Nerfing imperial jannis is absolutely unnecesary, they used to have ore HP than HCs and now they woukd have less despite elite jannies never being popularand not sure if nerfung the hp on castle age would fix the unit is strong because it can kill stuff from far away and quickly
Maybe they need theirvattack on castle age nerfed and their imperial attack buffed.
This is terrible. Absolutely broken
This is also terrible but mostly just design wise ugly asf rather thsn from balance
I dont mind this much, although at tgat point you could also include the cheaper upgrades in the same bonus. Something like “bloodlines, scout cavalry and cavalry archer upgrades half cost”
How so? It is a nerf on closed map as you actually need to spend resource for this and then you can’t do Fast Castle. If you research while aging up, you’re just getting a very small time frame as opponent will research it anyway. Is this really that strong in open maps? Scout upgrades in Feudal are already expensive. Players will skip Forging for this upgrade. So 50 gold for +1 attack and 15 HP but less speed. Oh wait, they also have +1PA. So players will skip SBA too. Maybe moving the +1PA to castle age will balance it?
Fair point. I considered that. But less HP will prevent surviving after taking a mangonel shot.
Why unit that has the highest pierce attack in the game (after trebuchet and CG) needs more attack?
Why? It already exists. Removing free LC suddenly makes it a terrible bonus?
That’s Burgundians. So it is actually a terrible bonus by design.
I dont think you understamd what I meant. Overlaps are fine but getting a free upgrade for a tech you nedd to research is bad design because its kind of deleting the whole point of the free upgrades being some sort of quick powerspike that you just get for doing nothing, particularly since free hussar is as far as it goes a pretty meh bonus. In fact is an objectively worse bibonus than the Mongol extra hp. Overlaps are fine as long as theres a sizable diference and in this case theres some. One of the bonus affects knights, this other affects cav archers abd bloodlines. Either way its not great but I far prefer that. They can have cheaper techs than Burgundians and I doubt tmut would be OP and the overlap would be even smaller
Because they are bad. If you are olaying Turks in late gane you are never using elite jannisary. Maybe a cheaper elite upgrade could fix it but I somewhat doubt it. It only has one more attack than Burgundian HC too, while being more expensive in every aspect possible, so its not even that impressive
Doesnt matter when they can shoot down mangonels before they are ecen in range thanks to their high attack and higher range.
These mostly seem like open map changes. Sure, 200 extra resources being spent in castle age for picking up relics could hurt if they played standard but I suppose your intention is to primarily nerf the castle drop janissary play style.
Although this does make them more vulnerable, 5 hp is not the reason why they’re a deadly unit. Its the range and attack at that stage of the game. All you need to do is reduce the range of non-elites to 7 and increase their food cost to 65 or training time by 5 seconds. This way, it gets much harder to get a bunch of janissaries, value from them gets reduced because of lower range and once killed or converted, harder to replace. You can keep the rest of the bonuses as they are and the civ will remain top tier but not deadly.
Not sure if I have comprehended this. Are you saying a bonus, for example you needing to research Chemistry to get free BBT as Koreans is bad design?
Well I can also say Castle Age Janissary is just Bohemians HC with more cost and slightly more HP. 1 extra range makes them better than both Bohemians and Burgundians in Castle and Imperial age.
Not really. My intention was nerfing their dominance on relic race.
No thank you. Why every single UU that has the potential to be played in Castle Age, needs to be gone for Arena players. I swear they can’t tolerate a single UU be viable in Castle Age.
Arambai - Nerfed.
WW - Nerfed to the ground.
OG - A complete redesign. (Probably the only one I support).
All they want just a single style of play - Monk, LC, spearman opening in Castle Age with Arbalester, Bombard Cannon, Hussar, Halb follow up.
Dude, then why did you mark the janissary nerf as mandatory. That just gives the impression that you want to cut the main power of the civ. Btw, as far as civ dominance is concerned, Janissaries with 8 range are the primary reason for Turks being top 5. If you nerf the regular moderately beneficial light cav relic play, you’re making that less viable and forcing the much stronger castle drop uu play. When uu is too strong in some niche situations but unviable in others due to certain weaknesses of the civ, the best approach imo is to balance the civ to make uu more viable as an option but less broken in those niche situations. Arambai, Conquistador changes were like that. War wagon nerf was unnecessary but still justifiable if they had huge win rate in one settings and the change was accompanied with buff elsewhere. That’s also the intention behind Portuguese and organ guns but it hasn’t quite worked out yet.
