Ornlu's 45 ideas to balance all 45 civs

[UpmostRook9474]

@KHANATTILA

• Add ‘Plate Barding Armour’
• and I would honestly give ‘Fereters’ to another civilisation

They are in the list of personal preferences.

@KHANATTILA

@UpmostRook9474

Bohemians

• Remove Siege Engineers, and Elite Hussite Wagons get +1 range in exchange.
  Or, make Bombard Cannons and Houfnices unaffected by Wagenburg Tactics.

Buuu

They do deserve to be good in closed maps, but now they are crazy.
Houfnices should either slow down or lose 1 range in my opinion.

@KHANATTILA

The discount on siege weapons, aka Mangonel, was given to try to have a chance in the Castle Age because they have no knights and no redemption.

They have more extra wood than 200 so they can afford workshops and Mangonels.
I don’t think the wood discount for siege did deal with the problems decently. They need better Barrack infantry, and I do think the Redemption is worth considering. Check the list of personal preferences.

@KHANATTILA

Also because it would be the only civilisation with a bonus on the Steppe Lancers without having to pay

At most, I can accept the extra HP of Scouts and Steppe Lancers to be a part of the effect of Nomads.
I don’t like a civ bonus which is just a simply worse version of the other one.
And I can’t get the need why insist on having it a cost.

@Skadidesu

Would directly giving them 10 Wood for each villager trained be an option?

If you mean receiving 10 wood at the moment a villager has been trained, no. That might be too strong, especially in the Dark Age. That would make you receive at least 150 wood before you click Feudal.

Receiving as many wood as 10x the number of villagers when hitting a new age is similar to the current extra wood bonus but just providing more in the later Ages. If there are 20/40/100 villagers when you hitting Feudal/Castle/Imperial, then you receive 200/400/1000 wood at the time, that’s it.

@Skadidesu

But there are some advantages like you can wall with houses and you can place them as scouts.

It’s not an important advantage in my opinion. Having the cap directly max is still a simply better version, even games need to be started with less wood.

@Skadidesu

tbh movable TCs are a cool feature in general and it should just be a generic tech that is available all Nomadic civs in the game.
By being a generic tech it would prevent TC rush from being an OP Dark Age strategy.

I only mean to make Nomads can allow Castles to “train” TCs in a form of Packed TC Wagon for the Mongols who often have a Castle first rather than having the second TC. Train a Packed TC Wagon at a Castle, and the wagon can automatically build up a TC without villagers, that’s it, nothing complex.

For your idea, I feel that allowing TCs to be packed back into a wagon is too special to be generic feature. Maybe a unique feature of a nomadic civ in the future like the Gokturks or of 1 existing civ like Huns (as they already have no house for reflecting nomadic lifestyle), but I don’t see it will likely get applied on multiple existing civs.

Before that, I feel It’s very situational in AoE2, not really useful in normal games. You will want your TCs to constantly be training villagers instead of wasting time packing, moving and unpacking. Yeah it might allow TCs to run from TC rush, but firstly the TC rush is not a usual strategy, and secondly keeping training villagers is probably still better than taking the economical loss during the time unable to train villagers even if the TC is eventually destroyed and you need to pay for building a new one.

It’s just I feel I’m not a fan so much. But it would be cool to see it come true in scenarios.

@KHANATTILA

And I would add that the infantry bonus could then be given to a true infantry civilisation. Because at this point it would be really erroneous and meaningless.

You mean that the infantry attack bonus should be removed from Burmese?
I’m open to it, even though I think it’s one of their few solid bonuses.

[Skadidesu]

@UpmostRook9474

If you mean receiving 10 wood at the moment a villager has been trained, no. That might be too strong, especially in the Dark Age. That would make you receive at least 150 wood before you click Feudal.

Well there are civs that just start with 200 more resources so it wouldn’t be the strongest bonus.
Maybe 5 Wood per villager would work. This would be a nice small bonus for most of the game. But it would be less then now in early Feudal.

I personally like general bonuses more then age up bonuses.

@UpmostRook9474

It’s not an important advantage in my opinion. Having the cap directly max is still a simply better version, even games need to be started with less wood.

I know that it would be inferior to the Huns bonus but that doesn’t mean it wouldn’t fit the civ and have it’s own advantages.
Not every bonus in the game is equal right now either.

@UpmostRook9474

For your idea, I feel that allowing TCs to be packed back into a wagon is too special to be generic feature.

It was originally planned as a generic feature but then scrapped for technical reasons.
The feature can be activated in AoE2DE but it’s a little bugged. The TCs don’t align with the gird when you place them.
Also the unpack and pack times are very long. I think it’s the speed for one villager building a TC so it is currently pretty useless.

If the alignment is fixed and the speed is at least doubled it would become an interesting option. The issue is that it being available in Dark Age would make it a too powerful while it’s likely almost useless in the late game. It would be more of a flavour things then actual strategy.

