Quick reminder: monocomb is no strategy

there where some complaints in the forum, that with the upcoming patch you cant monocomb skirms, ERKs or gatlings anymore. Just keep in mind, that monocombing any unit, shows that you dont consider their “weaknesses” in this particular game situation; aka it overperforms. This could be, because of a super thight coordinated team, covering your flanks… but most of the time its just that you hit a critical mass, that negates your weaknesses. In rts the rock-paper-scissor dynamic must be enforced, so im glad for the changes. Skirmisher civs and the USA have plenty of other viable units, for aztec i can understand the complaints… but they shouldnt spam ERKs again and instead get some other viable units as compensation.


If you win with one unit against all that means something is wrong (yumi anti cav :slight_smile: )
On the other hand the heavy cavalry on Aoe3DE in teams is little used especially when you put it in fights (except certain heavy cavalry). Due to the negative multiplier for improved light infantry but above all for the new civilizations that have hybrid units and new infantry ( in fact with the new civilizations there have been added more strong infantry units than strong heavy cavalry).


Many people say that AoE3 cpunter sistem works as each type of unit counters others 2. Right now ERKs only counter heavy cavalry

are u talking before or after the PUP?
as long as u can monocomb a unit and win, it is overperforming.

Before the patch they could fight vs musks. Now they cant. Unlike goons and ruyters they dont have bonus vs artillery

1 Like

yes and …? whats your point?
the baseline is, you could spam them and win - thats a fact → so the nerf is reasonable; aztec just needs some compensation for it.
If your point is to give ERKs x2 against artillery, i’m fine with that^^’

1 Like

If you lose vs a ERKs spam is not the fault of the aztec player. They are counterables, otherwise they would have been the most OP civ since release, and they havent.
Skirms counter them, artillery counter them, halbs counter them… just use them.

idk, i’m no aztec player. i just know, its their only real lategame strategy and (according to u guys) they were viable in treaty… so its a bad design ¯_(ツ)_/¯ no need to argue about it

a good Aztec player doesn’t spam ERK; The basic Aztec combo is ERK+arrow and ERK+arrow+coyote if the opponent knows the weak point of the ERK, ERK+arrow+jaguar+otontin if the opponent creates dopples, halbs, samurai, etc. In treaty games it is common for Aztec players to resort to all their units: ERK, arrows, jaguar, otontin, coyotes and even pumas, since pumas are fast and have a good siege. The only Aztec unit that you will hardly see in treaty will be the skulls since they are not practical to train. Also, Aztecs in treaty are not considered OP; They are strong but not OP and are one of the few civs that are completely useless against the Mayans because the Mayan Musketeer had bonus range against ERK and 18 range. Now they are spreading one of the problems that the Aztecs had against the Mayans (that the ERK is weak against their musketeer) to all civilizations.

By the way, the musketeers + grenadiers combo is difficult for the Aztecs to counter. now it will be almost impossible without an ERK that can fight musketeers and take siege damage at the same time.

1 Like

an Aztec player who only builds ERK is sure to lose in the late game, even if they build ERK+arrow. The only way for an Aztec player to win with an ERK spam in a late game is to go up against a noob.

So now they’re weak to what was supposed to be their soft counter?

This is an issue I can get behind, they need a small bonus, at least.
All in all, the problem I had with the ERK nerf wasn’t the nerf itself, it’s that it wasn’t accompanied by a Card or a late game buff for the Otontin or the JPK.

Musks havent any bonus vs light cav at range, so they arent. Only at melee. You want treat them as dragoons but they arent.
They are countered by skirms by cost and artillery unlike goons caused by they being nearer to each other.

I can understand that they could overperform in earlier ages maybe (I dont play supr that much) but defenitely not in imperial age.
Aztecs have lost for years against skirmishers and muskets.I dont understand why ERKs are now an issue if they havent get any buff for months

Edit: aztec balance is a meme, nerf after nerf while they get the worst hit by any general change.


