Stats at 1650+ are meaningless, because they are typically accumulated from mere ~200-400 games per civ. With so little data civs winrate would have varied between 45 and 55 even if they were exactly equal in strength.
I mean sure, but then if you take data from all games, you include games lost because someone tried to go straight for Teuton CA or something, which isnât much better. And it was my point that stats are bad anyway.
There are other elos that you can have reliable data but not 1650+. Just compare the number of games yourself. And trolls have a significant weight on data unless you just want to search <1000 Elo games.
If you want to go even deeper you can get formulas for the win rate error range based on the number of games played by each civ and then judge if itâs reliable.
I know arambai doesnât have bonus vs building, just their high attack which should be changed to -15 and change completely their UT that gives more damage vs buildings.
The terrible design of the arambai is probably never going to change, since its an unit created by FE and they defend their creations and abominations till the end.
Cows makes more sense, you are right. He meant a 150 food herdable.
As a magyar (or Hungarian) player I can confirm that magyars werenât from steppes and giving them the steppe lancer would be a quite big mistake in the perspective of historical accuracy
Thanks for this. Maybe that clears much of my confusion. Also, I am Indian, but no one seems to take my suggestions on historical accuracy, 11.
So what? People are going to keep complaining because they lose to paladin spam
The Paladins after this go from 192 to 190 HP, so technically a nerf.
Well if you have chivalry it means you have a castle and then you can just garrison Joan inside.
There are other occurrence of Franks other than JoA campaign. Moreover, if you start in Imperial Age, even if you donât have a Castle, Chivalry is researched.
Is the biggest reason arambai destroy buildings so much faster than conquistadors is their rate of fire? Itâs 2.2 vs 2.9 respectively.
Yes, and also they have 1 more attack, which may doesnât sound much. 1 more attack means they do 10 to 25% more per shot to stone walls depending on upgrades and structure.
Stone and Fortified Gates have 6 pierce armor while Fortified Walls have 12. Stone Walls have 10.
Also, I am Indian, but no one seems to take my suggestions on historical accuracy, 11.
the problem isnât that.
the problem is the game isnât based solely on historical accuracy. it takes balance and gameplay far more into account and always has.
i mean for gods sake we got Native American civs running around with wheels, steel, and crossbows/arbalests. on top of siege weapons like trebuchets.
the other problem is you literally use historical accuracy to justify changes to Indians while ignoring Historical accuracy elsewhere. this is also a very common trend among those who want to change Indians for accuracy sake.
The Paladins after this go from 192 to 190 HP, so technically a nerf.
and the Knight goes from 120 to 130, the cavalier goes from 144 to 150 and the Light Cavalier goes up to 80 HP. those are all technically buffs. the ONLY time its a nerf is when they actually manage to get to paladin so in the super late imperial age. outside of that they are STRONGER, which will help them GET FURTHER AHEAD and close the game out FASTER.
Give ballistic ti gunpowder units
Remove the Indian camel bonus vs buildings and give them a normal +2 attack (1 un castle, 1 in imperial)
Improve the accuracy of organ guns secundary proyectiles and reduce tu gold discount yo 15
Give militias line a tiny bonus against knights
Kinda, but no. Arambai has bonus damage against buildings through unique tech. Conquistador does not have any bonus damage against buildings. So whatever conquistadors has as pierce damage can only do so much against buildings, unlike bonus damage, which is the minimum damage that Arambai deals to buildings.
Magyars - (Elite) Steppe Lancers added which cost -15% food. Not that Magyars are having terrible military options but just historically. They will be the only Lancer civ without Camels.
I dont think magyars need lancers, the lancers already suck, give their tc build time 100% faster
give their tc build time 100% faster
This is a good buff for magyars actually. Tbh I think they are fine, considering also how bad some other civs are, but they are at most an average civ. So this small buff in castle age could be really niceâŠ
As a Magyar player so i can %100 sure of we have Steppe origin probably Turkic origin.Our ancestors trace back to ancient Xiang-Nu(HUN) empire in north China and we still have many common words with modern Turks and Mongols (Both have steppe no doubt origin for %100)
More suggestions after watching pro games.
-
Italians (buff) - Cheaper ageing up bonus increased to 20%.
-
Byzantines (buff) - Imperial Age and Paladin upgrades cost -33% in resources and time. (+50% faster ageing up to Imperial Age).
-
Town Patrol - costs 150F rather than 300F 100G.
-
Tracking (nerf in early game, buff in late game) - At present this technology isnât removed. It has become free. It is like the Scout upgrade from Dark Age to Feudal Age. Rather than increasing Infantry LoS by +2 in Feudal Age, it would be better to have Infantry +1 LoS every age starting in Feudal Age.
Consequences - The Scout Cavalry becomes slightly more viable. At present both Militia and Scouts have same LoS (4 in Dark, 6 in Feudal). It also affects Spearmen now making Scrushes slightly more viable. Also it slightly nerfs the Eagle Scouts too. Absolutely no change in Castle Age. Slightly better infantry in Imperial Age.
- Italians (buff) - Cheaper ageing up bonus increased to 20%.
No accompanied nerf on the water? Pro scenes in pure water map are already nearly always Italian mirror.
Byzantines (buff) - Imperial Age and Paladin upgrades cost -33% in resources and time. (+50% faster ageing up to Imperial Age).
Why? They already have cheaper age up and stacked with faster research time is too much, and why have to buff their Paladin?
Town Patrol - costs 150F rather than 300F 100G.
Town Patrol is already good tech and price reduction is not needed. Player have to choose invest that resource to get it or not.
Tracking (nerf in early game, buff in late game) - At present this technology isnât removed. It has become free. It is like the Scout upgrade from Dark Age to Feudal Age. Rather than increasing Infantry LoS by +2 in Feudal Age, it would be better to have Infantry +1 LoS every age starting in Feudal Age.
Scout and militia/MAA is already both viable in early game and that change is unnecessary.
Still super random af proposals Like wtf cheaper and faster imp for byzantines. As if they need a buff and need to be even faster in imp. And including paladin is just adding ugliness to the civ. They are f i n e. Just watching pro games doesnt build a sound basis to judge balance for the w h o l e game and then i dont see how these ideas arise from watching just viper 24/7.
No accompanied nerf on the water? Pro scenes in pure water map are already nearly always Italian mirror.
Finally someone who agrees in this. Italians need an important rebalance, which is more than a small buff on land and a small nerf on waterâŠ