Proposed balance changes based on average winrates

Hello guys, after checking the average winrates of the civilizations, i gave it a serious thought on what might be adjusted (albeit slightly) in order to furthermore balance the civs without changing their gameplay drastically. There have been tons of posts about “buffing” or “nerfing” a civ - and devs usually come up with their own way instead of actually implementing someone’s ideas (idk why…maybe they don’t want anyone to credit?), which sometimes ends up good (e.g. teuton melee armor), or it ends up being bad (sicilian team bonus…yeah…).

So here’s the list along with an explanation (do not consider ALL changes necessary…those are just some ideas, and instead of hating on the entire post based on 1 change you might not like, maybe you could instead agree with something you like, even if it’s just 1 change:) ):

Franks (
If we take a look, we can see that their winrate is really high early to mid game, but drops steadily for the late game. This might be attributed to their extremely powerful eco (faster berry collection, free farm upgrades) making scout and knight rushes absolutely deadly, as well as their +20% Hp bonus for cavalry. Unfortunately, swapping the unique techs does not necessarily fix that

  • A) Cavalry gets + 10%/15%/20% HP in feudal/castle/imperial age (or +15%/20%/25%)
    • We’ve seen plenty of “progression” bonuses, so i don’t see why not apply this to Franks as well. Sure, their scouts would be weaker with “just” 50 HP in feudal, but it might be a fair trade off for their great eco & no need to pay for bloodlines. With 15% more HP in castle age, their knights would be a bit weaker though, but the eco should still be solid to back it all up. +25% Hp in imp would actually boost their late game a bit.
  • B) they get bloodlines, but cavalry gets +10% HP only in imp & berry collectors work “only” 10% faster
    • This might also seem to balance their early game, but idk how much of an effect would the strong eco have to pump out even stronger light cav than before (should bloodlines be researched), so this is probably a bad idea TBH

Berbers (
Berbers actually resemble Franks a bit, and their early winrate is very high. It looks like the +10% villager speed has a huge effect on that, especially in dark/feudal ages, and could be a relatively “simple” to fix:

  • Villagers are 5% faster in castle age, +10% faster in imperial age (+3% faster in feudal age, too?)

Indians (
Indians are a weird civ right now - but not necessarily bad. Their early victory spike might probably be attributed to the (not so recently new) pierce armor they get in castle age, and the late drop is probably from the plate baridng armor, which has been removed some months ago. I think the cheaper villagers are fine, but the piecer armor gives them a huge benefit in castle age, and should be removed, whereas plate barding armor should be brought back (yeah) - but not the + pierce armor for camels, so that ranged units might actually counter the “full camel” spam in teamgames.

  • Stable units no longer get bonus pierce armor
  • They get plate barding armor back

Huns (
Huns also benefit from early bonuses and have quite a powerspike. I personally think that Huns are somehow okayish, but instead, they MIGHT get some love for late game in exchange for an early game power

  • Stables work +10%/15%20% faster in feudal/castle/imperial age (team bonus, changed from +20% across all ages)
  • They receive ring archer armor

Lithuanians (
Now these guys are interesting. Though not overpowered at the first glance, I think several issues arise. 1) The +150 food in dark age might be a bit too much 2) faster skirms/spears in feudal age seem a bit too strong vs cavalry (which is not yet able to research husbandry) 3) the relic bonus can still be unforgiving in castle age. Yes, they recently received the winged hussars, and leitis got buffed, but if someone manages to get 4 relics in castle age (especially at pro scene), the basic counters are often rendered useless, whereas missing plate mail armor and now even blast furnace might seem a bit too much for their late game.

