I don’t prefer to nerf the berry bonus too.
Cavalry HP bonus moved back to castle age means encouraging the opponent to research the bloodline in the feudal age for killing you who have no bloodline at the time.
I suggest that the Franks have to pay for the bloodline but the bloodline provide an unique effect to +20% HP for the Franks rather than to +20 HP for others.
Better nerf the effect than increase the price in my opinion .
Perhaps +30 HP and +5 attack against the cavalry.
I would like to keep their 150 food but take 50 wood or 50 gold off.
MEANINGLESS because of no bloodline. However the Logistica bloodline knights are a bit broken.
The cheaper camels with bloodline are broken too so the camels should not get cheaper anymore if the bloodline will be introduced.
I would like to give them 1 more llama as their unique civ bonus.
Cavalry HP on castle age means Franks have to use their eco advantage of berry bushes and free farm upgrades ASAP because their scouts won’t have any supremacy in feudal age, which is needed to be honest, however, it still will reward the player if keep those scouts alive (much like how Turks are greatly rewarded with the free Light Cavalry upgrade in castle age).
+30Hp won’t make any difference and +5 vs cavalry is too much, the effect is fine, but the tech is too cheap.
Doesn’t mean we have to make the Frank scout cavalry inferior.
Most of civs able to +20 HP for their horses in the feudal and the Franks can not. You are creating a big disadvantage to them, especially in the team game. They will be forced to fast castle.
Let them have as same beginning as the others.
Making they have to pay for their bonus is already able to delay their strong time.
Much difference while the archers and infantries face them.
People now have chance to research the bloodline to making their horsemen better than the Franks or able to fight them. (45 +20 = 65 > 45 *1.2 = 54)
After this change, people see the Franks, seeing you cannot get the bloodline, they will have more motivation to hit the bloodline since they know you have no any chance to make the horsemen fight fair or have advantage. In the feudal age, the Frank player are doomed to be behind.
Making the +20% have the price as expensive as the bloodline, let the horsemen fight fairly. If the opponent pay resources for the bloodline, you can also pay the resources to have more advantage.
I think Franks partially dominate the ladder just because it’s such an easy to play civ. With 39 civs you can’t know every civ, but everybody knows to play franks, as they feature such an easy strat you can’t make anything really wrong with.
If you don’t need to think about your next steps, you can fokus more on the gameplay and feel safe with your strategic choice cause you just know it usually works just fine.
In general I also hold it with T90 - I don’t want to nerf the top civs actually, except for those who just thrive by their insane eco maybe as I think this is silly design. Ofc there should be civs that mainly thrive by eco bonusses, but chinese, vikings and partially mayans just have too much of eco bonusses imo and too less of specialisation (that could be explioded by the opponent).
For Franks I thought about some “adjustment” actually, I think it would benefit the civ and open options for other civs if the berry bonus was completely removed from them, but the HP bonus of the cavalry became 25 % in Imp. We currently have several other civs that question the Franks Paladin as the best Heavy Cav in the Game. Teutons and Sicilians for Example, Lithuanians before the nerf. I think it’s Franks privilege to have the undisputedly best heavy Cav in the game. The ofset would be to make it a bit harder, especially in the early game, to get to this endgame power.
A bit melodramatic, don’t you think? I never see Franks falling behind in Feudal in a scout war. The Farms bonus alone helps there a lot. Franks have way more going for them than just the free +20 % HP.
I thik most people heavily underestimate how valueable that bonus is. It is actually more valueable than free wood upgrades because you often don’t want to make the farm upgrade right away (you prefer to make military first) but the wood upgrade everybody tries to get asap. That leads to the odd behaviour that because of the farm upgrade having a lower priority than the wood upgrade in fast paced games having it for free gives actually more benefit than having wood for free.
(The same is for vikings bonus actually, because wheelbarrow has low priority in fast paced games it is actually extremely valueable to get it for free)
I dont understand why everyone keeps wanting to nerf the Frankish scouts but then on other posts everyone complains that scouts aren’t viable in the meta and everything is archers nowadays. If the latter is true, how is the former a meaningful nerf to Franks?
About Burmese, what about a bonus on the Elite Skirmisher upgrade?
It could be free (too OP), cost halved, cost only wood/food, immediately research, bonus increase against archers, or even something as dead Skirmishers return some of the cost to help them against the archer matchups
Overall I like the proposal
Actually interesting. As Burmese lack the 2nd archer armor upgrade their elite skirms are way weaker than general. Normally I would say that this is too much of a bonus against archer civs, but Burmese can be the very exception there.
I actually like that proposal.
Giving to a civ free techs for a bad unit its kind of dumb. If you want to use free skirm use it in Spain which would fit them in game and would be historically accurate
Burmese need to get buffed in the stables or siege workshops.
Lol, you systematically sanded down every unique feature/bonus that civs have for the sake of balance lol, that’s the easy part, why would you even write a post about it though, nothing inspiring here.
Free Elite Skirmisher upgrade is too OP IMO, even for Burmese. But the fact that they miss the last two armor upgrades could compensate for this. Free upgrade for Spanish would be broken. Turks have free Scout line but no trash, Bulgarians have free Militia line but no Champion and no Archers, Malians have free Pikes but no Halbs.
Just try to give ideas on the Burmese subject in general
Not a fan of the new Imperial UT, too late to solve the problem
For aztecs I’d remove something siege related as a nerf, perhaps either siege ram or siege onager - or siege engineers - one of those three would be a big nerf.
Not coherent and in line with their identity, it could be much rather used on another civ. Not to mention the ramifications on Arena and the fact it would be virtually impossible to CD burmese or even go for any aggressive strat, coupled with the cheap monk techs.
I don’t see Burmese being weak against archers in the critical time (late castle age, early imp) if simply the ages for the UTs are swapped. Sure, you can’t go for elite skirm as Burmese in a lot of situations, but that’s the same for Malay not going knights, or Bulgarians and Spanish not going for archers long term.
In Imp Burmese shred archers. SE BBC and onager is usually enough, especially when coupled with FU hussars and elephant rams that kill an arbalest in 2 hits (only war eles and leitis could do that before).
In early castle a quick Chain Barding or a siege workshop is enough to defend or even be the aggressor against an archer mass, which you can afford with the free LC techs.
The problem is in late castle where your enemy is in imp a bit faster and they get the arb mass and you have to defend that. Well, the counter to fast imps is defensive castles, once you make that just get the UT (which, as iterated by me and many others before, should be moved to the castle age). On top of a castle age all in being a great option if you go for an arambai mass.
Chinese and Vikings die to halb SO. Spanish and Poles die to CA huss. Certain civs have always had certain weaknesses, which with the new Manipur isn’t even a thing for Burmese. As long as the ages are inversed- nobody masses eles in castle anyway, or needs 6 PA on them.