spahi e o melhor cavaleiro do jogo
Iâm going to make an unpopular comment, but itâs reality, Iâm not saying it, the top players say it and various data support it.
Ottomans and Spain are TOP CIVS atm, for something in each patch they nerf them.
I donât want to say it, I really donât want to offend you guys, but if you guys canât see it and you canât get the most out of these 2 civs, itâs not the fault of the civ design, itâs that you guys lack a lot of level as a player.
3 Likes
Lol, i mean they can nerf some units and economic things to allow diversity, because nobody use the heavy cavalry from Ottoman, itâs very rare, i never see someone use those units. Like the spanish they just need to add more units, thatâs all.
1 Like
Spain and Ottoman on a map without tp no one would want to playïŒThey need to strengthen the map adaptability, not be very strong in one or two maps, and are weak in maps without tpă
4 Likes
To be fair, there is so much we arenât aware of (as the player base in general) because we donât have direct access to civ stats (pick rate, win rates).
And it might also help to get explicit civ design overviews, telling which civs are supposed to have high ceiling or are beginner-friendly, and what are their strengths, weaknesses and available strategies.
I mean, pro have kind of figured it out already, but it would be easier for everyone to propose balance suggestions if it were clearer why some changes are made in patches and why some others arent (even though we can see in patch notes that devs are making efforts on this topic).
At no time have we said if civilizations are good or not, lol
1 Like
With the Ottomans you are right, there is a lack of variety, they almost always go Cavalry archer + abus gun or janissary + abus gun, then they add spahis or mamluks, it could be something more diversified. In Spain I totally disagree, it is always a mystery what composition Spain will use, I have seen several Spanish wearing rodeleras, skirmishers, musketeers, lancers, hussars and falconets in the same army, if that is not diversity then I do not know what is.
You are right, Spain and Ottomans have a lower performance in maps without TP, but it is compensated with the church and the mosque.
Also, I donât know the exact number, but there are approximately 40 competitive maps, and only 5 maps without TP (Gran Chaco, Pampas, Lake Victoria, Dunas and Siwa Oasis), there are others but I think they are not in standard maps. To what Iâm going, you have 40 maps and a chance that only 5 will be without TP. Itâs a very low chance, most of the time youâre going to have a TP available, itâs as if I argued that the Haudenosaunee is a weak civilization every time they get a map without bodies of water and demand that they buff their economy, itâs a weak argument and without sense imo.
Youâre also right, good man, we donât have population data, thatâs why as a UEC organizer I took the liberty of using the data from the tournaments as sample samples and doing statistics. Obviously we can say that it is far from reality, that it has bias and error, but it is what it is, this is the last table we made a few months ago.
With these data we can argue that the Ottomans is the most powerful civilization in the game. But it is only limited data, hopefully one day we will know the global data.
I believe that a TOP civilization does not need a rework, since it was clear that it was a mistake with the Incas and China.
1 Like
Top civilization with ff of halberdiers. Itâs boring. I prefer it to be a normal civ updated with various strategies, as they are doing with all the European ones.
Besides all the civs have improvements for their rank units except Spain.
I think that unction is conditioning that a lot.
1 Like
Your range of action then should be to eliminate those strategies as viable, and implement several new strategies. Because the reality is that if you implement new strategies that are not as efficient as the old ones, it is the same as nothing.
An example is Greenwich for the British, it was expected that the meta would change, but almost nobody likes it and they prefer to continue doing the usual strategies.
A good example is Azteca, nobody Rushes anymore, because now FF or semi FF or even FI strategies are much more viable.
Another alternative is to create better strategies than the Spanish or Ottoman FF, but that would be broken, such as the Spanish Logista, a broken strategy that was even better than the Spanish naked FF and ended up nerfed.
When a civilization breaks if you buff it or becomes unusable if you nerf it, it needs a rework.
This doesnât just happen here, it happens in every game.
If for example they put improvements to the Spanish skirms or replaced them with arquebusiers, it would be a good strategy with Spanish gold and it would not be broken because it is not as fast as the all-in of ff halberdiers
I find it quite ridiculous that you show Kaiserklein stat in the previous tournament as an Ottoman benchmark. It is a fact that Ottomans are very bad at late game and your statements are not valid to change the majority of playerâs mind.
5 Likes
They dont have to be strong all game. Civs peak at different points, both in game and historical. I always saw them as a civ that peaks age 3. Limited but powerful units that close out games early.
That said there FI anit bad either
Like I said in a similar thread previously. Ottomans set the pace of any game. You have to play to counter what direction they are going or you will lose quickly. No other civ is so unforgiving to play against.
Their rush is very strong.
The ff is very strong.
They have numerous composite strats like nizam or the 4 tc boom
Ottâs are fine.
3 Likes
Well bro, refute my argument that the Ottomans are NOT weak and do NOT need to be reworked with proof. Send me recs, stats or something that shows me that the ottomans are bad and need the rework. I am giving you statistics, unfortunately the recs are no longer useful, I donât know how to explain it without you rejecting everything I say.
If Ottomans get any proposed buffs in this thread, theyâre just going to break, and as a player and a huge fan of the game, Iâd do my bit to add to the discussion. If you do not want to take into account what I say and turn a blind eye, do what you want, that will not change the reality that Ottomans is a TOP CIV and does not need changes.
And finally, it seems ridiculous to me that you argue that Ottomans is bad in late game without any kind of data to support it.
5 Likes
The Ottomans arenât weak, I would say they arenât as flexible as some other civs but they are not bad.
3 Likes
Ottomans are great but they are weaker in late game because of the heavy infantry janissary, but they become more weaker in the end game, they need to make change like they did with the spanish, and make unused units train. If they are too strong just nerf those units.
Not now! The unction problem is resolved. A good change yeah
1 Like
ottomans could have some access to desert warriors, archers and raiders from shipments, they even get the same language, seems more fitting. Also some berber natives, since otto donât get native shipments as their other europeans counterparts.
5 Likes
Abus and Grenadier should be able to upgrade together with discounted price.
age3: 400w 400g Upgrade Grenadiers and abus gun to Veteran, research Incendiary Grenades
age4: 1200w 1200g Upgrade Grenadiers to Humbaracis, abus gun to guard, research Grenade Launchers
age5: 2000w 2000g Upgrade Humbaracis and abus gun to Imperial, Humbaracis affected by the âEngineering Schoolâ, abus gun have a rate of fire of 3.0