  • A) They start with +100 food (instead of +150)
  • B) spearmen/skirmishers 5%/10% faster in castle/imperial age (+3% faster in feudal age, too?)
  • C) both at once
  • Bonus A - they get blast furnace back, but relic bonus capped at +2(+3?) in castle age (and +3 in imp, too?)
  • Bonus B - relics are reworked and now they get bonus in the following manner (which might make teamgames on huge maps more interesting, to be fair):
    • 1 = +1
    • 2 = +2
    • 4 = +3
    • 8 = +4
    • 16 = +5

Vietnamese (
Vietnamese are actually a pretty nice civ with very strong rattan archers - provided that you can get to them. What was a really nice change was that their economic upgrades no longer cost wood - which is very good. Unfortunately, they still seem to struggle a bit, and this bonus can be expanded upon:

  • Economic upgrades do not cost wood, and are +10% better (e.g. double bit axe = +22% wood collection)
  • Bonus: paper money is reworked, because one-time bonuses/techs really feel…terrible…maybe (please, ignore me if this is bad), something like Divine crossbow, which lets crossbow line deal +1 “splash” damage within 0,5 tile radius, might seem like a fair replacement

Byzantines (
They obviously suffer from the early game due to no eco bonuses, but actually ending up quite “versatile” in late game. There can be an easy fix for this (of course, just one of the following is should be good for start):

  • A) -DEPRECATED- Italians have a similar bonus, ignore it. Advancing to the next age is 33% cheaper (previously, only advancing to imperial age was cheaper)
  • B) Spears/Skirms/Camels are 30% cheaper

Malay (
Those guys have been nerfed recently…except for the karambit warriors which do not help their early game at all. I don’t think they need a new bonus though…

  • Advancing in age is 100% faster (instead of 66%)
  • They get the chain barding armor (yeah, the fish trap and harbor nerfs are enough for those poor guys to deserve at least this…Idk about the elephant cost though)
    • Bonus - Elephants are 25% cheaper in castle age, 35% cheaper in imperial age (was 30%/40%)

Portuguese (
Portuguese suffer a lot early in the game, which might be attributed to only a small bonus of reduced gold cost for units. On the other hand, Feitoriae might seem a bit too strong in some situations (yeah…islands…)

  • All units cost -25% gold (or maybe even -30%, but caravel (and organ gun?) cost is adjusted accordingly)
  • Feitoriae generate resources in a slower rate (especially gold, stone and wood)…

Burmese (
Burmese are the final civ i think need a minor change right now, according to winrates (Cumans got buffed recently!). As we can see, their winrate has evidently dropped since the arambai nerf (which was, to be fair, necessary), but their early game is pretty weak nonetheless.

  • They can research leather archer armor
    • Bonus - arambai (elite too) lose 1 pierce armor

Well…that’s all i could think of - i don’t think anything about sicilians (first crusade and sicilian team bonus feel really silly…) and burgundians (flemish revolution is wtf tech) right now, so i’m not the guy to think about their bonuses 11. Hope you guys like those changes and agree with them - they are all based on statistics and i’d love to be corrected if necessary - this is what we are here for!:slight_smile:

1 Like

Divine Crossbow / JoJo Reference?
Aka: Divine Sandstorm

images (1)

1 Like

nah, it’s based on the vietnamese “mythology”

“King An Duong’s divine crossbow”

1 Like

For the Byzantines, a staggered discount for advancing might be a good idea. So,

Feudal Age cost -10%
Castle Age cost -20%
Imperial Age -cost -30%


They get 100w and 100stone each time they advance (or some sort of resource combination).

And make Greek Fire add the effect from the obsolete Boiling Oil UT of the Persians.

Non-balance change:

Give them Greek voice lines.


fair enough! I also thought about staggering the advance costs, but then again, advance to feudal age would be just 50 food cheaper, and to castle age 40 gold and 160 food, and that’s why i just went full on with the 33%:slight_smile: After all, their overall winrates are pretty bad 11…but i think the cheaper trash would be better since italians also get an advance discount:)

edit: castle age miscalculation

1 Like

If you nerf the Feitoria you might as well remove it.
Even now it costs too much for what it does, and outside one, maybe two maps it’s completely useless, unless you’re in for some weird strategy (like arena fast imperial).

maybe -10% tax at the market?
I had suggested to give it a little gold trickle but it seems that some people dislike a invisible relic.

