Bulgarians are useless on Islands, while Portuguese aren’t on Arabia.
But it is. This game already has 37 civs, it is natural that some become ultra-specialized in one type of map or another.
It is how evolution works, in all honesty.
I want more civs, and I have accepted that means more map-specific, ultra-specialized civs.
Look at what they did to Italians, now they suck on Land AND on Water.
The more map specific spezilized civs we get, the more the game ruins picking random civ. As we introduce more frustrating unfair and infun to play matchups to the players.
Well I don’t really mind, you can prppably guess I only play one civ anyway… M
But I imagine for others this would matter.
Sidennote: I don’t think Italians are ruined. the changes were exactly what I wish for Portuguese to happen after all. Please let’s don’t turn this into another Italian thread.
1 Like
Italians don’t suck on Water. They are just not OP anymore. That’s it. Vikings/Portuguese/Italians got closer with the balance changes. I’d love to see Koreans buffed by giving them Demolation Ships.
Italians aren’t that bad anymore on land. GC and Condos are finally good, their tech tree is very strong. I’d pick them over Burmese, Sicilians, Burgundians, Turks, Indians and probably Koreans. I’d buff their University discount to 50%.
2 Likes
It is exactly what I DO NOT wish to happen to Ports.
Neither from a gameplay or historical perspectives, does it make sense that Ports become a good Land civ, specially at the expense of Water.
Aztecs, Britons and Ethiopians already do what Ports do on Land, better. There is no niche for Ports on Land maps, that other civs cannot do better than Ports.
1 Like
100% this. Fully agree. 
It will remain so, even if you buff them and take away Water bonii for it.
Ports will never be as good as Britons, Aztecs or Ethiopians, on Land, unless they underwent a complete redesign from scratch, which is wholly uneeded.
I don’t think adding one of my above suggestion, for example that limited free millotia bonus would ewuall to a complete redesign thought.
I don’t want ports to become good in the sense of above 50% winrate.
I just don’t want them to be a catastrophe.
47% that’s all I ask for instead of 42%
I also don’t want them to lose the status of top tier water civ. I want to level the playing field while maintain the order, if that makes any sense.
Altleat I am brainstorming towards it…
Bad idea, since Portuguese are a lategame civ. Italians and Vikings outclass them in the early stages of the game, not by far, but they are better
They are perfectly balanced, yeah
This tech is already valuable enough
I can agree with this. One dev’s reasoning was that: Halbs would be too strong paired with Orjan Guns. No they wouldn’t be, because Elite Orjans are underwhelming and other civs have boosted Halbs and boosted SO at the same time
They would become Goths. 6 M@A appear in Feudal Age. No, please
Only change Elite Orjans, I like that.
2 Likes
Romoving the 10% HP bonus, would only make them suck on Water. Caravels are only relevant in the Imperial Age as it is. Without that 10% HP, Wargalleys would suck against Longboats, even more than they do now.
Ports do not even have Shipwright.
42% on Arabia, for a Water civ? Good enough for me!
Thank you for reading my suggestions, I appreciate your critique!
2 Likes
I think those aoe2stats make zero sense. I’d only make arguements according to tier list videos by pros. Pros say that Burmese suck which is the 10th best civ according to aoe2stats, at the same time Vietnamese have the second lowest winrate, but they are considered to be an excellent A-tier civ for both open and closed maps. Playrate doesn’t matter, because pros don’t pick civs.
Haha, that’s 100% the opposite of how I think.
I see pro Tier lists close to worthless and only trust hard statistical facts of nice confidence interval.
Anyway, the game is a lot different for pros and the average players, so I don’t think we can ignore one or the other.
Edit: actually we have argued over this topic many times (data vs pro opinion, pro player balance vs average player, etc.). Maybe not again, please.
1 Like
Viper constantly says Ports are his favourite civ, for all that is worth.
Ports are not bad, they are just good for Water, and that is where they belong.
2 Likes
Welcome to “let’s balance based of winrates” episode 43646983418969
They are fine on water. Feitoria stalling isn’t to the taste of everyone but it’s another issue.
And now they are mediocre on water again. They have a slow start, and a bit of gold save won’t help against Vikings, Italian, or even Byzantine.
Carrack comes way too late to make up for the feudal age nerf.
Bear in mind their champs are almost as cheap as Goths one while having the last armour upgrade. Lacking squires helps differentiate them. As of their halbs they work just fine.
WTF?
Fair enough?
Because it’s a hard bonus to use, but it’s a fine one.
Honestly why does everyone want Portuguese to have a stone bonus? Like they don’t need one.
cheap champs to slaughter the enemy trash?
Don’t need to mine gold to drush.
BBC that snipe siege like gods, BBT, insane gold retention. Sounds useful to me.
Totally true, but people here don’t seem really interested into that. Like why else would they ask for Malay or Byzantine buffs 11
Good intention, but the gap is so HUGE it’s pretty much a lost cause. At least compared to AoC we aren’t stuck with Viking mirrors all the time and there is a decent variety of OK water civs. Stuff like Berbers and Japanese aren’t good enough for island maps in tournaments but they work just fine on the ladder / casually.
1 Like
Reading some of your points makes me almost nerf them. I mean if it was as great as you make it sound, then why are they so so bad?
I take that many people FEEL like ports are fine.
Right, you don’t trust statistics. I don’t think it will be fruitful to argue about this point honestly.
Can u ask why you think the free millotia suggestion is WTF? I mean one can always tweak the numbers to be less. Atelast it’s a unique new game plan no? Something Portuguese compeltely lack. Compare it to Ethiopians free age up resources but only for milltiia
1 Like
It sound useful. 30% faster tech also sounds amazing. In practice it falls short, else we wouldn’t habe this discussion
Problem is bbc and bbt can not carry a civ in imperial age if you good no proper base.
To speak in pictures:
BBC is like salt, you can use it to sprinkle it on meat to make it tastier. But if the meat has turned bad then some salt just won’t help to get a good meal.
Lacking squirrels considerably hurts champions, especially against skirms. Or ever catching hussars
Yes and we got to this point of not only viking by keep improving the sitatuin instead of preaching the status quo
The free millotia would make them a top landing civ, maybe, I want to nerf them in water, and vikings are next