Make Incas Great Again

They need to put back the incas bonus. I am tired of microsoft always tweaking the game like they are bored and have nothing better to do. Please put it back!!!

  • Should Devs Give Incas Back Their Feudal Blacksmith Bonus?
  • Yes, The rush ability made them who they are, and they are lame without it.
  • No, Incas were too OP and needed that nerf.

0 voters

1 Like

and how do you propose you balance their incredibly strong tower rushes then?

Meh. The new Incas are Lame & Boring. I can’t see any reason to prefer Incas over Mayans or Aztecs. But the old Incas were obnoxious.

I hope the devs give the Incas a new bonus, or increase their current bonuses & UUs.

They were not OP, just toxic.


over 55% winrate in the early game - that’s imbalanced according to the devs standards.

Arent the Incas to far south to be considered by Trump as America :clown_face:

They werent toxic either… They were just anti meta.

The incas were fine. They just played different. If the devs thought the civ is OP, then they had to change something else instead taking away their special abilities. Better to give them the vill - black smith bonus back, but nerf there stone bonus for example.

1 Like

The Devs went way overboard. All they had to do was give the villagers an attack bonus, or a armor bonus, but not both. Giving them the armor bonus without the attack is probably the most logical and the least damaging to their playstyle.

Yeah, there wasn’t really any balance reasons for the change, but just some people don’t know what to do when play deviates a bit from the meta, if the civ were so OP like a loud minority claims, then why wasn’t it overpicked like civs that get overpicked when they are OP?

to be fair…
Playing against inca rush was also completely metarised. It was just highly technical and you also needed to adjust it accordingly to what the incan player was doing, as he was always in the drivers seat until you reached castle age.
I don’t think there was any strat anytime what needed more “meta play” to play against. And for good reason.
And for sure only a small margin of players was tempted to learn the complex meta how to play against a strat you would only witness in like 1% of your games.

1 Like

Yeah, that’s why it was a nice thing to have. It was a little bit of help in stopping people from getting too comfortable with just memorizing a couple of build orders and calling it a day.

being back only armor, but not attack, or vice versa

Incas have many options and it seems their tower rush isn’t completely dead.

Defending against the tower rush / incan tower rush isnt that hard. I am pretty sure i win most of these games.

One game doesnt prove anything…

YOu have no idea xD. Incan tower rush was instant win if you had a bad map generation and the incan player hit the right spot.

You can’t compare it with a standard tower rush. A standard tower rush has like 10 different viable counter strats. Incas basically only 1.

Uh, no. Even against the Incan trush i won most of the games.

yeah just ignore the main part of the sentence…

You just showed that you’re just making things up.

To be fair, if you have a bad enough map it’s gg even if the enemy isn’t incas (assuming similar skills), but that’s another topic

Their tower rush was super abnoxious to deal with; for me the villager bonus in that strategy was more of an exploit rather than a bonus. Also Incas have a very open tech tree and two very good unique units, and those advantages were not used very often, because the tower rush became the default way to play the civ. We have to wait and see, but i think the nerf will encourage to use their units and tech tree more often.


There is a thread to nerf lithuanians as well. Not fond of doing major civ changes that dont fix a big noticeable problem. I don’t think in lines of op but it didn’t seem the oppressive. It just annoying like laming or drush or dusching.

That thread of nerfing Liths ended up being non sensical, plus that civ don’t requiere nerfs.