[UpmostRook9474]

@Skadidesu

Well there are civs that just start with 200 more resources so it wouldn’t be the strongest bonus.

Aztecs: +50 gold.
Persians: +50 food, +50 wood.
Lithuanians: +100 food. (It was even nerfed from +150 food.)
Sicilians: +100 stone.
Which civ starts games with over 200 more resources?

Moreover, different types of resources have different importance. Starting with +150 wood means they can just click 2 fishing ships immediately when the first Dock is built. When they have been considered strong in water maps due to the 25 wood saved by the team bonus, having more extra wood in the Dark Age could be broken.

@Skadidesu

I know that it would be inferior to the Huns bonus but that doesn’t mean it wouldn’t fit the civ and have it’s own advantages.
Not every bonus in the game is equal right now either.

Bonus don’t have to be equal. Technically, I do agree it can definitely be a civ bonus, but having a bonus a essentially same but weaker version of other civs’ bonus is… lack of creativity. Both of them are to reflect the same thing — the nomadic lifestyle, but the one that needs houses just feels like even a semi-finished product of the other one. Once both are civ bonus, somehow I feel the sense of loss strongly in comparison. Personally, I’d rather pay for effects like allowing TC wagons to be trained and even giving scouts and steppe lancers extra HP so that the “semi-finished product” can be just a part of the bundle.

@Skadidesu

It was originally planned as a generic feature

I knew it. I just think it might be unique if it can return.

@Skadidesu

The TCs don’t align with the gird when you place them.

Refer to how AoE3 does. Regard the Wagon as a builder, so make it able to choose a place, drop a foundation and go there for building just like how villagers do, but the Wagon disappear when touches the foundation and the foundation starts to be built automatically.

[Skadidesu]

@UpmostRook9474

Which civ starts games with over 200 more resources?

I mixed up Persians and Lithuanians.

Then 5 Wood per Villager would actually be a pretty reasonable bonus.
It would be less wood overall though currently in most situations but it would be available earlier.

@UpmostRook9474

Refer to how AoE3 does. Regard the Wagon as a builder, so make it able to choose a place, drop a foundation and go there for building just like how villagers do, but the Wagon disappear when touches the foundation and the foundation starts to be built automatically.

It would be nice if it could work like this.
This would be generally a nice feature. Maybe one civ could make most of their buildings mobile (not Castles and Towers of course) as a UT.
Could be Mongols or a new civ.

[UpmostRook9474]

@Skadidesu

Then 5 Wood per Villager would actually be a pretty reasonable bonus.
It would be less wood overall though currently in most situations but it would be available earlier.

In early games the Dravidians are actually not bad. The first fishing ship can come earlier in water maps, the 200 wood are good enough when reaching the Feudal, and fast-firing skirmishers are really useful at the time.

Where they need buffs is actually from early Castle Age. They don’t need to have the wood earlier but need to have more later on.

[benithisrael]

@Zelley00

Huns: lose starting horse on nomad maps

LIke this change very much. Its not going to be the end of the world of Huns are not top tier on water nomad.

@Zelley00

Franks: replace civ bonus +20% cavalry hp starting feudal age with +20hp starting castle age

Not a fan. Franks are okay if anything the berry bonus is what starts their scout rush. Maybe start the 20% bonus in castle age.

@Zelley00

Koreans: replace civ bonus “ship cost -20% wood, non siege range units cost -50% wood” with “all units cost -25% wood”

Will make them OP on water with 25% discount. I don’t mind if they get a 20% discout on all units including Siege if they lose siege engineers.

@UpmostRook9474

Bulgarians

• Receive Ring Archer Armor.
• University technologies do not cost wood.

Should be balanced.

@UpmostRook9474

• Lose the gunpowder attack bonus.
• Replace the Flemish Revolution with “Culverins”: gunpowder units gain +25% attack.
• After the Imperial Age is researched, a “REVOLT!” button is available at the same place in TCs. It has a cost based on the number of villagers, enables Flemish Militia at TCs, turns all villagers into Flemish Militias like what the Revolution currently does, and additionally increases the work efficiency of TCs. This button can be disabled in the room settings.

Interesting set of changes

@UpmostRook9474

Khmer

• Lose Siege Engineers, and Elite Ballista Elephants get +1 range in exchange.
• Elephants move +10%/+20% faster in the Castle/Imperial Age instead of fixed +10%.

Khmer will still be played as a knight spam civ

@UpmostRook9474

Mongols

• The extra HP bonus for Scout Cavalry and Steppe Lancers is from the Imperial Age.

@Skadidesu

How about make the HP bonus their Castle Age UT and then make Normads a civ bonus.
This way we get rid of the most useless UT and nerf the early Castle Age power spike.

