My proposed balancing for September/October patch


here is my list of the proposal for the upcoming balancing patch (some of the ideas come from the discussion that we deal in other balancing thread ever and ever again)

In general:

  • Wheelbarrow research time 75 sec to 50 sec (indirect nerf to Vikings)

Militia line:

  • supplies reduce the cost to: 120f, 70g
  • Man-at-arms research time 40 sec to 30 sec
  • Longswords research time 45 sec to 35 sec
  • Longswords upgrade costs -50f

Cavalry archer:

  • reduce attack delay from 1 sec to 0.8 sec
  • increase accuracy 50% to 60%

Hand Cannoneer:

  • -5g to 45f, 45g

Steppe Lancer:

  • -5f to 65f, 45g

Some improvement for the UU (castle units)

  • Samurai: base movement speed from 1.0 to 1.05


  • Jaguar warrior: base movement speed from 1.0 to 1.05


  • Shotel warrior: +5 HP


  • Elite upgrade 1000f, 800g to 800f, 600g


  • Elite upgrade 1600f, 1200g to 1200f, 900g
  • reduce Training time 31 sec to 27 sec


  • Elite upgrade 1200f, 500g to 900f, 500g


  • -10g to 55f, 75g


  • unit cost -10g to 100f, 70g


  • Elite Janissary +15% accuracy to 65%


  • Flaming camel available in Imperial age without tech


  • reduce training time to 16 sec
  • Elite GC +1 attack

Some Civilization balancing:


  • gold lasts 20% longer
  • Artillery change cost 500g, 450s to 500g, 600f


  • +1/1 to ALL Infantry by reaching Imperial Age
  • Access to Squires
  • Improve Arquebus e.g. increase projectile speed


  • free Elite Skirmisher upgrade


  • siege workshop -100w OR -20% wood discount for ALL siege unit


  • Herdables contain 70% food instead of 50%
  • +1 pierce armor per Age for Steppe Lancer starting from the castle age


  • Blacksmith -100w


  • Mill, Lumber camp, Mining camp give +5 population space


  • Zealotry reduce cost 750f, 700g to 700f, 600g


  • Start with +100 Stones


  • access to Bracer
  • Elite Kipchak -1 attack

Longer lasting gold doesn’t change Turks’ uselessness against Archer civs.

Zealotry still would be very expensive

Berbers are fine, they don’t need to be Saracens 2.0

M@A and Wheelbarrow are balanced. Longswords deserve a bigger buff, even Bulgarian Longswords are completely useless.

For Portuguese I’d prefer Squires and cheaper siege is way more useful than 50% cheaper siege workshops.

1 Like

A Carrack is a Ship, it has nothing to do with Infantry.


It’s aoe2, so it doesn’t matter El Dorado wasn’t even a Mayan thing, but devs could easily rename it like Fabric Shields or Corvinian Army.


But El Dorado is at least a very vague name.
A Carrack is a very specific type of vessel, that does not have anything to do with Infantry.

Though Ports getting an Infantry buff could be cool, the Carrack UT is not the place for it.


I saw the wheelbarrow change as an indirect nerf to the Vikings, and I think it makes a lot of sense in that regard. Since every civ gets it, it doesn’t change a whole lot for the average game (might make it a bigger priority for faster vills in open maps along with the benefits) but the Vikings get a huge economy spike from free wheelbarrow and reducing the research time globally will reduce the effective benefit that bonus has.

No thoughts on the other changes. This just seemed like an interesting option. I might recommend 55s instead of 50, to match Hand cart’s time.


Turks is not the best civ against archer that’s true. But in castle age you can still defend with Mangonals, Knight and even Skirms without upgrade are still fine. In Imperial Age you have many good option, stronger cav archer and strong gunpowder units. And they have siege rams too.

Wheelbarrow balancing is indirect nerf for Vikings! Vikings are the most banned civ in the last tournament and has the best eco in the game.

No Longswords are not useless. A bigger buff would make balancing more comlicated. Goth, Vikings, Malians and some other infantry civ would be too strong. And Bulgarians Longswords are not useless!

Of course we can add Squires too. And rename Carrack.

Berbers are a good mid tier civ but has weak eco bonus. This small buff will help them a bit and not to push their strong Knight rush in the castle age.


If I was to buff any Ports units, it would be the HCs and the Halbs, since that is what they are supposed to use.
Perhaps +15 HP for both in the Imperial Age.

