Next Balance change proposal

Age of Empires II: DE II - Discussion
1

Game balance has been overall good, but need more tune down for many DLC civs, and powercrept on gunpowder civs dominate in closed map and unit like Janis power crept too much that I propose to fix them

General

- Matchlock: New University tech in imperial age, +15% accuracy for Hand cannoneer, Conquistador, and Janissary, 250F 200G, Available in Castle age for Turks.

- Hand Cannoneer Base accuracy -15%, Conquistador Base Accuracy -10%, Janissary stay same, Elite Janissary Base accuracy -5%.

(In this way, Bohemians HC which outperform Castle UU Janis can be nerfed/resolved without making Janis too powerful. Janissary in Castle age can have accuracy 65%, which can be strong, but need to invest Castle + University. I don’t want to discourage HC play in open map where reaching imp in full eco, I want to tune down 1-2TC FI HC strategy in closed map which need additional cost to produce HC in full power)

Khitan

- No longer training Light Cav line 25% faster, only Spearman line, skirmisher line training and upgrade 25% faster.

Wei

- Lose access to ring archer armor

(Problem for Xianbei raider which should be glass cannon unit is even bit too tanky when Fully upgrade with 8/6 Armor. Without last archer armor it can be weak against archer/cav archer but still ridiculously cheap cav archer unit and tanky vs low-melee attack with Ming guang armor.)

Wu

- Jian swordsman cost 45F 50G → 55F 50G

- Jian swordsman and Heiguang cavalry +2 attach in imp → +3 attack in imp

- Lose access to Plate Barding Armor

(Hera said that Jian swordsman is most broken castle age UU now which is Huskarl not needing castle. Also, civ is too versatile that access to FU Hussar, Heiguang cavalry in full armor. This civ need to be Infantry civ with decent archer not having all-around tech in imp.)

Hindustanis

- Lose access to ring archer armor

- Gaining access to Parthian Tactic

(This way their Shatagni HC lose last armor)

Mongols

- faster hunting bonus +40% → +30%

- Elite Mangudai movement speed 1.4 → 1.45 (Non-elite unchanged)

Burgundians

- Gunpowder unit +25% attack bonus no longer improve bonus damage (Only Base attack)

Turks

- Matchlock available in Castle age with 50% discount as gunpowder tech

Portuguese

- Units 20% gold discount no longer affect monk cost.

Any thought? Welcome any opinion.

1 Like
2

Disagree. Janissaries is still very powerful in Castle age.

I don’t think that this is necessary after all.

I don’t think it is a good idea to buff Mangudai further.

Any reason behind this proposed change?

3

Are you @II.Selim ?
20 char

4

aoe_janissary_1
aoe_janissary_2
aoe_janissary_3

1 Like
5

I don’t disagree here. My suggestion isn’t straight buff to Janissary. Just give more potential for increasing accuracy when research tech, and tone down other OP gunpowder civ like Bohemians/Burgundians/Hindustanis

That is OG mangudai movement speed. I am only suggest giving back for elite one. Mangudai become worse while Magyars/Turks HCA better than mangudai in many aspects with no castle production requirement. I also suggest nerf mongol hunt bonus which adjust their OP FC steppe lancer rush.

That is sneaky OP bonus. When both civs going HC + BBC (which is usually reasonable composition in closed map). Burgundians just easily overwhelm with superior attack. Even Bohemian BBC is generic before expensive houfnice tech, Hindustanis HC also strong but need UT upgrade. It is too strong for free bonus.

Main effects here is nerf BBC against building, then other civs have time to deal with.

Burgundians also getting Flemish militia tweak/buff which help them in mid-game so other civs have more hard time preventing Burgundians getting late game so at least some adjustment needed.

6

I dont think gunpowders (i.e HCs) are a problem in closed maps no?

Bigger problem is BBCs (for Turks) and monks (for Bohemians)

Hindu is actually pretty weak against monk rushes so pretty bad in closed map (and in TG you go camel anyway)

I would do this instead:

Monks 100G → 75G 25F

Redemption now is imperial tech

Turks lose chemistry but chemistry is half costed

Turks gain imp UT to increase attack speed of gunpowder unit by 25%

BBC takes 50% longer to train

7

I like this change. Any nerfs to the situationally overpowered conquistadors is welcome.

Not a good change. Not a hybrid civ. Lacks halberdiers, gunpowder and important monk techs. So mediocre in closed maps as well. So they’re an open land map niche. Civ must be strong on such maps to avoid pre-August Gurjara, Poles situation. Faster production and higher dps are the means to compensate for the lack of bloodlines, knight-line and stay stronger in castle age.