@UpmostRook9474

That is just a Hun bonus but a simply worse one since they still have to build first.
I’d like to give Nomads more special effects, like making Packed TC Wagons trainable at Castles allows they can build more TCs without villagers.

I think a unique tech is definitely the way forward to balance 30% tanky steppe lancers. Maybe houses are built 100% faster could be a civ bonus to refer their nomadic lifestlye.

@UpmostRook9474

• Receive 10 wood for every villager instead of fixed 200 wood whenever a new Age is reached.
• Lose the wood discount for siege weapons.

Lets get rid of the redundant siege wood discount bonus and any scaleable wood bonus to replace it is better.

@Skadidesu

@UpmostRook9474

If you mean receiving 10 wood at the moment a villager has been trained, no. That might be too strong, especially in the Dark Age. That would make you receive at least 150 wood before you click Feudal.

Well there are civs that just start with 200 more resources so it wouldn’t be the strongest bonus.
Maybe 5 Wood per villager would work. This would be a nice small bonus for most of the game. But it would be less then now in early Feudal.

I personally like general bonuses more then age up bonuses.

I dislike age up bonuses too and the ethipions should have been an one off. The Bengalis and Dravidians bonuses are just worse. Dravidian bonus is especially exploitable in high levels and next to useless in low levels.I’ve seen @Pulikesi25 and @SMUM15236 point this out in several posts.
I really like this suggestion of “Receive 10 wood for every villager trained”. Currently Lituanians and Persians receive 100 resouces while starting the game. Khmer save 100 wood on their mill. I am ignoring scicilians because of Donjon. So 150 rescources while clicking feudal is quite balanced. It would also make Dravidians balanced in settings like Empire wars with 6 vills and 400 wood start.
If it is a balance nightmare, it can be staggered like Hindustanis.
"Receive 5/10/15/20 wood for every vill trained in Dark/Feudal/Castle/Imp"
But I believe 10 should be okay, Dravidians will have incentive to make more TCs before opponent and a clear game strategy in castle age. Dravidian villagers are worse than generic lacking any bonus or tech tree support on upgrades such as resource gathering, building speed or survivability except fishing. So making them technically cheaper is not a bad call. The current raiding problems faced by Dravidians can be mitigated this way since its easy to replace cheap vills.
"Receive 10 wood for every villager trained". should be the bonus Dravidians should be designed around and the Siege discount shoud just be discontinued.

[KHANATTILA]

@UpmostRook9474

You mean that the infantry attack bonus should be removed from Burmese?
I’m open to it, even though I think it’s one of their few solid bonuses.

The balancing argument is that the Burmese do not have very good options for taking out enemy halberds. So I think the reasoning at the time was to give some extra attack to the Champions.

But compared to the original game launch:

• HeavyCA have an 80% accuracies and no more 50%:
• Scoprions are affected by ballistics. And they have Heavy Scoprions + Siege Engeeners.

So for now I have given that bonus to the Celts, but it is open to give it to other civilisations.

→ Give the ‘Infantry units have +1/+2/+3 attack in the Feudal/Castle/Imperial Age’ to Celts instead.
→ Add ‘Elite Battle Elephant upgrade -50% cost’ as Civilization bonuses.
→ Move ‘Relics are visible on the map from the game start’ from Team bonus to Civilization bonuses (shared exploration is active by default, EN).
→ Add ‘Knight units and elephant units have +2 attack against standard buildings’ as Team bonus.

[KHANATTILA]

@benithisrael

I dislike age up bonuses too and the ethipions should have been an one off. The Bengalis and Dravidians bonuses are just worse. Dravidian bonus is especially exploitable in high levels and next to useless in low levels.I’ve seen @Pulikesi25 and @SMUM15236 point this out in several posts.

The funny thing is that they would be even stronger in the map where they are already strongest at medium, high and top level: Migration. That is why it will never pass as an amendment.

[UpmostRook9474]

@benithisrael

Khmer will still be played as a knight spam civ

The reason is the economy in the Castle Age usually cannot afford Battle Elephants. The elephants had been cheaper by 20 food, but still only Malay may be able to go with them in the Castle Age unless they get even cheaper to a extent, such like just a bit expensive than Knights and just a bit stronger than Knights.

I think that having the elephants more useful in late games can make them more attractive to players so that people could be more willing to transit from Cavaliers to Elite Battle Elephants as if the Elephants were equivalent to Paladins, and this way should be a easier work than making elephants able to be spammed like Knights in earlier games.

@benithisrael

I dislike age up bonuses too and the Ethiopians should have been an one off.

I guess that is on purpose. The devs want the Dravidians to go aggressive and have a power spike at beginning of each Age. Receiving hundreds of wood at once can fit this purpose more than receiving a few wood regularly like when a villager is trained.

@KHANATTILA

The balancing argument is that the Burmese do not have very good options for taking out enemy halberds. So I think the reasoning at the time was to give some extra attack to the Champions.
[…]
So for now I have given that bonus to the Celts, but it is open to give it to other civilisations.