That may make it more powerful even than the Khmer in the castle age.

Balancing around the win rate on arabia on all elo sounds like a really bad idea to me.


The problem is mainly their strong scout rush, so just having +10/20% in feudal/castle would be enough.

It’s not necessary to give them BL, or nerf their castle age to buff their imp. Just go for the easiest solution.

And what would be that huge effect?

Berbers are strong because they have cheap cav and one of the best UU, not for their vills. And overall I wouldn’t call them OP.

That +1, while it’s not elegant (a lot of civs have similar bonuses) isn’t neither OP.
Their camels are now more manageable, and they can get a powers spikes in castle age, which is way more important than having one on imp.

Huns are the same since the AoC, and they aren’t OP, people simply learn how play them perfectly.

3 seconds less per scouts will hardly make a difference, while the last archer armor is huge.

Those seems just random onestly…

The bonus A is maybe the only one that could make sense, but I feel like it’s too early to say it.

So burgundians on steroids basically…

Yeah let’s give them rocket launchers…

PM just need to give a 1:1 conversion rate, so if it cost 800 food and wood, it should give 800 gold. That’s it.

Again, italians say hi, and having a 335 food feudal age seems a bit too much maybe? Then you want to make their cheap units even cheaper?

Give them free age ups since you are at it…

But why? What is it the effect that you want to achieve?

This way you almost hurt them, since they’ll age with no resources to do anything.

It won’t change much…

On the armor I agree, but I don’t think that the arambai needs a nerf on his PA right away. They aren’t the same as before, so maybe we could test them before.

Also, I read the stats too, and the only civs that are outside of the 45-55% comfort zone are:

  • Cumans (but we need to see the effects of the new patch)
  • Malay
  • Portoghese
    Franks are borderline OP, and dangerously close to the 55%. Italians too are close the the 45%, so those civs too should receive small nerf or buffs, but small ones.

Others thought, seems stable, so eventually nerfs and buffs cannot be justified with such statistics.


I would go with a 50% increased research speed for Portuguese. This is an interesting bonus but current value is underwhelming.

Buffing Malays age advance speed (not sure how much) is probably the way to go

I’ll give Elite Genoese Xbows +1 attack and -1 Vs cavalry (same Vs Cavs, a bit better overall). The upgrade is a bit meh. Some Silk Road bonus for 1v1 would be nice too.

I’ll give Saracens the ability to research their UTs from monastery. So Madrasah could actually support their Smush.

For Viets, I don’t know but Paper Money should probably be reworked the same way Scutage has been.

Byzantines have basically been powercrept by all other civs, so they feel a bit meh now… Bonuses on all age advance would feel too similar to Italians. Maybe just buffing the IA bonus and lower Elite Cataphracts/Logistica once again… ?

Cumans may be alright but basically everybody dislike one time tech so Mercenaries can be targeted.


First, franks will never get bloodlines, it’s their civ design. If something will be nerfed it will be the berry bonus.
Berbers are alright, wouldn’t mind faster vils, but it’s no big deal. The cheap stable units carry them enough.
Indians get extra pierce armor so they can stand up to archer civs better- the only civ without knights in castle age, bar meso.
Huns will never receive ring archer armor, and why change the team bonus? It’s just like britons’ or celts’.
Lithuanians… what the? 3%, 5%? I need 8 relics to get +4 on knights? Devs definitely knew what they were doing. Leitis are now a glass cannon-y kinda cavalry, much more like what lithuanian cavalry should be rather than the heavy paladins. The civ is fine. Nerf knights in general- this unit itself is what makes cavalry civs better in winrate.
Byzantines can’t have cheaper age ups- Italians have that. If anything they need an eco bonus that’s not really an eco bonus, but is a military bonus to keep with the civ concept, or even defensive. Something like the cuman cheaper ARs and stables or the portuguese cheaper gold units.
Malay advance fast enough, they already are the best civ on arena. And the whole point of them getting trash swordsmen is that they don’t get the second armor upgrade and have the worst cavalry.
About portuguese- feitoria is fine, it’s a part of the game. Suck it up, islands players. It’s not vikings vs vikings every single game now.
Burmese will never get the second archer armor either, that’s their civ design. I’m not even sure what is wrong with the civ, probably that their transitions are really tough due to no thumb ring and you being kinda forced to play into arambai as a ranged unit every game.

