Situationally like I’ve pointed out, they need huge investment and it just pushes them to die to halb + siege rams in early imp.
lool why would you want that, that’s like half the reason people dont stone wall early game
thats just a worse version of HCA Hussar combo, countered by halbs. Unlike CA, WWs have worse fire rate and mobility and no bonus damage against halbs
thats a huge difference lol, xbows after thumb ring get 1.7 fire rate for comparison, War Wagons are just 2.25 after thumb ring
Is it still though, free guard tower is okay but the range is mostly gone. Incas (who have 62% win rate against them btw) have easily replaced them as the meta trush civ now
Well, Koreans have got two very important buffs in free archer armors and wood discount. This says a lot on their old status.
Overall, Koreans have a huge late game with extremely pop efficient units, so this may justify a slow start.
Said that, the civ is clearly not top tier and a buff would make sense.
Extending the wood discount to siege may work. Similarly, if you want to provide a larger help in castle for a smaller help in the late game, you could just add a massive discount on the siege workshop (the building), like -100 or -150 wood.
yeah i think you are right here, thats why i was maybe thinking increasing the discount to 30-40%(and not affecting siege), as the amount of wood saved early on is so little. whereas porto are saving gold on everything cool throughout the whole game, including siege and monks.
currently you need 7 archers just to save up enough for a farm, if we push it to 30% it takes it to just over 4 archers per farm
unless we add another civ bonus instead (which is preferable, but harder i guess)
we could argue the fluctuation is 40-43, and might be opposing civ dependent, along with the changes to arabia, im not sure at which point the woodlines were hard nerfed but wouldnt be surprised if it was when korea was at it’s lowest. also not sure which other game changes would have hurt them.
and then of course it “spikes” to 45 when they get their uber buff…
just checked that dip is consistent across elos, so imo likely due to arabia changes
what i do like to see though is the spike on teutons, when they get their armour buffs(i think) 6% increase on 1250+ elo and they just maintained it the whole way, and conversely i hate looking at franks… i have no idea how the devs could ever justify that happening…
None is asking for this. Koreans are decent but nothing special. Worse than Koreans there are a couple of civs (Italians, maybe Spanish…).
Ofc nerfing all the other civs would work as well, but small help to Koreans may put them closer to, say, Vietnamese, Japanese or other well balanced civs.
If they are already decent, I don’t see the reason why buffing them.
Yes, people tend to preffer buffing than nerfing, because buffing is funnier, but it is not better for game balance when we want to buff already decent civs.
The best for game balance would be to nerf civs like chinese, mayans, and those top tier civs instead of buffing already decent civs.
Better and simpler idea i just have seen in reddit: make stone walls available in dark age. Although they should require more building time for balance.
To be honest, a friend who always plays as Korean in single-player vs. AI and multi vs. AI is going back to AoE2:HD, as of a week or two back. To be fair, it is partly because he likes HD’s graphics better, too (crisper, more contrast, etc.)
I have a feeling he’s tired of not feeling like the civ is very powerful in DE, and the recent turtle ship damage issue didn’t help things. (At the conclusion of the turtle ship issue game, that’s when he said he was moving back to HD.) Of course, if towers have been nerfed in DE, too, he’d notice because he makes a lot of towers to help his defense and offense. He has a classic turtler AoE playstyle, so when enemy AI comes storming into his town, he defends with a bunch of towers he’s built. Lately, it seems like that strategy hasn’t been working that well for him.
Towers demolish the AI no matter how nerfed they are, especially if the AI makes archers.
They are as buffed as it can get. The wood discount makes them cost in the 90ish wood instead of 115 and the free armour upgrade makes them de facto a 2/5 armour unit in castle and a 3/8 armour unit in imp. They are so much easier to use now.
Because it’s one of their best bonus, that makes them so good on nomad-type maps?
Actually I think it should be extended to all their civilian unit (ok it’s going to be useless on trade units but for completion’s sake it sounds better) The purpose is to make their fishing ships able to spot enemy ship without being seen themselves. Pretty useful as Korean don’t have demos to answer fire galley rushes.
The bonus works just fine, it’s just that the tech tree doesn’t take into account cost reductions of the civ. You can check it with any other civ that has a cost reduction on some of its units.
Let’s just extend the wood discount to the siege then, so maybe people will be incouraged to play with them and learn how to play with them.
In the end, they’ll just be better against archer civs, and the same against cav civ, but people will try to play with the more, so learn the other strengths of the civ too maybe. And if then the siege wood discount is too much, it will just be removed again, hoping that in the meantime people learned to appreciate them for their other strengths too.
Might be an option. But reddit guys are already saying they can be oppressive vs archer civs. Due to the power spike on armour. The siege might tip it further.
Im all for it though. Rather buff them instead of leaving them at such a terrible win rate. Either way I’ve been maining them for a bit. I usually try run the weaker civs for a while.
War wagon screening monks has been successful, but takes a while to get… Monk micro is always nuts…