I see. But the Celts may not be the best new owner. They can already run fast, and every suggestion about them is going to make them even faster.

I feel it’s just a better version of the Goth infantry siege bonus. Both +1/+2/+3 but the current Goth one only affects on buildings. Maybe the Goths can have that bonus instead of their current one, and receive the Arson. (But the discount for infantry might need to be nerfed for this.)

Perhaps a new infantry civ in the future, or the Sicilians for encouraging to use their Militia-line (but I think that will still not enough), or Dravidians for pairing with the Barrack technology discount (if they are not going to have the Militia-line upgrades one Age earlier or have the Forging-line upgrades double the effects as I stated in the list).

[TommoChocolate]

@UpmostRook9474

Koreans

• Lose Hussars in exchange for Blast Furnace and Plate Barding Armor.

This would be a good change. Right now they pay a lot of resources to have quite poor hussars. Ideally I think light cavalry should pair well with war wagons – and they almost do, except that the Korean light cavalry line is pretty rubbish.

@UpmostRook9474

War Wagon rework.
…

• The armor class changed to cavalry + siege unit.

I support this, or something like it. I think the decision to give war wagons the cavalry archer armour class was a bad one, especially with a negative armour value. It’s led to a situation where Koreans as a whole are basically hard countered by skirmishers. Yes, technically they have a mangonel bonus, but against skirmishers their mangonels are effectively generic until shinkichon comes in, which is very late. (Also, skirmishers countering war wagons is unintuitive, unrealistic, and looks silly.)

With siege armour, war wagons would be weaker against siege weapons so countered by mangonels. To me that seems more sensible both for gameplay and realism (although I haven’t done any testing so I don’t know how hard a counter it would be).

@UpmostRook9474

• The projectiles changed from 1 bolt to 4 arrows. The main arrow has 3 attack, and the additional arrow has 2 attack, so the total is still 9.

This I’m not so bothered about. They seem to be based on (some interpretation of) mangam hwachas (rather than the rocket/arrow-firing hwachas), which had guns rather than arrows or rockets:

Multiple projectiles would probably make them better against mangonels, so if the intention is to have mangonels counter them, this might not be a good change.

@UpmostRook9474

• The range changed to 6.
• Affected by Shinkichon too.

Would they still benefit from archer upgrades? Or now they’re a siege unit, would they benefit from siege engineers instead?

@UpmostRook9474

Anyway, we should wait for the update that comes with the next DLC before making a decision.

This I agree with, but I’m hoping that they still have war wagons after the possible DLC-related rework.

@Skadidesu

It was originally planned as a generic feature but then scrapped for technical reasons.

Not sure this is the reason – unpacking TCs was actually implemented in an alpha version of AoK, with proper placement so that it lines up with the grid (unlike the implementation in DE). My guess is it just wasn’t really useful, since you trade some valuable villager training time for a slightly better TC position (probably next to wood or berries).

[Darkness01101]

Spanish:

• Make them so people want to play them. Obviously need some buffs. Never see them played in tournaments because they’re so weak, and/or have no late game.

Koreans:

• Make walls, towers, and castles(?) stronger again. And turtle ships better firepower. (Just a hunch on Koreans. I don’t play them, but I think devs have nerfed these things quite a bit over the years)

[UpmostRook9474]

@TommoChocolate

@UpmostRook9474

Koreans

• Lose Hussars in exchange for Blast Furnace and Plate Barding Armor.

This would be a good change. Right now they pay a lot of resources to have quite poor hussars. Ideally I think light cavalry should pair well with war wagons – and they almost do, except that the Korean light cavalry line is pretty rubbish.

Exactly what I think. Bloodlines-less Light Cavalry with Blast Furnace and Plate Barding Armor should be better than Bloodlines-less Hussar with no Blast Furnace and Plate Barding Armor.

You seem to be the fist one who checked my personal preference list.

@TommoChocolate

They seem to be based on (some interpretation of) mangam hwachas (rather than the rocket/arrow-firing hwachas), which had guns rather than arrows or rockets

Multiple projectiles would probably make them better against mangonels, so if the intention is to have mangonels counter them, this might not be a good change.

Good addition. If its reference was using guns, than the WW rework should change the projectile from a bolt to a larger bullet or a smaller cannonball.

I do think Mangonels should counter them. Because the fire arrows/rockets are fired in a straight line, it might be fine if the intervals between arrows are close.

@TommoChocolate

Would they still benefit from archer upgrades? Or now they’re a siege unit, would they benefit from siege engineers instead?

As I stated, WWs are no longer considered archers, so they should not benefit from the Archer Armor-line. That can a little bit weaken the fast castle push by the way as the current WWs are benefit from the free armors.

