Perhaps, we should start turning the CA into a semi-regional unit.
This Regional unit frenzy is getting a bit out of hand. Doesnt anyone see what I do!?
1 Like
I want longbowman with 1.7 reload time and losing 1 attack (There is still no Thumbring). It will be good unique feature.
How about changing the civ theme to “Elephant, Monks and Infantry”? I feel sorry for Burmese without the infantry bonus.
Idk why Paladin civs should be reduced.
Exchanging their civ concept sounds exciting. I’ve felt missing for Armenians unique power.
It’s better to give as a civ bonus; Towers give 5 pop space.
These are good changes. In addition, scout-line can get +5 HP (scouts HP 45 → 50. Nomads’ effect is changed to +20HP).
Why not take the plunge?
-
The Bonus changed
Land military units (except siege weapons) receive 33% less bonus damage.
→
Land military units (except siege weapons) receive 5% less damage. -
Change Hauberk to Scoutage.
Exactly.
General
- Market cost reduced to 100 wood
- Mongols, Cumans, Tatars, Huns gain pastures
- Militia upgrade to man at arms automatically
- Outpost stone cost removed
- All gunpowder units benefit from ballistics
Byzantines
- Greek fire: Towers and Castles gain 0.25 tile splash radius on their arrows.
- Camel Rider, Skirmisher, and Spearman lines are 25% cheaper. → Militia, Spearmen, and Skirmisher lines and related upgrades are 15% /25% /33% starting feudal age.
Wanted some more roman in my eastern roman empire.
Mongols
- Nomads
- Villagers take -3 damage from mounted units.
They’re too strong to need anything military related, but the current nomads is just bad.
Cumans
- Cuman Mercenaries → Removed
- New Technology: Khwarezmian Raiders → Steppe lancers gain a +10 charge attack and -25% reload time.
You cant pay me to make Kipchaks in team games.
Ethiopians
- Team Bonus
- Outposts have +3 line of sight and no stone cost → Outposts have +3 line of sight and return 50% of cost when destroyed.
Compensate for general change.
Hindustanis
- Shatagni: +2 range → +1 range and + 3 damage
Range and speed are the strongest stats in the game so too much of one is a problem. A bit of range and some damage, modeled after the magyar ‘recurved bow’.
Japanese
- Lose Parthian tactics.
Fully upgraded arbalester, CA, access to handcannons, AND heavy scorpions? The current patch gave them enough for a due cutback.
Lithuanians
- Civilization bonuses
- New: Town Centers +3 range
- Unique Technologies
- Sainthood: Relics generate 50% more gold.
Hillforts were ancient to the romans. Should really be active since the dark age.
Portuguese
- Unique technology:
- Arquebus: ballistics for handcannoneers → Arbalesters gain +3 vs infantry (lose spear bonus) and a bullet fire animation.
Compensating for everyone having ballistics now.
Saracens
- Civilization bonuses
- Markets cost 75 wood → Markets available in age 1
Its something - is the overall theme of this civ.
Spanish
- Unique Technologies
- New: Tercio → Spear units gain 1 - 4 melee armor near foot archers (includes hand cannoneers). Min bonus with 1 archer type in 5 tile radius, max with bonus with 10 archer types.
- Supremacy removed
They literally invented the musket and prototyped a major western gunpowder tactic - why do they have the weakest hand cannoneer of all gunpowder civs??
Teutons
- Unique Technologies
- Ironclad removed
- New: Buildings take -33% bonus damage
Few in europe knew that value of BRICK HOUSES.
Turks
- General:
- Gains Pikemen
- Gains Arbalester
- Loses Heavy scorpion
- Loses Heavy Camel
- Unique unit:
- Janissary: accuracy 50 → 60, melee armor 1 → 3, hp 45
- Elite Janissary: accuracy 65 → 70, melee armor 2 → 5, hp 50
- Civilization bonuses
- Chemistry is free → removed
- Gunpowder units +25% hp → removed
- New: Chemistry and Bombard available in age 3
- New: Ballistics is free
- Team bonus: Military units made 25% faster
Way too much gunpowder focus on a civ that spent 80% of the period all about horses, archers and horse archers.
1 Like
100 wood market is too cheep. Crazy castle age uping would rage.
Militia-line buff is already enough. Auto upgrade is Bulgarians feature.
Lack of Ballistics is essential for generic gunpowder. It gives fun micro games.
Is this really Turks? No change is needed for Turks.
I’m a noob but I’m pretty sure this isn’t a good idea. Militia is the earliest unit you can make and swordsman line just got a buff.
Makes fast castle easier? Market price is fine in my opinion (espcially considering its a big building)
As a noob i do feel like outposts are very useful and perhaps a bit underrated. But removing the stone cost makes it have very little drawback and I like the current tradeoff, making you unable to build 2 TC when you reach castle age.
