I wouldnt mind stirrups affefting cav archers, even if it overlaps with mongols civ bonus. The game is full of overlaps anyways.
2 Likes
Yeah. Same. I even voted for sorpion.
Right. Currently Bulgarians is called Slavs without eco and with CA bonus they will probably be called Magyars with stone defense. Having gunpowder or at least HC will make them unique compared to both in terms of army composition.
That is a buff that wonât help in the early to midgame where they are struggling, but just buff them in late game where they are stronger, furthermore that also will lead Bulgarains to be played just as another CA + Hussar (as a side note that Stirrups would make them even with better ROF than Mongols) and thatâs bad design.
3 Likes
I just question whether they have the need to have CAs that are better than average.
1 Like
I personally do not think any civ needs a main source of pierce damage, or a perfectly viable one at pro level. Otherwise we may have to talk about Burmese and Goths main source pierce damage as well. And talknabout all these sources that every civ need a main source of. Especially about the raiding unit for civs like Dravidians, Koreans, Malays, or the source of anti onager for civs like Chinese and Mayans, etc.
Do you mean better than Fully Upgraded ? Because their late game HCA are already getter than average: only worse than Mongols, Huns, Tatars, Magyars, Turcs, Japanese, Saracens, Vietnamese, which are 8 civs. You could add Dravidians, Bengalis, Gurjaras, Berbers, Cumans, Spanish if you want to add Unique units and elephant archers (and think these are better than Bulgarians HCA). But that still makes 16 civs out of 45.
I wouldnt see a problem with Bulgarians having better than FU HCA, nor would I see a problem with them keeping the same one as now.
I remember before the farm buff, Slavs were called worse Bulgarians.
I think it is great that Bulgarians are called Slavs with worse eco and viable CA. With so many civs, many civs should look very similar with 1 or 2 compromises to take.
Just like for me Tatars are Chinese with a worse eco and no arbalesters but better cavalry options, or Magyars are Huns with better late game ranged units but worse mid game eco. And Slavs are like Teutons with Light cav & Hussars instead of gunpowder units.
I agree. It is not more of an overlap than Burmese&Aztecs infantry bonus.
But I dont like the idea because it is a dishonnest buff. Because the premise is that the civ isnt used in 1v1 tournaments, but has an averag pick rate and high win rate at low and mid elos. Giving a buff that would help low and mid elos but not pros is dishonnest.
To be picked more without remaking the civ, it doesnt need the pros to be told what is the main source of pierce damage for the civ, but rather something coming into play before late castle age:
- better early to mid game bonus, either as eco bonus or military discount.
- making the spam of its UU viable (like for Spanish).
- making LS more viable
- more maps favoring kreposts and maa (socotra, atacama)
- crossbows (i dont like the idea)
I think it may be very hard to force scorpions or CA viability of Bulgarians in castle age, seeing how often the castle age scorpions civs (Romans, Khmer, Celts) and castle age CA civs (Mongols, Huns, Tatars) are picked for their scorpions/CA use in recent tournaments. I guess CA would work if Bulgarians got free balistics or some free archers attack upgrades (in exchange for losing some techs or nerfing some bonus)
1 Like
exactly; it does not even need to be an instant upgrade, if it turns out to be too op, devs can still make it take time to research at still no cost, but ballistics would even make archer plays viable, right now nobody makes archers in feudal as Bulgarians because whats the point, but if those archers get free ballistics in Castle age, that would still make them adequate during early Castle Age, still not better than xbows but definitely something to consider as a viable option before going CA
please no. Thatâs a Bonus that should be kept for possible future Archer Civ that has compensatory downsides
Woud be totally wasted on a mostly melee focussed civ.
3 Likes
Thatâs a very unspecific reason not to give it to an already existing civilisation who struggles with midgame.
The reasoning that the Bulgarians are not an archer civ does not hold ground either, by that logic letâs remove all bonuses from the other civs which are not specific to their focus? For example, Lithuanians have faster skirms and spear-line, but are cavalry and monk oriented.
Malay have cheaper battle elephants despite that they are an infantry and naval civ.
As you can imagine, Aoe2 is a game where different mechanics act like communicating vessels. I say that free ballistics indirectly buff their infantry too because it will make it easier to counter enemy archer-line (used to counter infantry) with skirmishers in castle age.
1 Like
As soon as I saw the title I knew which civ will be on the bottom.
He is definitely not the only pro with this opinion. other pros could draft them in either NAC5 or HC5.
How about further buff all of the already existing bonuses that can be used in the early game? And since Bulgarians are considered bottom tier, make it all round:
Blacksmith technologies cost -100% food (instead of -50%) and Blacksmiths work 100% faster (instead of 80%).