Now they are cavalry + siege, like the Ballista Elephants, so they would benefit form the Barding Armor-line. Also the Fletching-line cannot affect them, so that’s why I stated their range changed to 6. After affected by Siege engineers and Sinkichon, they should eventually have as same 8 range as the current one.

@TommoChocolate

My guess is it just wasn’t really useful, since you trade some valuable villager training time for a slightly better TC position

Exactly. That’s why I think allowing TC to be packed back into a wagon for moving is not necessary.

[Pulikesi25]

Not a very good set of changes. Except a few like Bulgarians most of them don’t make any sense. He wants to buff strong and legacy civs, nerf post 2000s civs. Wants to nerf civs which are niche for certain maps such that they’re not the best even in such maps. And once again the fake hype around cheesy phosphorus builds and a poor analysis of most of the civs. He thinks civs like Poles, Goths are very good, Japanese, Bengalis, Magyars and Gurjaras are overpowered wants to nerf them a lot, Franks, Huns, Mayans are very weak and wants to buff them, that’s just crazy. Some changes like 5 hp on Gbetos, 55 wood on Kamadaran crossbows, Elite Turtle ship buff are nearly zero impact changes, don’t think anyone would ever get elite turtle upgrade and gbeto will still be the same even with 5 less hp, 5 wood in post imp doesn’t matter much. If you want to nerf civs weak on land maps and niche for certain category where they are powerful, it has to be accompanied with appropriate buffs for commonly played settings. Sincerely hope he’s not a part of the balance discord and most of his ideas get ignored.

In my opinion, some general changes are required to fix infantry, elephants and towers usability. The balance between complete walls and hit castle age vs stay longer in feudal should shift a bit more in favor of longer feudal age. That should fix plenty of civ imbalance.

So my changes would be first making Infantry, towers, elephants viable. Monks a bit more balanced. Small changes to other meta units.
Scout line and eagle line added to a new common scout armor class. +4 min and max conversion time, +3 conversion level (13% probability instead of 38%), an additional +4 bonus vs monks on top of whatever they get today.

Militia line: +1 bonus damage vs economic units, +1 extra bonus damage vs buildings, +2/3/4/5/7 (from militia to champion) vs walls and gates armor class, +2 vs stone defense armor class. Takes -1 damage from units with scout armor class. -20% food cost on all of their upgrades and -5 seconds on the upgrade times.

Towers: +1/+2/+3 bonus damage vs economic units. +2 stone defense armor (reduces damage dealt by villagers by 2 and increase the damage done to villagers by 2). Can be upgraded from the building itself. Get 0 bonus damage against building armor class and walls & gates armor class, you’ll see below why.

Palisade walls: -3, -2, -1 walls and gates armor in dark, feudal and castle ages (extra damage taken from towers, militia line)

Houses: -2, -1 building class armor in dark and feudal ages.

Monks: Per interval conversion probability lowered to 30% (from 38%). Restores the probability of conversion under 6 seconds, 7 seconds and 8 seconds closer to pre-Devotion times. New tech introduced which is available to all civs that lets monks convert elephant units. Costs 150 food 50 gold takes 30 seconds.

Battle Elephants: +4, (+8 for elite) elephant class armor. All except Malay elephants will need an extra hit from halberdiers to be killed. Elite upgrade cost lowered to 900 food 600 gold.

Heated shot: Towers do +125% damage to ships, +50% to mounted units. (+3 vs castle age mounted units, +4 after arrowslits vs Paladin, +5 vs light cav, Monaspa, Leitis)

Cavalry archers: Increase training time by 2 seconds.

Skirmishers: increase training time by 2 seconds.

Chemistry: Gives +2 attack for gunpowder units (base attack of handcanoneers and bombard canons reduced by 2, gunpowder unique units reduced by 1)

Civ specific changes:

1. Armenians get bombard canons.

2. Aztecs carry capacity +3 in feudal, +4 in castle. Monk hp bonus +3 per castle age tech, +5 per imp tech

3. Britons bonus changed to foot archers +1 range and produced 10% faster starting from castle age. Yeomen gives +2 range to longbowmen but cost lowered significantly.

4. Bengalis - Civ gets thumb ring, Civ bonus changed to elephant units resist conversion. Paiks changed to Melee cavalry units take 20% less damage and deal 20% more damage. (Ranged rathas and elephant archers won’t benefit)

5. Berbers - Genitours +3 (+5 for elite) bonus vs CA armor class. Dealing same or lesser bonus damage than skirms is one of the reasons why they’re so bad.