Lastly with 7 range and a few extra seconds to produce, janissaries will still be deadly but not unstoppable. A few more civilizations could handle them.
Because I admit they are oppressive in Arena and needs nerf but not totally remove Castle drop into Janissary from Turks strategy. Seriously why would you train a Bohemians HC as Turks for a higher price as well as from a more expensive building? (I know you can mathematically show me that Range, University and Chemistry are more expensive than a castle but I’ll argue going for stone early damages your eco anyway.)
Very good. And I’m suggesting to nerf Janissary anyway. I’m not buying arena players (or more specifically arena only players) cry for an UU being OP and hence needs to be removed from a viable meta strategy anymore.
Can be a total ignorance from me as I didn’t see enough Arena game. But I’ve never seen a Bohemians HC opening in Arena. So I can’t have faith on your statement or anyone else suggesting to reduce range.
As this gentleman @ElectricEye mentioned before, the most problematic issue when facing the Janissary is actually the 8 range in castle age, it is so problematic and even more problematic than the annoying Britons 8 range because Janissary is a very deadly unit with big attack; which makes dealing with them very hard in the castle age even in small numbers.
Turks already have great advantages in Arena regardless the Janissary, like free scout line upgrade, free chemistry, 20% faster gold mining, etc. All these factors give them the upper hand, so imo nerfing the Janissary 8 range will be ok and doesn’t need any compensate if done.
I agree. Not to mention that Turks has also one of the most deadly combo in late game which is Elite Janissary + PA Hussar + 14 range BBC + 13 range BBT. I think the nerf in closed map is really needed
Why 25 attack to Elite Jannissaries, is just too much.
Nerf the range in castle age to 7, buff the range of the elite one to 9, and also increase the accuracy to 65% and 75% for elite.
Turks don’t need a buff on open maps now, their winrates are overall at 50-51%.
The thing is chemistry costs 300 food which is very difficult to afford if you add tcs and do eco upgrades. If you stay on 1 tc, you could click chemistry but still have to wait 2 mins to start hand canoneer production. And also production time of Janissary is like 17 seconds while those of hand canoneers is 28 seconds. Even if the training time of janissaries are increased to 21 seconds, its still 25% faster production. The stone does hurt your eco but also gives a forward map position to break-in enter and keep the spot open. Not the case with hand canoneers. You have to add a siege workshop, do multiple mangonels or siege tower. All of this is additional cost.
And finally, the hand canoneers wont scale. While if you preserve janissary numbers and get elite, you’d still get the extra range, extra 5 attack.
Its more like a small reduction in value from army. It doesn’t make it unviable. Lets say right now only Poles with Szlacha privlige knights are able to handle the janissary numbers in mid game. Maybe after the change a few more strong economy civs might be able to do that but most of them would still struggle to deal with them. So then the Turk player might have to revise their strategy against those civs.
Chemistry 2 mins, 300 food, siege tower or 4-5 mangonels or a castle and 2 petards to enter. All of these happen much slower compared to a castle drop and break-in enter. If you do the same gunpowder rush Turks do in under 20 mins at 24 mins, its going to be much less effective.
i think all gunpowder units should be affected by chemistry +1 dmg.
that is Jannisarry, conqs, organ guns
hc and bbc shoud both lose -1 dmg which is offset with +1 dmg from chemistry (no change)
overally slight buff to UU gunpoweder units in imperial age, giving them more affordable upgrade dependacy other than the elite upgrade. gunpwoweder UU have always fallen of a lot in imp while being a bit on the too strong side in caslte age.
additionaly give janissary 7 instead of 8 range in castle age
Elite upgrade cost can be lowered. I’m against any sort of stats buff because Turks late game doesn’t need any buff.
Okay, I’ve understood then. Having 1-2 exception won’t hurt.
Good to know that. Then we can just nerf without compensation.
Cost of breaking through walls is worth to consider. However still not convincing enough.
I’ll actually accuse Arena players one more time. The reason Arena players asking to reduce range is they know exactly which stat nerfing will remove an UU from being a meta in Arena. They knew reducing or maybe even removing WW’s attack bonus vs building should be done, but they asked to reduce archer armor. And unfortunately balance team listened to them.