Free food is always good, on land and water maps. Berries are a more exposed than sheep for sure, but they also dont rot so you can delay 5 farms or what a bit longer or send vills to the berries whenever you can spare them. But ofc it doesnt make the civ fly that is why I also consider a new tb that isnt useless in 1v1 which is:
First market purchase free.
Getting some free ress for celebrating the establishment of the first market is a nice thing and is interesting in team games because it can be used differently for each player. And since it needs the investment of a market it is not broken but rewards you when you have one.
By far the most sensible balance changes proposal thread. Changes that will have some impact on the game without making anything OP or useless. Especially there have been some extremely stupid proposals recently which call for buffing Mangudai, buffing Slavs, nerfing Imperial camels etc.
Most of your proposals look good.
Since youâre also proposing reduced training time for genoese, this could buff Italians a bit too much. Powerful vs cav and gunpowder civs in late game, and good vs archer civs in mid game.
Too much for a free tech to the civ with the weakest land eco in the game is improbable imo. Several people have proposed free archer armors as alternative for Italians (I like it despite I am not a big fan of that).
Imo free archer armors would make more sense since, despite weaker vs archers than free e skyrms, it acts in feudal where the civ is clearly badâŠ
Yeah because every game ends in feudal age since every player completely wall his base. Italians have a good age up cost bonus that helps them to go castle age faster.
Iâm starting to hope they just remove the italians from the game. Having no civ representing my country is a fair price to pay to stop seeing the same couple of people repeating the same stuff about italians every fâin thread
The fact that I see nearly every player go for elite skirms in castle age prove that this would be a strong buff for Italians if course depends on civ the enemy has.
These in particular are some really great ideas and need to be implemented for balance ASAP.
HC buffs have been argued to better be based on their HP and accuracy.
Also, Turks/Tatars buffs SORELY NEEDED
CA, HC, SL, Shotel, Siege Tower buffs SORELY NEEDED
Shotel could be given the same armor piercing that Leitis have, thatâs what they were made for IRL.
Siege Tower should not cost such many gold. It cannot attack at all. The main way of using can be easily blocked by double layer house/palisade wall. It can only help the infantry move faster against archer fire. It costs double amount of gold of rams and even more than mangonel. The gold cost should be reduced for its limitations. But siege tower should not be trash unit as siege tower may be overused in late game.
when paired with severely reduced genoese training time I meant. One good change might seem fine but when paired with another it becomes strong. And because its a naval civ, it isnât meant to be very strong and top-tier on land maps. And btw Italians are not the weakest land eco. Magyars, Bulgarians, Byzantines, Portugese are economically similar.
These civs have a better feudal age by a large margin, since they spare much more than 75f⊠Regarding Portuguese, I agree that something is still needed!
Some people say that several civs you mention neeed buffs btwâŠ
Sure GC TT is very necessary. Italians would still need something in the early stages (which are completely unaffected by a change of the UU). Btw, I am not a big fan of free e-skyrm, it may become very good vs some civs and useless vs others. A more general small buff like free archer armors is more balanced
Free archer armour is no small buff. It makes Italian archers super hard to kill with your own archers since they will have fletching and padded archer armour. Per se its ok but together with cheaper age up you force opponent to go skirms delaying his castle age time even further will you just spend wood and gold and click up even cheaper.
Maybe you are right, but a +1/1 archer performs exactly as a vietmamese archer in feudal fights. Vietmamese would be still with a stronger eco and some other land advantage until imp (where the two civs are too different to be compared).
I mean, I agree it is decent, but seriously, do we expect that if koreans or Italians get this free armor they become competitive civs?
Some people think this is a good bonus also for Koreans.
Also, a civ with good feudal eco is typically several resources ahead to Italians (which just spare 75f) so they may also research the armor quicklyâŠ
its not getting the food after they have reached the next age they dont need to spend it which means they can click up faster and use it elsewhere otherwise which is more than just 75food after they have reached feudal.
If you click up one villager earlier it is around 25 seconds advantage, and no more. It is not a great eco advantage since when you age up one vill less you have a worse eco and less villagers collecting resources in the transition. More or less you waste the 75f advantage by clicking up one vill earlier (you can still drop the stable 25 seconds earlier). Malay is a different thing, because you are actually ahead in eco using the faster aging up (faster is better than cheaper, especially 80% vs 15%).
In principle I agree that the bonus could be good, but it is simply too small atm. But it has to be so weak, otherwise the civ would be broken on water.
I think âMilitary units cost -20% woodâ can be changed to âMilitary units (except siege units)and military buildings (Barracks, Archery Range, Stable, Siege Workshop)cost -20% woodâ. This should be enough for early buff.