6. Bohemians - Remove blacksmith discount and free stone mining upgrades.

7. Bulgarians - Get -100w blacksmith discount, and stone mining upgrades for free.

8. Burmese - Infantry and towers get extra attack per age starting feudal

9. Celts - Infantry 10% faster dark 15% feudal 20% castle age onwards. Woad raider base speed dropped to 1.15. Tower rof becomes a default civ bonus - 15% faster rof in feudal, 30% castle age onwards

10. Chinese - Lose heavy camel upgrade or plate barding armor. (They get a tower UT. That should work well with incoming buffs to towers)

11. Dravidians - Barrack techs cost -50% → All tower and infantry technologies cost -50% (Updated heated shot will do extra damage vs cavalry and be a partial solution to Dravidian cavalry skirm problem). Urumi swordsmen cost reduced to 45 food 15 gold, speed increased to 1.1 and for elites 1.15

12. Ethiopians - Shotel warrior gold cost reduced to 25 gold. Royal heirs +100 food but makes Camels and shotels take -4 damage from cavalry

13. Franks - Cavalry hp bonus starts from castle age. Axemen cost -10 food, have +1 range by default. Bearded axe effect changed to +5 attack vs spear line and camels.

14. Gurjaras - If you nerf Shrivamsha speed to 1.55, reduce their cost down to 65 food 25 gold by default and give them +4 cavalry class armor. And it should never be the same as light cav or lower. Otherwise it won’t make any sense to ever produce this unit. Or Increase the food gathering from herdables to a rate of 15 log(1 + x/150) instead of 15 log(1 + x/200). (8 sheep food rate increases from 24.1 to 27.7, og was 28 but still logarithmic to prevent abuse in tg like early days). Weak economy strong military or strong economy weak military.

15. Goths: Remove +5 attack vs boar. 20% longer lasting hunt changed to 20% more drop-off. Should be sufficient with rest of the tower changes.

16. Georgians - First church alone gives +10% work rate boost (if destroyed the next built church becomes the first). Regeneration rate reduced to 2 hp/min flat + 2 hp/min per stable technology (can reach a max of 4 hp/min in feudal, 8 hp/min in castle and 12 hp/min in imp)

17. Incas - Change the food discount to be applicable only to infantry but increase it by 5% per age. (Skirms and slingers more expensive, rest a bit cheaper)

18. Italians - Dock, archer line upgrades and university techs 33% cheaper

19. Japanese - General infantry and tower changes should be sufficient.

20. Khmer - General changes to elephants should be sufficient.

21. Koreans - General changes to towers should be more than sufficient.

22. Lithuanians - Spears and skirms also get +1 armor for their respective armor classes (or in other words -1 bonus damage)

23. Malay - Age up bonus reduced across ages. -40% feudal (+14 seconds compared to now) -50% castle (+10 seconds) -60% imp(+4 seconds).

24. Magyars - Scout discount -15% feudal, -20% castle and -25% imp. Recurve bow cost increased by 50w, 100g and upgrade time by 20 seconds.

25. Mayans - Archer discount starts from castle age -15% castle age, -20% imperial age. Plumed archer base cost decreased to 55w, 55g to adjust for it.

26. Mongols - Hunt bonus decays with amount of food collected from hunt. 40% at the start, 30% by the time 1 boar is finished, a bit more than 20% when 2 boars are finished, approx 15% after 2 boars and 2 deer. <10% in hunt heavy maps. CA fire rate becomes civ’s castle age UT. Useless nomad becomes a civ bonus.

27. Poles - Tower upgrades available one age earlier.

28. Portugese - Monks and siege (implying organ guns as well) excluded from gold discount, 1st feitoria generates more resources, but resource generation rates scale logarithmically (1.7x for 2 feitorias, 2.3x for 3, 2.8x for 4 and so on)

29. Saracens - Team bonus replaced to transport ship hp. Blacksmith attack upgrades give archer line +1 extra attack vs buildings, the free extra attack bonus removed.

30. Sicilians - Donjon cost 50 wood, 150 stone. Donjon get +2 building class armor and +2 stone defense armor (implying 8 instead of 12 damage from vills). Serjeants trained 25% slower from Donjons in feudal and castle ages. Farms provide +50% food dark, +60% feudal, +70% castle age onwards. (Mill upgrades will still be beneficial but not mandatory)

31. Slavs - Towers and military buildings support +5 population

32. Spanish - Tower changes should be enough buff. To compensate conqs training time increased by 4 seconds.

33. Tatars - Silk armor won’t impact light cav line anymore.

34. Turks - Gold miners work 20% faster feudal, 25% faster castle age onwards. (castle age Janissaries nerfed as a part of general balance changes)

35. Teutons - Tower changes should be more than enough.

36. Vietnamese - hp bonus not applicable on skirms by default. Imperial skirms have 40 hp.

Civs that I haven’t included don’t need changes imo.

[KHANATTILA]

@UpmostRook9474

I see. But the Celts may not be the best new owner. They can already run fast, and every suggestion about them is going to make them even faster.

I feel it’s just a better version of the Goth infantry siege bonus. Both +1/+2/+3 but the current Goth one only affects on buildings. Maybe the Goths can have that bonus instead of their current one, and receive the Arson. (But the discount for infantry might need to be nerfed for this.)