Will this solve the problem of low pick rate in pro scene? I find it super beneficial regarding the efficiency of, and faithful to, the identity of the civ that pushes towards the simultaneous use of infantry and cavalry, as well as the use of Kreposts (their arrow power). The latter looks juicy as team bonus too, boosting the civâs impact in TGs.
1 Like
Cav Archers require a universal buff so theyâre more useful for Civs that arenât aggressively specialized into them.
3 Likes
Too much, particularly since most Feudal blacksmith technologies only cost food. This means that all feudal blacksmith upgrades (except Fletching) would be completely free, and fletching would only cost 50 gold.
Some potential buffs:
- Give them hoardings (which does affect Krepost, even if it is normally impossible to have both)
- Slightly improve longswords (would affect a number of other civs as well)
- Early access to siege engineering (possibly with a cost discount)
- Early access to some siege workshop techs (combos with the current cost discount)
- Bagains buff (either reduced cost or a second effect to a different unit or increase PA as well, possibly by a smaller amount)
- Increase stone discount on TCs
- Reduce stone cost of Kreposts
- Stirrups affects CA
So what. Currently all blacksmith upgrades (except fletching) are half price in feudal age, and no Bulgarians player cares about exploiting this, since usually nobody researches any upgrade (besides fletching) in that age. As for fletching itself, Bulgarians donât even have crossbowmen to capitalize on it more than 10 minutes.
Man-at-arms constant production play will still be considered expensive and slow, even with free blacksmith upgrades in that age. Scouts play will be good. Archers play will be decent. Skirms+spears play will be good in defense, just decent in offense. Maa into archers good. Maa into scouts unique opportunity (as infantry & cavalry civ). Archers into cavalry archers, which is rare because of the amount of upgrades it requires, might open as a decent play.
The bottom tier civ has road to cover, to reach high tiers imo (the tech tree is like a swiss 
without any economy bonus in return), and its blacksmith bonuses are these that define and support the identity of the civ mostly (because they push you to fully upgrade both infantry and cavalry). This is also easy to implement, and easy to adjust later if needed.
Cavalry archers.
Personally, Iâd like it if it was scorpions because it would synergize nicely with their workshop bonus and infantry, but thatâd make them too much of a slav version 2.0. More than they already are.
Therefore, I think cavalry archers would be better. Besides, theyâd work well with the blacksmith bonus and stirrups knights.
On the other hand, I wish krepost could research the elite upgrade for konniks.
1 Like
Just an idea. I dont mind leaving it to anyone.
But given how strong of a powerspike it is (as it is 500w175g often rushed befire adding TCs), it feels fitting to a civ lacking xbows, so going for an easier cav archer transition (after scout rushing) which number have to be trained from 0, or to empower skirms who got limited offenssive potential.
I fee like giving it to a civ with arbalesters+bracer civ, it will be very hard to balance due to the thin line between not getting crushed in Feudal and snowballing every xbow fight.
I like the work rate buff.
The blacksmith buff is definitely toi strong if not nerfed in later stages of the game. I really like the idea of buffing early techs. So I like more either replacing the current discount by a flat 100f to 150f, or adding to it a refund of 50f per blacksmith tech.
Improving LS is a good idea, as Bulgarian get it for free. The more viable LS are, the better it is for Bulgarians/Slavs/Dravidians, who save a lot of resources for the transition.
Reducing the cost of kreposts is good, as long as it does not power creep ######## too much.
Siege engineers with a big discount would be hilarious in the matchup against Britons xbows and against any players trying a fast imperial into arbalesters. Early onagers is great as well, but in both casescit depends on whether the Bulgarian player has time to invest into the mangonels + upgrades.
I dont feel that the other options would have a real impact at pro level.
The more the gameplan is centered around researching multiple blacksmith techs, the more I feel the civ is used as intended.
2 Likes
I agree that the blacksmith bonus could be buffed but not like that
Imo the ideal is âBlacksmith techs cost -60/80/100% in feudal/castle/imperial ageâ
1 Like
Bulgarians also have the free militia-line upgrades. Combine that with 100% food discount on blacksmith techs, and Bulgarians would have the option of building a few MAAs, quickly building a blacksmith, queuing up all the infantry techs (which would come through quickly because team bonus) and then tech switching for cheap. They could switch to scouts without spending anything on cav armor or forging (only tech to pay for is bloodlines, which they donât need to get immediately). They could switch to archers or skirms rather easily as well (50 gold isnât very expensive, and can be paid for through their starting gold). Sure, archers might not scale well, but theyâd be easily paired with a few fully upgraded Feudal infantry units (which would make them much harder to deal with).