I know it makes more historical sense but it also makes the pastures for Khitan’s less unique. Farms are easy to understand and use, and reworking old civs might be a bad idea.
Hand cannons probably deserve it but bombard cannons and bombard towers do not need this
Are militia line balanced now, or did devs overbuff them. I like spamming them : )
Possibly, instead of giving +1 range for the elite version as I gave for changing Yeomen, you can increase the fire rate. To be tested of course.
I thought so too of course, but the Svan Tower already has a skin. To use it, you need a unique building.
This is also a nice idea.
I don’t know why it keeps popping up as a proposal, when it already looks like the Mayans and Vikings are in OP territory.
A lot of changes that I don’t particularly like. Some of them seem like changes for the sake of making changes (something that isn’t needed). There is some value in keeping the game stable by not making unneeded changes. And some changes don’t really seem to consider the already-existing balance.
I think the simplest way to do this would be to make Paladin a unique cavalry upgrade for the Franks (as technically they were the only civ that actually had paladins) and then give other paladin civs a replacement unit (basically, a renamed form of the already-existing paladin). But I don’t see a good reason for this.
This one does seem like a fine one (mitigating a vulnerability), though I think that it could be restricted to just the mill. Also could benefit from having their mill’s food generation rate increased (possibly multiplied by 1.2 or some such)
Genoese Crossbows, hand cannons, and arbs: all three have a niche, and this tramples on the arb’s niche. Gen bows already do fine against spears, even without bonus damage (mainly because spears are generally plain flimsy). I don’t think they really need more. In my experience as Italians, I usually only need one of these three in a game.
Composite bowmen already have 100% accuracy, and Armenians don’t have thumb ring
Paladin is a power unit, so removing it would hurt Huns in team games. Tarkans and steppe lancers don’t really fill that same niche.
I do think that the Hunnic horse should be a unit trainable from the TC (for cheap and quick). This would make that bonus more general, but it would still have an opportunity cost in villagers. Being able to find an opponent may make it worthwhile, but not on maps where you already have a scouting unit (unless you lose said scouting unit).
Japanese were a bit on the weak side before this patch. Now they have a strong Feudal MAA rush (especially since they get more benefit from Feudal arson than other civs do). If they do need a cut-back, I think replacing kataparuto would be a better option (Japanese have no historical reason for getting better trebs, and the name itself is just catapult with Japanese pronunciation - pretty much how katakana works
Prepare for the Lithuanian douche! Given that the Teuton deuche (way back in AoK when they had a TC range bonus) was removed, I doubt anyone is getting it back as a dark age bonus (or even a feudal age bonus). +3 range makes shooting down enemy TCs with your own trivial, and roughly doubles the area in the TC’s range (would be 2.25x, but TCs aren’t a single point)
And Lithuanians already have a strong bonus for capturing relics - getting them another relic bonus would make them even more lopsided in that regard.
Markets in dark age won’t really add much. I’d rather have the saved wood (even with your proposed market price change). Although I suppose Saracens would be able to build a market, sell stone, then buy food for a really fast uptime. Might get an archer rush in the time other civs get a MAA rush.
Supremacy is a useful tech. And Spanish already have faster attacking hand cannons and Conquistadors (one of the most dangerous gunpowder units in the game due to their extreme raiding potential).
Ironclad is a pretty solid technology. Is pretty significant at increasing survivability of their siege equipment, especially against units that get close. If removed, they should at least get siege ram to compensate (giving them a full siege tech tree, including siege engineers). Ironclad is pretty much the reason why they don’t have siege ram (as I understand it)
I think that sheep should be allowed to garrison inside the Town Center to generate food.
If elite GC get +1 range, they don’t really need +1 base damage. Besides, reduce their HP to 40 HP such that onager can one-shot them. They may also need negative archer armor for skirmisher harder countering. Elite GC can then mix with arbalest and micro together well.
I know that increasing food production may seem the obvious solution, but it is fundamentally wrong. It does not improve sizutation in open or semi-open maps where the mill can be attacked, but rather makes the Gurjara stronger in closed or semi-closed maps.
It is the same with the Poles, where someone asked for the TC to be validated as well. The reality is that in both cases their bonuses would have to be nerfed in order not to be OP.
The design of the Genovese (but also of the Condo) can be seen to be crude, and that it was done when they were only a mod team.
Longbowman? +2 vs Spearman.
Chu Ko Nu? +2 vs Spearman.
Plumed Archer? +2 vs Spearman.
Rattan Archer? +2 vs Spearman.
Composite Bowman? +2 vs Spearman.
As you can see, things are more consistent in later years.
At least Kataparuto should be renamed, e.g. Karakuri (絡繰).