I honestly don’t like the idea of making a unit much faster than its generic counterpart. Even the Cumans were once faster and have been nerfed.

The problem with giving the attack to the Goths is the spam of halberds in the late game.

[UpmostRook9474]

@KHANATTILA

I honestly don’t like the idea of making a unit much faster than its generic counterpart. Even the Cumans were once faster and have been nerfed.

The current Celts only have only 5% faster infantry than the generic infantry having Squires.
The old Cumans had 10% faster cavalry than the generic cavalry having Husbandry, and now they are 5% faster only.
5% of speed means different for infantry and cavalry. It’s not surprising that the old Cumans had nerfed and people want even faster infantry for the Celts.

But I agree that if the Celts replace the additional speed with the additional attack, the Woad Raider could have a better identity as a fast foot raider.

[UpmostRook9474]

@Pulikesi25

Militia line: +1 bonus damage vs economic units, +1 extra bonus damage vs buildings, +2/3/4/5/7 (from militia to champion) vs walls and gates armor class, +2 vs stone defense armor class. Takes -1 damage from units with scout armor class. -20% food cost on all of their upgrades and -5 seconds on the upgrade times.

I honestly think they’re just missing that last step to be a practical unit. For the civs that already have bonuses for them, they can even be really useful in some situations. Maybe they could have 1 more attack against standard buildings, but for more buffs I would tend to give by introducing new techs in the standard tech tree in order to be better for balancing work. For example, let +10% infantry speed is available in the Feudal Age, while another +10% exclusive to the Militia line is available in the Castle Age.

@Pulikesi25

Towers: +1/+2/+3 bonus damage vs economic units. +2 stone defense armor (reduces damage dealt by villagers by 2 and increase the damage done to villagers by 2). Can be upgraded from the building itself. Get 0 bonus damage against building armor class and walls & gates armor class, you’ll see below why.

Although I think it makes sense that tower upgrades can be researched in the tower itself without the need for a university, I don’t like encouraging to go early game tower rushes on a general level. The bonus damage on economic units is the worst change.

@Pulikesi25

New tech introduced which is available to all civs that lets monks convert elephant units.

I really don’t like this. Elephants are essentially cavalry like knights and camels, so it feels strange that they can’t be converted by default. If anything I would rather give the elephants a technology to resist conversion instead.

Monks are effective against elephants not because they can convert elephants particularly quickly, but because each conversion is more cost-effective, making them a particularly effective counter to elephants in the Castle Age, as the economic loss of each conversion is more unbearable than in late games. The argument of economic loss can also holds true for being countered by spearmen (although relatively minor). The fundamental way to encourage the use of elephants particularly in the Castle Age is to reduce the cost of elephants to reduce the loss of each elephant. But this also requires weakening their quality.

I’d rather have Elephants as a good late game move like Paladins properly than always hoping they can completely replace the role of Knights in the Castle Age.

@Pulikesi25

Heated shot: Towers do +125% damage to ships, +50% to mounted units.

This doesn’t make sense. If you want towers to be more effective against cavalry, you can buff the bonus attack of towers directly.

@Pulikesi25

Chemistry: Gives +2 attack for gunpowder units (base attack of handcanoneers and bombard canons reduced by 2, gunpowder unique units reduced by 1)

Why not just simple let the elite upgrades of the gunpowder UUs give +1 attack?
Maybe it aims to encourage those civs to research Chemistry, but it nerf the UUs in the Castle Age.
And, is it really a need?

@Pulikesi25

Dravidians - Barrack techs cost -50% → All tower and infantry technologies cost -50%

I don’t think they should be a tower civ.

@Pulikesi25

Franks - Cavalry hp bonus starts from castle age.

Nerf too much. I have been against this idea before. If the enemy research the Bloodlines, the Franks would become the disadvantageous side since they cannot do anything for the gap of 20 HP.
I’d rather split the Bloodines to 2 techs, so allow enemy to have access to 10 HP in the Feudal Age then have access to another 10 HP in the Castle Age.

@Pulikesi25

Georgians - First church alone gives +10% work rate boost (if destroyed the next built church becomes the first).

I don’t want to remember the order in which the churches were built…
If this bonus is going to change I’d like it to be replaced directly with a new one. Having a building with two ranges looks ugly anyway.

@Pulikesi25

Italians - Dock, archer line upgrades and university techs 33% cheaper

Fast imp arbalesters can be expected. I’m not sure if this is a good thing.
I would probably prefer to have swap the university techs discounts for free archer armors with the Koreans.
The archer armor bonus and Pavise will form a distinct theme for the Italians, and cheap university techs will be more helpful for all the things that the Koreans are good at, just like they will be happy to get cheaper Ballistics, Arrowslits, and Siege Engineers.