Another way of putting it: The Bulgarians would save 100 food and 40 gold from MAA upgrade. Theyâd save 250 food from infantry armor and forging. An additional 200 food from the ranged upgrades. And another 100 food for cavalry armor. Thatâs a total of 650 food saved in the Feudal age (of which 550 is relevant to typical MAA openings - as per a recent video from Daut, the best follow-up is an archery range for either skirms or archers). Thatâs a lot of investment for an opponent to match.
What would the counterplay be to Bulgarian MAA rush with a 100% blacksmith food discount? Archers are a normal option, but Bulgarians would have no problem switching into skirms (which would barely be tickled by the archers because they have the armor upgrade for free, and fletching can be paid for with starting gold) and the MAAs would have their own armor upgrade as well (because free). Skirms would do little more than tickle Bulgarian MAAs and could easily be dealt with by Bulgarian skirms (who are again, fully upgraded) or by scouts (who would have cavalry armor, making for a really easy cleanup). Infantry responses are going to be limited to other infantry civs (otherwise, youâre investing more into your own infantry than the Bulgarians player is, and likely will be even if you are an infantry civ). And scouts arenât really a counter to MAA, especially if a few spears (with infantry armor, because free) get mixed in, but they would have an option of picking their fights (and harassing reinforcements). And fast castle strats would easily be punished by a Feudal all-in.
Also, Bulgarians might be bottom-tier at a high level (which is still >40% win rate at 1900+), but perform better at lower ELOs (probably carried by Konniks, who are quite a strong unit and more spammable than most UUs due to Kreposts). Increasing the food discount to 100% would easily push them to OP levels at lower ELOs.
Blacksmith and Siege Workshop techs cost 50% less food â Blacksmith techs cost 50% less food.
New Civ Bonus
Scorpion moves 25% faster and deal +25% more damage.
(Heavy) Scorpion -
Speed will be increased 0.65 â 0.81
Attack will be increased 12 (16) â 15 (20)
Attack bonus vs Elephant will be increased 6 (8) â 7.50 (10)
Attack bonus vs Building will be increased 2 (4) â 2.50 (5)
Attack bonus vs Ram will be increased 1 (2) â 1.25 (2.50)
That is a big discount indeed. But in practice your opponent could hopefully counter the MAA into skirms with a skirm+archers composition. Because MAA is currently countered by archers after the early damage control, then your opponent saves its archers and produce skirms for a skirms battle, and bring back the archers only to counter the MAA or scouts.
So even though it would be a big discount in theory, it would be less big of a discount in practice due to how far away from the meta the milicia line is in late feudal to imperial age. Currently, the savings of going MAA into upgraded skirms is 200f+40g + up to 125f if you research infantry upgrades. But we do not research infantry upgrades because in the context of a feudal fight, we feel that these 2 upgrades are worth less than 125f. Other civs can do MAA into skirms while skiping the upgrades and would not feel that bad compared to a Bulgarian player. Decent early game civ like Burmese, Franks (not opening scouts), Japanese, Dravidians, save something between 100f100g and 250w in early feudal age, which is less than the current savings from a Bulgarian player. This shows that all of these Bulgarians savings feels like they actually are.
I agree with you that once in castle age, having blacksmith upgrades free of food would be OP, due to the power of the knights+skirms combo (or even knights alone) in the current meta, and the importance of their blacksmith upgrades.
That is why I am against buffing the discount from 50% to 100%, and would rather see the discount becoming a flat value, so that Bulgarians become more of a feudal age powerhouse that must deal with the lack of xbow and the lack of raw eco bonus in castle age. In other word: I wouldnt buff the feudal age discount without nerfing the discount in later stage of the game.
I think that Bulgarians would be picked a lot in tournaments if they had xbows, because xbow is a strong offensive unit that scale well, better than scouts (which are replaced with knights). Lacking xbows is a reason why these blacksmith savings are worth less than the actually saved value.
But if MAA/LS or if konink get a buff and become âvery metaâ in the sence that they are as good as their counterpart (MAAâarchers/scouts, LSâxbows/knights, koniksxâknights) in the mid game, then all I just said does not apply anymore and Bulgarians would not need a buff of the blacksmith savings, and might potentially need a nerf depending on how meta the uni are.
For MAA, it is not about the opening being meta as much as how much the saving brings to the opening. And due to MAA not being meta in mid to late Feudal age (and LS not being meta in castle age), the blacksmith upgrade can be skipped without hurting
I would be fine with this direction, even though I would a little sad that using scorpions (+unupgraded pikes) more probably means not needing much of the blacksmith discount.
Not sure about the number though. I didnt do the math to quantify the impacts, but it feels too weak of a scorpion buff to make it meta (compared to Romans/Khmer/Celt bonus). I might be wrong though.
.
2 Likes
It will be more useful that scorpion deal +25% pass-thru dmg.