Not many civs really have a need for a change imo. Or at least, its still too soon to tell.
My list of recommendations is more for flavor/historical relevance than to change any specific power level. It’s by design that I try to keep the suggestions small or indirect.
True, the didnt have anything fancy in the way of siege till gunpowder became a thing. Still, I’d say a full complete archery range, with possibly the best standard CA might be more relevant to balance since most games dont go on long enough for age4 UTs to really shine.
[quote=“JasuniSmith, post:28, topic:274267”]
Prepare for the Lithuanian douche! Given that the Teuton deuche (way back in AoK when they had a TC range bonus) was removed … [/quote]
Eh, seeing the word Hill forts prompted that tbh. A primitive, fortified position that was close in functioned to ingame TC’s. What about +3 melee armor on palisades and outposts then?
The goal isnt really to add much to Saracens in terms of power - personally I think they have something truly horrifying in the latent potential of bimaristan.
It just occurred to me that they caught a nasty broadside with the food price increase and an indirect way to help with that would be to allow for an earlier market - open the option to trade for wood or gold sooner to help its pacing issues on arabia.
Being virtually immune to hussar raids is useful, for sure. Yet for all that the spanish HC is very good at its intended role as backline dps, it always felt off that it fell behind the likes of burgundians, Hindustanis, and now italians despite inventing the musket in the first place.
It certainly makes it hard for the average huss to snipe siege. But then, the extra melee armor on infantry does that already. Not too sure how the extra melee armor compensates for something weak to melee attacks tho.
The word 絡繰り means ‘mechanism’ or ‘machinery’. It is an generic term that does not have the impression of being used to describe war machines. In most contexts, the word is used to describe small and delicate mechanical designs using precise craftsmanship with parts such as threads, gears and cams, such as dolls, music boxes, clocks and other mechanical works of art, or used abstractly to describe the artifice or conspiracy, rather than huge war machines. I don’t think it’s fitting.
Elite Genoese Crossbowman getting +1 damage sounds good. Don’t think it needs other changes aside from maybe having their bonus damage against cavalry nerfed.
Right now the Elite Genoese Crossbowman is inferior to the Arbalester in almost all situations. Only in team games where you can be often very certain that your opponents have cavalry you can go GCs.
What maps are Gurjaras even strong in? Without any FU units, I doubt they’re a strong pick on closed maps. With hybrid/water maps, getting the mill up early conflicts with getting a dock (and fishing ships) up early. As I understand it, their strength is their food economy and their counter units (camels for cavalry, Shrivamshas for archers, Chakrams for infantry). And as Gurjaras like their light cavalry, units that tend to work better on more open maps. The open map might leave their mill more exposed, but also makes it easier for Gurjaras to deal damage with raiding units.
Faster food generation is going to have some benefit on open maps: Extra food in dark age can mean aging up earlier, or having the food to skip loom in favor of an extra villager (admittedly risky), or getting an extra scout, or moving a vil off of food to wood or gold (potentially also saving the cost of a farm), or getting an eco tech earlier. The benefits might not be as pronounced as it would be on a closed map, but it also isn’t nothing. And the reduced benefit on a open map assumes the mill gets destroyed, something that isn’t guaranteed (even with a hostile MAA rush).
Gen-bows can be absolutely killer against cavalry civs. Franks have a hard time against Gen-bows, but can handle arbs perfectly fine (by using their paladins). Same situation with several other cavalry civs (Persians, Huns, etc). Gen-bows aren’t for every matchup, but when they’re appropriate, they can dominate where arbs cannot.
2 Likes
I kinda wish they had made them more like Ethiopia (archer/siege civ), thats a kind of civ we havent gotten many times
Honestly Infantry/naval civs are just as common as cav/infantry civs anyway so I just shrug at the idea of making them an infsntry/cav civ
From Fandom:
I wish the thorns effect of Lamellar Armor and Iron Pagoda’s ability were interchanged.
If you don’t bother to go through the OP’s post, then why do you bother commenting? And the upvotes on your comment…I expected much more from AOE fanbase.
The OP had a quality post, and it’s ok to disagree…but a no quality reply getting so much love instead is just remarkable.
To the topic: I get why Armenians would be changed by the way OP suggests - it’s because their cavalry was formidable, but then Armenians would need to be changed thoroughly, including their spear-line early upgrade bonus.
The rest of the changes is fine, but Shatagni definitely need to have their range reduced. You can’t have a civ with FU HC, a free armor bonus, and a cheap extra rang tech that adds a whooping 2 range(!!!). How about shatagni: HC +1 range and +1/1 armor instead (while removing the HC armor from the civ bonus)?
1 Like
Or take a page from the Magyars Recure Bow - split it between +1 range and +10% damage.
1 Like