@Pulikesi25

Saracens - Team bonus replaced to transport ship hp. Blacksmith attack upgrades give +1 extra attack vs buildings, the free extra attack bonus removed.

Don’t you realize that you are giving their Barrack, Archery Range and Stable units (except Hand Cannons) all +3 vs buildings? Don’t you think that’s too much?

[AbuzzJam4677680]

@Pulikesi25

Heated shot: Towers do +125% damage to ships, +50% to mounted units. (+3 vs castle age mounted units, +4 after arrowslits vs Paladin, +5 vs light cav, Monaspa, Leitis)

I don’t think that towers should excel vs cavalry. I agree that towers should deal more damage against cavalry archers.

[SMUM15236]

As always, I agree with some and disagree with the rest.

Armenians = Agree.
Aztecs = Buff Jaguar instead. Speed 1.00 → 1.10 and MA 1 → 3.
Bengalis = Melee Cavalry +2 attack bonus vs skirmisher → Villagers and Monks take 10% less pop space.
Berbers = Agree. Change Kasbah effect to destroyed castle return 50% cost.

@benithisrael

Bohemians - Remove Siege Engineers from tech tree to balance Houfnice. Its speedy and has range.
Mytake - FC → hussite wagon is more porblematic. Nerf speed of Hussite wagon to 0.6 tps. Increase cost of wagenburg tactics to 400 food and 400 gold.

In that case why not take away free stone mining bonus? It will nerf FC → Hussite Wagon.

Britons = Major rework is needed. I will start with making Yeoman effect of Tower +2 attack as free civ bonus Tower +1/+2 attack in Castle/Imperial Age.
Burmese = Hawdah effect change to Elephant Archer +50 HP. This also means they will get EA replacing CA.
Bulgarians = Already agreed at Bohemians.
Burgundians = Agree.
Byzantines = Logistica trample damage also apply to Paladin but cost reverted to old one.

[Zelley00]

@Tyranno13

As in, Tatars are not even that good a civ, why nerf them?

It is my change, and I dont think it will affect them much.

@Tyranno13

Then why give any civ any bonus? Just randomly distribute them! Give Celts an Elephant bonus! Romans a gunpowder one!

Not saying I am specifically trying to be ahistorical, just that I do not care about perfect historical accuracy for every bonus.
And we obviously give bonuses to the civs to make them different, otherwise we only need one civ.
And I actually wouldnt mind giving elephants to Celts if it magically made the civ perfecly balanced. But throwing it like you propose for the sake of boredom is dumb.

@Tyranno13

Then if they are average, leave them alone and concentrate on ones who are not.

No, one change per civ. No more, no less.

And if the civ is average, just give or take something with little effect.

@Tyranno13

Actually I commented on these because they are some of the civs I play most, and they jumped out at me.

11

Don’t take it so hard. I am not on a vandetta against your favorite civs or against the real life citizen behind these civs. Everyone can have their own opinions and ideas about civ balance.

@Darkillermon

You dont need to build more than one house with slavs before 6 barracks/srtables and can pop out military units to rush or defend, does it sounds good?

I dont know, I am not into DM. It sounds fine, I guess.

@benithisrael

Not a fan. Franks are okay if anything the berry bonus is what starts their scout rush. Maybe start the 20% bonus in castle age.

I wanted to take the opportunity of one change per civ to normalize the strength of most paladin civs. Hence the Lituanians, Burgundians and Persians changes.

Which makes me think I forgot about Teutons. So I replace the farm nerf by:

• Teutons: replace stables/barracks units get +0/+0/+1/+2 melee armor" with “barrack units get +0/+1/+2/+3” melee armor.

@benithisrael

Will make them OP on water with 25% discount. I don’t mind if they get a 20% discout on all units including Siege if they lose siege engineers.

I am not expecting the 5% wood ship discount to have such a big impact, but it is fair to set the global military units wood discount to 20% everywhere. So compared to now they gain siege discount at the price of range/barracks 20% discount (ships unchanged).

@Darkness01101

Spanish:

• Make them so people want to play them. Obviously need some buffs. Never see them played in tournaments because they’re so weak, and/or have no late game.

stats.io says they are at 3.21% play rate on the 1v1 ladder, and 4.27% on the TG ladder. At 45 civs tje average play rate is at 2.222%. And they are even more popular in lobbies due to language, team bonus, and aversion to open maps. People play them.

In tournaments, they are popular in nomad-like maps, closed maps, especially in TG. They are regulary played in TTL in some hybrid maps. Their late game is great. They lack pn open maps due to lack of eco bonus primarily, and lack of xbows secondarily.

[KHANATTILA]

@Darkness01101

Spanish:

• Make them so people want to play them. Obviously need some buffs. Never see them played in tournaments because they’re so weak, and/or have no late game.

All it takes is one thing, just one thing: Crossbowmen. And everyone knows it. You can also remove thumbring.