Absolutely terrible change. Again no fishing related or dark age bonus. Not a hybrid civ. Need not even explain why its a terrible closed map civ. Open land maps are their niche. Eco bonus is above average but not extraordinary. Civ lacks plate barding armor, monk tech tree, siege engineers, regular trebs, gunpowder. Xianbei raiders don’t have a heavy or elite upgrade. Its important for the civ to have +4 armor on skirms.

Hera hates asymmetry and calls all civs with a different non-castle military unit as broken or overpowered, especially when they are new. A year after they’re nerfed to the stone age like your proposal here, he’ll make a new video about “lets discuss why this civ is shit”. It has already received some nerfs last patch. I would wait for a year or so and if its too strong in early castle age there are other ways to fix it. Like increasing training time, reducing base p.armor but making them benefit from gambesons, all melee cavalry except scout line getting +3 vs jian when they are in run-away mode. Your changes nearly removes the possibility of market up early castle age jian swordsmen as a viable strategy for Wu. In a way its like forcing skirm-stable unit play, which is bad imo.
And why would you remove plate barding armor. No Arbalest, no heavy CA, nerfed Jian swordsman, castle uu is one of the worst and you want to remove plate barding as well. Like are you trying to create some competition for civs like Dravidians, Sicilians?

Makes their skirms weaker and the civ overall weaker against most CA and archer civs with good eco bonus.

The hunt change is quite decent. But buffing Mangudai is ridiculous. The unit is already so broken once produced. Just because in Arabia 1v1 it takes a long time to get a decent mass of Mangudai, you can’t buff the stats on the produced unit. I’d do the opposite. Reduce their training time so that they can be massed sooner but make them weaker in generic fights vs other ranged units and cavalry and keep it as a specialist vs siege and infantry.

Great change for closed maps.

8

Let’s just give +1 attack and +10% accuracy to Janissaries.

For Elite Janissaries, their Elite upgrade cost should be reduced. And the weirdness of Hindustani/Italian HC countering Elite Janissaries definitely has to go, but the issue is how?

11

Honestly, infantry UU will be preferred to buff rather than janissaries especially compared to their generic counterparts. Infantry UU should be prioritized way higher than reverting 8-range Janissaries.

2 Likes
13

Every infantry UU except Huskarls have been buffed since DE, some of them have been buffed twice or thrice even

1 Like
14

If Bohemians can train basically cheaper and stronger Janissaries on their archery range, then I’d want to train cheaper and stronger Hussite Wagons on my siege workshop.

15

Because of Gambeson and HC buff? I believe that buffing infantry UU makes more sense than reverting 8-range Janissaries, when you compared to generic line.

16

so is this an endless cycle? buff one because because its counter or alternative got buffed? There are no “bad” UUs except TTK with the current balance, they all play a role in their respective civ

17

I agree that there is no big issue for infantry UU. But if castle age Janissaries has to be buffed because of Bohemian HC better than it, then I will propose to buff most infantry UU instead.

18

There are many ways to compensate Janissaries without brutally nerfing Conquistadors.

It’s okay for Castle Age Janissaries to be countered by Hand Cannoneers. What isn’t okay is Bohemian Castle Age Hand Cannoneers acting like a direct upgrade from Janissaries.

This is why I strongly suggested all Castle Age Unique Units must bring exclusive combat advantages to prevent such weirdnesses. Previously, Janissaries’ combat advantages were +1 range and +9 HP; now it’s down to +4 HP only (not to mention they also stealthily lost accuracy and now have worse attack dispersion than the Hand Cannoneer).

So, Castle Age Janissaries must bring more than a +4 HP advantage to justify their downsides. Simply compensating for the loss of +1 range, +5 HP, and accuracy (which were huge losses) is necessary. That’s why I wouldn’t be satisfied if they only give an accuracy boost, because that would not be enough for what they lost.

19

Think you overestimate how good Khitan scouts are. They may be a strong civ, but their winrate on aoestats for 1900+ is statistically below 50% (though still pretty high for every other elo category). I’d be fine with the bonus being reduced to 20% though.

Jian swordsmen meanwhile would still be bad in imp while losing a good portion of their strength in castle age. I think that going from 45f/50g → 55f/40g (or even 65f/30g) would be better. Food is scarcer in early castle age, so it still nerfs their castle age (which is desirable), but their imp strength (which is a bit lacking) would be better.