You would have thought people got tired of making new balance threads after the 5th…


What about militia line costing only 16 gold allowing drushing without additional gold gathering ? :smiley:

I dont think you should discount a unit and then give them an extra bonus (goths are not excluded even though they exist with that flaw, Obsidian arrow is basically the same problem, but even without cheaper archers for mayans, problematic UT). Portuguese’s main problem is that their gold discount should carry them on land 1v1 since every other thing they have is only water, team game or super late.
50% longer lasting berries would be a nice one I still think so.

That is why I do not think Ports Militia or Archers need a buff.

1 Like

Haha yeah… But i wonder if the more threads people make, the more some people feel encouraged to then make their own

At least this thread is a kind of summary of a number of things some people had agreed on in other threads…

I agree portos need a buff. But berries is a tiny wood buff imo. Since berry gather rate is so low i dont think its feasible to want to gather from them for too long…

Assuming their UT no longer affects the SL.? Otherwise agree with basically everything.

Berbers aren’t s-tier so even though they don’t suck, they could do with a buff and not break the game.

Imo the koreans SW buff is either too much or too little. 20% wood on all siege is too much imo, and 100w per SW is too small of a buff.

Usually it would be easier to put my ideas in some other thread for balancing but my idead would get lost under the thousand comments.
So in the end it’s better to make my own topic and put my idea inside.
And for the Devs it’s easier to find. :slight_smile:

1 Like

What I disagree with:
–> The cavalry archer buffs. They are already good as is.
–> Janissary accuracy buff: getting access to a gunpowder unit in the Castle Age is pretty powerful for the Turks as is.
–> Portuguese Elite upgrade lowered cost. The Organ Gun is a powerful unit, and should be expensive to get.
–> The Tatars buff to herdable food containing +70% extra food instead of +50%…that I think makes them a bit too powerful in the early game. If anything, it is the Britons that ought to get a buff to their shepherds working faster.

–> Cuman access to Bracer. That makes them too good with their Kipchaks. Their get multiple arrow firing, but Mongol Mangudai, Berber Camal Archers, get single fire, with a better rnage as they have access to Bracer. Giving Bracer to Cumans would make Cumans much more preferred than the other unique cavalry archer civs.

–> The changing of the Turks’ Artillery tech stone cost to food cost. Absolutely should not happen. Artillery is a powerful tech to research for Turks. And the Stone cost is essential to put a nerf to Bombard Tower rushing/spamming. The stone cost must remain as is.

–> Expanding the Portuguese tech Carracks ability to infantry units. Really? It is meant to be a naval tech. The Portuguese already are quite good with their gold cost reduction for ALL gold cost units. If you want to play a civ with strong melee infantry, just play Teutons.

1 Like

The way I see it, naming the tech “El Dorado” is a nod to the Dreamworks film, “The Road to El Dorado” and the people of the city of El Dorado in the story, are shown to be peaceful people much like the Mayans were as compared to the (much more warlike) Azteca peoples and other northern Meso-American tribes that fought bloody wars against the southern Mayan peoples.

Another way of looking at it is that “El Dorado” aludes the the actual myth that there was a city of gold that several European explorers tried–and failed–to find. Whatever the reasons for naming the tech such…it is a nice idea if I do say so myself.

1 Like

sorry, but even viper recently commented on how bad cav archers are right now. a passing remark, but it’s pretty telling when even pros consider them to be under-performing.

he only buffs elite jans, not normal jans.

kipchaks also have much lower health and attack.


Just because The Viper says so does not mean that his word should be treated as gospel.

I acknowledge the skill of the The Viper as an experienced AoE2 player. Honestly, I even like the guy…but you justifying that “cavalry archers need a buff because The Viper says so” is not a good enough argument.

Can you tell me WHAT exactly cavalry archers need to be buffed in, and WHY? And did The Viper say WHY?
From my own experience, cavalry archers are still quite powerful and are fine the way they are right now.

1 Like

I’m sorry man
But Viper has way more experience on the game than me and you do
So, if he says that, he’s not being a balance topic spammer


i agree with you, and that’s why its important to look at everything involved and games.

tell me, how often do you see cav archers used even by cav archer civs at the highest level?

part of the problem if you ask me is just how bad they are for their cost compared to other castle age options, with a base 50% accuracy and large cost, you’re at best going to wait until late castle to even see them get rolling, as they require so many upgrades to even compete with other easier to mass up options.

i mean he does have a point. pros have been known to overreact before, look at hera calling plumes trash as a good example. but this is one i think is pretty obvious to everyone that cav archers aren’t doing well.