Mongols might need a rework

Lets step outside of the current problems people are having with Mongol tower rushes and look at their civ bonuses. Are they what we would expect for what was historically a cavalry nation famous for raiding and besieging their way from China to Russia and the borders of India? To me the answer is no.

Plunder, moveable buildings, The trader bonus, mangudai, the khan, and (due to balance reasons) the transport ship bonus all make sense to me thematically. They encourage mobility, frequent raids, and a nomadic, aggressive playstyle.

The rest of their bonuses get a little weird. Early horsemen encourage players to avoid cavalry in feudal since they need an upgrade, the speed aura applies to all units after a cheap castle age tech encouraging slower infantry more than already fast cavalry, and ovoo improved techs are generally neutral except for siege engineering which encourages infantry when siege is meta.

The end result is a civ with average cavalry, a niche mounted raiding unit, and a relatively heavy focus on faster moving, siege building infantry. To shift their focus back to cavalry, raiding, and siege I suggest the following:

  • Siege workshops can be built in the feudal age, cost 200 wood, and can build rams and siege towers.
  • Improved siege engineering is changed to increase the production speed and unpack rate of siege workshops.
  • Defense arrow is changed to only effect cavalry units.
1 Like

I dunno, that sounds about right for the historical progression of the Mongols. After their conquest of China as plundering horsemen, they adopted a lot of Chinese technologies, particularly becoming experts at siege. The further they conquered, the larger their foot infantry army became, being recruited from their new holdings.

Their famous historical battles certainly had a focus on horse archers, but they couldn’t build, run, and maintain an empire like that.

If anything, the Mongols should become the Chinese civ by Castle or Imperial Age.

Infantry in Mongols was only available in urban regions.
It was not part of the army, as all those infantries are foreign auxiliary units (Mostly Chinese, Korean and Khwarezmian). It was part of the city’s garrison, and can be used like an army, but is commanded by only the commander (Warlord) of the capital or city.

The main army was based on complete mounted (Cavalry) units to make it mobile and fast. That allowed the Mongols to have uncompetitive speed, surprise attack, and momentum.

Its capital was made of Chinese architecture and structures (buildings and walls). However, its army used Mongolian traditional “ger” as the main structure (as it is simple to pack, unpack, and is mobile). Constant military mobile activities made the Mongol army physically stronger than the ones living in a city.

And I do agree that the Mongols in the game is boring and depicted wrong.
I hate to see them as infantry civ as you already clarified why it is.

1 Like

History isn’t balanced. It can only guide a competitive game so far.

I don’t think we’ve seen a strong Mongol player yet tbh. So, I wouldn’t judge too much yet. Most of the pros are pros by stepping into the scene with strong RTS fundamentals already, coming from AOE 2 or Starcraft, allowing them to play most Civs well. Most are generalists. It’s not really their Civ play that’s good or pro status, it’s a carry by exceptional general RTS fundamentals.

Without Civ specific pro players that pave the trail, we’re gonna be stuck in both experimental ladder play and civ norms being heavily influenced by generalization play.

1 Like

X Per Minute has a 1M history that it calculates from. Which means that it’s “per minute” average can swing wildly depending on the exact second the worker deposits the item. I’d be extremely weary of using 1 worker data sets.

Secondly, it’s a Landmark against a Regular Building. Of course, a landmark is going to have greater benefits. However, it does not fully map the overview of civilizations vs civilizations.

Thirdly, if I had to guess why Mongols have higher win rates. Mongol play is attractive to aggressive players. You have no walls, no castles. You get basic outposts. This means Mongol players on average are forced to practice their micro every single game, for the majority of the game. To either deal with harassment or be the harassment, no double turtles. You can’t win if you don’t swing, and Mongol players are forced to bat. That would be my guess.

1 Like

You speak well there, as a former Delhi only player that has been converted to Mongol only, I feel that freedom to focus on the offensive a lot more than before and it is very rewarding. Of course, being rushed yourself is something to deal with and it gives you practice as well, but it doesn’t happen much anymore.