to counter civs and or deal with a civ then the average player does. Not saying Malta is OP, just saying that its barely an argument, stating it did bad in a tournament.
Indeed, though as I mentioned mid to low level players lose to aggressive civs. Even at a time where aztec was considered weak by the pro players it received a nerf and the devs mentioned in the patch notes that it had a way higher than average win rate.
I haven’t seen much aggression from malta, the pike/xbow age 2 is no faster than any other civ, though perhaps low level or new players struggle vs the new units like the fire thrower or the fixed gun.
Malta seems played more and though both are strong Italy seems stronger.
2 cosas primero el torneo no es representativo por que los jugadores estaban obligados a usar a italia y malta, varios partidos fueron de italia contra italia.
y lo segundo, italia tiene buenos envios en 4ta pero gran parte de esos envios cuestan recursos, y sus envios de pávisiers no suenan muy atractivos por el simple hecho que son demasiados debiles y caros, son basicamente en segunda edad un ballestero mas caro sin daño adicional contra nada, solo su bonus de posturas que es muy lento de usar, sin mencionar que si los pones en formación en guardia a la minima que les disparan abandonan la formación.
Pavisiers are just bad, the age 4 skirm is great though and the papal lancers.
I am aware they were forced to choose them otherwise we likely wouldn’t have seen any italy or malta but malta fared worse of the 2 new civs.
Eso, el bersaglieri pese a tener menos vida y resistencia a distancia, es un escaramuzar competente, pero su problema radica en la edad en que se puede crear siendo 4ta, y peor aun tienen 2 cartas de mejora en esa edad, asi que al menos podrian mover una de esas cartas de mejora en 3ra y dejar que los italianos construyan bersagliris en 3ra por que los pavisiers no hacen muy bien su trabajo, las arbalestas maltesas si.
Indeed, we will continue to see mostly italy FI until they do something like that. Otherwise you might see them going age 3 and merc shipments which are very strong.
This is a very good point. Otherwise I do think that tournaments can be somewhat informative, specially when devs do not release any statistical information publicly.
Isn’t it better to just buff the pavisiers, since we can all agree that they are the problem?
Bersaglieri can be tweaked a bit, but I would fix the pavisiers first, since if you make them viable then the problem of the late skirm it would become more manageable.
The problem I see and I think this is a reason why the devs have not buffed it (or do the simple thing of just giving them guard and imp upgrades ) is that on paper it is probably the strongest xbow/skirm unit in age 3 after they get the 2 cards in.
It has the same base HP has a skirm and after the card higher range resist ( not to mention all the other resist), it has higher base damage then skirms (and pretty good damage against heavy after steel bolts), it can get extra hp from the arsenal without needing the advance arsenal upgrade and as a bonus unlike any other range infantry unit in the game, it has no melee attack in volley mode, meaning that it can its microable dps isnt affacted by cav (also the whole siege from range thing)
So I think its a strong unit that would easily overshadow the Bersaglieri if allowed to get stronger. I agree that currently it creates this weird dynamic for Italy that it is basically required to FI in order to get a good unit out
Thats why I think the devs tried to “buff” them with Roman tactics instead to avoid having the 2 units competing against each other. Italy has that design of transformation from the city states to an unique nation during the industrial age reflected in the Bersaglieri and I dont think they will change that.
Ese es el problema requiere 3 cartas para ser competente, y aun asi pierde facil.
I would say in age 3 you only need 1 for it to be good and the second one makes it the strongest
By italy, you mean Malta, right? Italy needs nerfs as well as China and India.
Noo malta and china is just good italy need a buff their cards are trash and malta has much better cards
Considering just xbows, Malta get +30% attack and the steel bolts card, Italy get +25% HP and the steel bolt card, so it’s actually debatable… in my opinion on a skirm unit attack is better than HP, since you won’t want the in the first line anyway…
As for skirms, Dutch for example get +30% both attack and HP, same for the portoghese cassadores.
I personally don’t believe that speeding up a bit the changing of the stances or the fire animation would make them OP, and neither the introduction of the guard and imp upgrades, with a nerf of the roman tactics card of course.
I don’t think so, the bersaglieri will still be the best option for the late game, since they have more range, attack, speed and can snowball the fights better with the stun ability.
I am just talking about the age 3 situation since that is when the pavisier should be at its height and just get across how tanky this thing is
its HP max hp in age 3 186 with 35 range resist, for a range HP of 286( so infantry breastplate, hp card and heavy pavese)
a maltese xbow with the same upgrades 2-3 of its combat cards has 182 hp with 20 range resist, for range HP of 228
Dutch skrims only get to 257 range hp with its cards
Neftenya after 2 cards get to 280 range hp
French skirms only get to 265
In a shootout war this thing will be a beast.
as for firing in front, the main weakness of that is usually that make you vulnarable to cav snare where their DPS slows down, but that doesnt matter for the pavisier so I think this unit breaks that logic abit. In addition if its a skirm goon comp (or in this case skrim xbow comp) then you get a very competitive comp in age 3.
Tankiness is arguably more important in the lategame then speed or attack since you want to not turn over as many units as you can and maintain frontlines
to simulate its potential lategame hp in a relatively competitive 1v1 scenario ( no roman tactics just to be conservative) and say it has up to imp upgrades with heavy pavese and the hp card
it will have 282 hp with 35 range resist for 433 range hp, it will basically never die, combined that with all the covering ability of the papal units as well.