As much as Ornlu calls Portuguese OP, whenever I look at their stats, I don’t really see evidence that they’re OP. Even when I look at specific maps, they don’t seem to excel on any particular map type. Though I will admit AoEstats doesn’t help with evaluating them at a pro level.

Counterpoint: Burgundians are missing the last archer armor upgrade, which makes them easier to kill (especially with ranged units). Burgundian hand cannons aren’t particularly strong, and their BBCs miss siege engineers (which hurts their usability, especially against buildings/castles). BBCs are really more of an anti-siege unit than an anti-building unit anyways.

1 Like
20

Free Chemistry is primarily what makes Turks’ games interesting and opens up unique strategies like instant Bombard Cannons / Hand Cannons, fast Bombard Towers, and a temporary +1 attack advantage for your Crossbows and Cavalry Archers. It uniquely shapes both your and your opponent’s gameplay. It’s less about the cost of Chemistry and more about not needing to wait 100 seconds. (At least until Bohemians/Malians were added).

Bohemians can already go Imperial Age with Chemistry researched like Turks; they can also train Castle Age Hand Cannoneers, which are basically stronger Janissaries, which is not nice.

You keep the legacy by respecting 25+ year old unique bonuses, not making civs more similar by removing options or giving rip-off versions of their bonuses to new civs.

Nobody would want to see their 25+ year old bonus go and be forced to scrap their entire game plan.

21

Yes he has a very subjective bias based on a very few games. Like he thinks Malay is too OP because of the free infantry armor. I do agree that Portugese aren’t broken, at least not the gold bonus but keeping monks out of it isn’t a bad idea either. Given they’re good on most maps, reducing their strength on closed maps isn’t a bad idea. For me personally either way is fine.

Valid point about bombard canons but hand canoneers are never used directly against ranged units. Its usually a mix of ranged + melee fights. Tbh I didn’t know their 25% also applied to the bonus damage. +4, +10 in general is more than sufficient to compensate for the lack of last armor and siege engineers. Don’t think you need to over-compensate that. Given Burgundian vineyards, food from relics etc, their units need to be slightly a bit on the weaker side.

1 Like
22

That civ access to tiger cavalry which is ultimate anti-archer. Other cavalry civ also lack good skirms though like Franks, Teutons, Persians etc. even Hei Guang cavalry not bad against archer with 5PA. Also skirms without last armor perfectly usable

This civ do have arbester. You may confuse with Wei? I would give them ring archer armor for compensation.

You may forget this civ have anti-archer focus eagle UU? Hindustanis have really good matchup vs Maya for Ghulam both counter archer and eagle and FU skirms not really needed. Imperial camel also good against HCA. No need to get everything.

23

No its not, lacks plate barding armor in imp. Halbs + Arbalesters would wreck them before you build 5 castles and mass Tiger cavalry. If they either get 6 base p.armor for elite or take -10 bonus damage from halbs or cost lesser gold, you can justify the removal of ring archer armor

And they all get plate barding armor, a bonus on their stable unit (no need to mass stone for production) that lets them survive longer in halbs + arbalester battle, a bonus or UT for their castle to hold longer, access to hand canoneers+ bombard canons and still have regular trebs. Plus Teutons, Persians get ring archer armor which is good to survive early imp arbalester play. None of these apply to Wei. If you’re giving access to plate barding armor + a free castle bonus or Heavy Xianbei raider or imperial hei guang cavalry with 5 base p.armor and 150+ base hp, sure you could justify the removal of ring archer armor

I meant to say fully upgradable arbalester, my bad. Hei guang cav with extra attack, jian swordsmen with 9 p.armor and regen and uu that can snipe siege justify the lack of ring archer armor. If you want to remove plate barding armor, the right compensation is providing ring archer armor + thumb ring and either heavy CA + parthian tactics or improved generic stats of fire archers + siege engineers. Then cavalry can become a situational support unit for the civ.

Otherwise you can’t justify a mediocre economy, subpar military civ. It will become a repeat of Sicilians, Dravidians and Bulgarians.

And why is having good matchup against Maya a criterion for nerf? Imperial camels are not good vs HCA unless you heavily outnumber them and the CA player has no halbs. Again the compensation here apart from Parthian tactics would be giving 1 melee and 5 p.armor for elite ghulam and access to plate mail armor or leaving their infantry as such and giving 1 p.armor and +5 camel class armor to Imperial camels so that they dont die fast against halbs + heavy CA combos justifying weaker skirms.

“No need to get everything” - Absolutely with you on this and that’s why they lack Knight line and halberdier upgrade. Ghulam is a great alternative to the knight line vs eagle civs.