The Americans still have horse-drawn artillery as a substitute when weakening the Gatling machine gun, and have given the farmers the amount of feedback. But Aztec has no other unit to replace the unit when weakening the Eagle Runner Knight, nor has it strengthened other units to fill the gap in the absence of the Eagle Runner, and even has not given any compensation at all

Since you want to weaken this unit, please strengthen the Jaguar Warrior and other units to make up for the disadvantages caused by the absence of the Eagle Runner Knight

The problem with all other units in Aztec is that they can’t be used. The Americans can still use horse-drawn artillery without the Gatling machine gun. Aztec has lost the Eagle Runner Knight. No other unit can be used as the main unit. No unit can make up for the absence of the Eagle Runner Knight

Please visit the Aztec people first and understand the difficulties faced by all other units in the fight, so you can understand why the Aztec people rely so much on the Eagle Running Knight

But this isn’t "monocomb"ing. But this logic, would you nerf muskets, culverins and falconets if each player in a team masses each unit type and together they create an unstoppable combo? No.

The issue here is that of critical mass of ranged units ve melee units. This critical mass issue occurs in every game which has both melee and ranged units, and it also occurs in reality (which is why there’s no melee solider on battlefields today). They simply made the critical mass threshold bigger for some units. People will still complain that gatlings will own cavalry when they throw 5 hussars at 20 gatts, that won’t change.

1 Like

AoE2 Champions don’t have an attack bonus against the Scout-line, Skirmisher-line and Spearman-line, yet they’re the SOFT-counter to all of these unit lines (soft is the key-word here).

They were literally supposed to be the Aztec equivalent of Dragoons. It’s in the freaking wiki, first sentence in the overview segment. They counter and are countered by pretty much all of the same units. I would’ve asked for a buff against artillery to ERK in order to function more like the unit it was supposed to replace.

Then We should nerf musketeers too since they do the same damage to every unit, their counters included.

1 Like

the Aztec army is not perfectly symmetrical to the European armies and the ERK is not thought to be symmetrical to the dragon. It is compared to the dragon because they share their anti-cavalry function and some of their weaknesses, but that does not mean that they should have exactly the same bonuses. The ERK is so strong to cover the lack of artillery, grenadiers or any unit that can cause distance area damage in the Aztec army, in addition to also covering the role of the musketeer.

If the idea of ​​balance is that all the units are symmetrical then we will end up with an age of empires II.

If you really want the Aztecs to be symmetrical to the Europeans, then they need to take away the community plaza from the Aztecs, give them cannons, musketeers, grenadiers, cavalry, arenal and advanced arsenal etc.

The Aztec army stopped being OP from TAD. So I don’t understand how it is justified that they receive one of the strongest nerfs in the entire history of AoE III. nerfs this strong should be exclusive to OP armies, otherwise they would be turning a functional army into one with a well below average performance.

Musks havent any bonus vs light cav at range, so they arent. Only at melee. You want treat them as dragoons but they arent

Its basic intuition that light cav is soft countered by musks. An individual dragoon has better stats than one musk but is weaker than two musks. They are absolutely a soft counter - soft cuz goons have that extra range and ### run away.

The fill similar roles in that they counter cavalry and get countered by light infantry, with a major tradeoff light cav dont get evaporated by cannons and musks types just give more basic stat value per pop.

Thats the gist of the comparison , I believe.

1 Like

Everything is fine until goons cost 180 res, miskets 100 and ERKs 150.

1 goon (180) vs 2 musks (200) = musk win

1 ERK vs 1 musk = ERK should win

Without talking about vills seconds…

1 Like

Post nerf ERK still can 1v1 musks without issues, dude.

But why go into res talks of all things? Even res is a bigger deal in aoe2 since popspace and shipment timing usually have a bigger impact in treaty and supermacy, respectively. Then theres civ perks and eco cards and decks…screw that.

Dont think the world is ending if the ERK doesnt hit heavy inf like an actual skirmisher. Thats what JPK were supposed to be for anyway and if this leads to a jag tune up, thats just better.