Overall some of the more “uneducated” change proposals I have seen recently, but it’s understandable since it comes from reddit.
You can actually touch very little in terms of tech trees, bonuses, etc, mostly because no two civs can overlap- think koreans being the only ones with full university, teutons being the only civ with SO, paladin and BBT, ethiopians the only ones with full siege workshop, spanish the only civ with full trash tech tree etc.
The devs have been coming up with very fair and reasonable changes thus far that make the game very varied. Bar new civ concepts that they hadn’t thought of, I doubt we can have much of an input on future balance changes.

Here’s the first problem with your proposal.
The winrates aren’t updated to reflect the new balance patch.
So basically you’re nerfing lithuanians again without knowing the impact of the new nerf.

Secondly nerfing based on all players means that archer civs are going to look worse than they are (see you have no nerfs for mayans, Chinese, and vikings despite those 3 being some of the best civs in thd game) and cavalry civs are going to look stronger rhen they are (see Berbers, Indians, and huns). And lastly some civs, who most just can’t use well, would become absolutely busted where they are insane. See the Malay. Imagine Malay on arena. Where they are already one of the best. And having them hit castle age with another 2 or 3 villagers.

The only civs on your list I agree need change are franks, Byzantines and Vietnamese.

1 Like

This seems really OP

I like this one a lot. You have to remove/change the italian bonus, but the proposal is very cool for byzantines

1 Like

The Italians have a fixed 15% discount on all ages. They save a total of 345 food and 150 gold.

For the Byzantines it would be staggered. Currently the Byzantines save 330 food and 264 gold but with a staggered bonus it would be 510 food, and 280 gold. So in essence, just 180 food saved.

1 Like

There is no need, Byzantines civ identity and bonus are fine as they are now. It will be just a copy paste of the Italians bonus, which should remain unique to them.

IMO the only thing Byzantines need is maybe a little more love to their cataphracts

Please note that the Italians receive a steady 15% discount for each age, but for the Byzantines it will be staggered.

In fact the byzantine bonus would seem like Italians on steroids, since they’ll save way more and on top of super cheap trash and camels.

Italians bonus pale in comparison, and the fact that it’s staggered just apparently makes them different…

You gonna nerf archers as well or just make the entire game an archer fest?


Berbers +10% in dark age = a lot of laming in lower elo & it helps a lot to escape drush, and to wall. Maybe “villagers walk 10% faster starting in feudal age” might be better:)

Vietnamese… the eco bonus would not be that big. Celts get extra wood chopping speed and are they op? nope…burgundians can research those techs earlier, whereas viets would have those techs slightly stronger, which is a fair deal, right?)) 1 splash damage per 0,5 tiles would not be as significant as you think, would it?

  • you would still need to research in imp
  • enemy units would need to be fairly stacked
  • you’d still need a mass of archers for it to be effective…so maybe even +2 splash damage might be fine, but i’d start with +1.
  • druzhina, logistica and lechitic legacy also have splash damage, even bigger than this, and the upgrades are quite rare.

Otherwise i can see your points:)

agreeing with just 1 single change, as stated above, is fine (e.g. franks, byzantines and viets)

lithuanian nerf was only for imp, that’s why i proposed something earlier:)