More than several posts talking about how unbalanced Mexico is

nothing new, just another post complaining about how the Mexican units are a cluster of bizarre status checks.
together with an economy with an extremely strong boom together with a consistent sustain


they even beat cuirassiers, lol.


Yeah, like I still dont know why people want to counter Cav with other Cav???

You could just make dragoon unit type or pikeman unit type, and no cav is issue. :man_shrugging:

1 Like

Fortunately Mexico is rather easy to counter if you bother to play aggressively before the 25 minute mark and bring some petards to destroy buildings. Those fancy haciendas don’t last too long once that starts to happen. That and their units are all rather pricey (besides the insurgente, which is countered by the things it nominally counters).

Worst part about the civ is that it can be very unpredictable, but that’s solved by knowing that 80 percent of Mexico players in 1v1 sup are still just gonna go for standard age2 rush or FI. The only difference between Mexican strats and normal strats is that they come with a unique (and unversatile) revolution and/or are simply too slow or card-hungry to compete.

1 Like

Clearly this is a more treaty focused complaint. And isn’t really easy to beat pre 25 minutes tbh, although I’m quite certain you were being hyperbolic, we’re finding out more and more just how good the civ really is because people are finally taking the time to learn it. Unbeatable? No. But rather easy to counter? Also no.

1 Like

those aren’t efficient counters , especially after the age 3 lance cards.

after that they deal net bonus vs heavy infantry and have extra range so they can snipe before the units make contact.

the range bonus also allows them to snare cav really well, which means one contact and it can start to snowball, even more so if they have skirm backup or even the splash charged attack.

edit: given their design they need to be inefficient against other heavy cav

Sounds like a lot of people answering here have never heard of team games or FFA (some have heard of treaty at least)

so the cavalry with 8 home city upgrades plus flag wins against the cavalry with 4-6 upgrades?
who would have guessed

1 Like

Because it has been common knowledge that you can counter lancers, a unit which the chinaco essentially is, with hussars.

Dragoons are indeed a counter, but the issue here is that units should generally be countered by at least 2 other units, and it turns out chinacos are countered by dragoon type units only.


Since some people complained during a previous conversation about removing the multipler against heavy cav, “But Mexico doesn’t have Hussars so they need the multipler”, I’m going to suggest;

Add the Hussar to Mexico’s unit roster and remove the Chinaco’s bonus against heavy cavalry.

I’m not sure they actually need it, but I also don’t believe it’ll create problems.

They don’t need hussars, so no point in adding them. Hussars are effective at soaking cannon fire, so adding hussars might actually be an unintentional, unneeded buff for Mexico.


For the Chinaco, they can either remove the heavy cav multi, or remove the Presidial Lancers charge attack


Why that obsession with hussars??? Its not the only cov wothout them, every asian cavalry is like that

To be honest, I don’t care if Mexico gets them or not. I’m not convinced it’d create an issue, but the Chinaco needs to be nerfed and one of the things I saw people complaining about was ~“but they need a heavy cav that trades evenly with heavy cav!”

If the 1v1 “Mexico is too weak” lobby is strong enough to cause the reduction to the multipler to get reverted than something needs to be done.

If giving them Hussars helps them in 1v1 (because age 2 Hussars are probably better than Chinaco would be without the cav multipler) and hurts them in treaty (because fully upgraded Chinacos are crazy) then I’d have no problem with that.

It’s annoying how op Mexico is in treaty currently and I’d like them brought into line. If that means trading some small buffs for more important nerfs I’m okay with that.

O… K …

So dragoons and pikemen are not cav counters, and thats why you MUST counter chinaco with other Cav.

Chinaco is a weak cav unit early-mid game, they can’t tank like hussars or similar heavy cav for the same price. Thats why they are a mix of lancer-hussar and need to strike in a strategic and calculated way.

The obvious solution if you want to nerf chinacos to the ground is give México Hussars maybe? So chinacos become secondary.

But like why remove the uniqueness of the civ? just because everyone necessarily wants to counter the chinacos with more cav. Genious.

its not a matter of countering them with cav, its that lancer type has always been countered by other cav. Because not every civ has useable ranged cavalry (looking at inca especially), its really not justified to have a unit good vs heavy infantry, ranged infantry, and still somehow able to beat cuirassiers in equal cost?


Aha, what about pikemen type unit and regular Musks in melee mode, etc? I count 2 counters at least.

It seems this is more of a player issue than game issue. In 1v1 high ELO supremacy México remains pretty average compared to other civs.

1v1 yes, its very average. I don’t think most people argue that. Its got some annoying quirks but most people have it figured out generally. Its the lategame that is being discussed here anyway


México has no other Cav, that why Chinaco has to cover the role with a weaker mix of Hussar & Lancer.