Remove mayan archer armour?

This is a proposal to remove the last archer armour from the Mayan tech tree.

Details & Compensation

Mayans could get some compensation.
If the last archer armour were removed, I think the ideal balance would require increasing some of the Mayan’s civ bonuses 5-10%, and/or buffing the UU and/or the skirm UT.
I don’t know which ones precisely, or by how much precisely. Because I wouldn’t be opposed to Mayans being one of the weaker civs for a couple of months I’d propose initially only giving Elite Plumes should get +1 PA in compensation.
Other minor buffs could always be implemented later.


  1. Mayans have a massive discount on foot archers (30% in Imp) and a UT for skirms. Missing an archer&skirm tech would be only fair. Huns also lack the last archer armour to compensate for their CA discount (20% in Imp)
  2. Mayans overshadow Incas too much
  3. Mayans overshadow other (non-briton) archery civs too much
  4. It’s sad seeing the Mayan unique bonuses being slowly whittled down in magnitude
  5. Having a foot-archer civ which lacks the last archer armour would be more unique
  6. Having an eagle civ which lacks a blacksmith upgrade would be more unique


I genuinely don’t know how much losing the last archery armour would hurt Mayans. A lot of games are decided before it becomes relevant.

The biggest danger I can see would lie in certain civ matchups becoming unbalanced (Mayans vs Vietnamese perhaps) or in increasing the 1v1 - teamgame strength imbalance Mayans already have a little of.

A note to critics

The sentiment that this change wouldn’t do enough, or that it sounds unfun would be informative, regardless of how you express it.

The sentiment that Mayans would become too weak could be informative, if you express it as

(I think) Mayans would need [such-and-such] to remain viable after such a change

rather than

Mayans would be complete garbage after such a change


I still think the Mayan team bonus should be removed and replaced with one from this list of useless team bonuses. Team bonuses should be used to balance team games.


Mayans need more than one nerf, regarding Archer discount, you can just tone it to 10%/15%/20% instead of 10%/20%/30%, Plumes would need an adjustment in the price to offset that nerf.
However I also think Plumes in Imperial offer too much, having same range as arbalest while also being soo cheap plus with better HP, PA and speed, the less attack barely matter when they cost 39W 39G, I’m not against removing one extra range from the Elite Plumes, with the archer discount nerf and the plume cost adjustment the new situation would be if you want an archer with good range and attack, and not needing castles to be created then Arbalest is for you, but the drawback is that it has less durability and mobility, but if you want mobility and durability, plus a cheaper archer then plumes are for you, but the new drawback is that you get a weaker attack and range.

On top of that, Eagles need the food cost raised to 30F because they are way too effective to mass and to raid (Incas would need a buff to offset that, Aztecs would be nerfed fairly tho) and buffing LS wasn’t even close to reduce eagles dominance. Longer lasting resources also need to be nerfed to 10% and El Dorado UT cots raised (something like 900f, 750G).

1 Like

Let’s not forget that Mayans have no horses whatsoever. In my opinion this is a silly comparison.

Not saying i agree or disagree and maybe they need a nerf, but not having horses at all is tough for any civ imo, that’s why they have such great archers. They’re a one trick pony civ, we all know what’s coming.

what about missing thumbring??

Alright. I neither disagree nor agree with your perspective. As I said, I don’t know how much removing the Archer Armour would do.

But would you be opposed to removing the Mayan Archer Armour before

  • decreasing the archer discount
  • nerfing Plumes
  • nerfing eagles
  • nerfing the longer lasting resources
  • nerfing El Dorado
  • all of the above


As I said (or meant to say) in the OP, I think removing archer armour is more fun than the above alternatives.

My nightmare vision is a version of the future where Mayans have a generic tech tree (without horses) (unless they convert a stable) and

  • 5% archer discount
  • 3% longer lasting resources
  • El Dorado gives + 20 hp
  • Plumes are like generic archers, but they have +5% movement speed

I like civ design to be a little sharp and angular.

Vikings and Aztecs are already in a similar position to that. It could work, but I think reducing their defenses is more interesting than nerfing Mayan archers’ offense.

1 Like

I am not sure if the last archer armour is that important tbh (I usually forget about it anyway - the only big issue imo is that skirms will perform much worst vs other archers, but you can sub in eagles when you have gold).

Hmm, I don’t really think Mayans need a nerf, but if they were to receive one this plan makes some sense. It goes with the general theme where Goths have discounted infantry, but lack Plate Armor, and Huns have discounted Cav Archers, but lack Ring Archer Armor.

They definitely need to keep Thumb Ring and Bracer to be a good archer civ. And IMO El Dorado is balanced correctly to make Eagles a decent cavalry replacement in late Imperial.

Skirmishers without the final armor upgrade are a concern. Huns skirmisher for example are very weak to archers. Without the option of Hussars, Mayans’ trash (skirm + halb) is very weak to enemy skirms. Maybe make Hul’che Javelineers give their Skirmishers +1/+2 armor (in addition to the 2nd projectile) to make up for Ring Armor, while keeping the Arbs weaker. I’m not sure if this makes their Skirms too OP in Castle Age though.

1 Like

Have you seen them at pro level? I think they probably need a nerf. I personally think that the archer discount should be toned down to 10%/15%/20%, although losing the last archer armor could be interesting.

What about make the Mayans Eagles 30F, Aztecs 25F and Incas 20F?

Just make it 25 food. Having something like that change depending on the civ seems too arbitrary

I could agree with most of your opinions, except that the El Dorado price
Mayan eagle cannot beat paladin with the equal gold cost, and they are slower than paladin , got countered by infantry. So their upgrade shouldnt be more expensive than paladin

1 Like

In team games yea of course, but in 1v1 this is by far the strongest tech for eagles, basically making up for their weakness of low HP by granting same resistance as an Elite Teutonic Knight, and Mayans have soo many advantages to have such tech that cheap, also it improves them vs archers tho (From 30 shots to 50 shots)

Mayan does not have cavalry line so eagle is their cavalry. but eagle is much weaker.
With Mayan UT, the eagle are not weak anymore but its still not as strong as paladin
Mayan will have no late game if their eagle get nerfed

How it wil be nerfed, Am I proposing to modify eagle stats? no, I just want that Mayans eagles being a true investment because Mayans have literally 60% winrate at 2k, basically, there isn’t any bad match up for Mayans and they can end games in castle age most of the time, they can’t have that OP supremacy in Imperial with quickly upgraded El Dorado Eagles and OP Plumes with the same range as arbalests.

Then their skirms would just suck, and then you have to rebalance plumes armor somehow…

They can end games in castle age so you should nerf their early game, the eagle upgrades are in imperial age so they are irrelevant.
With the mentioned nerf idea of eagle, the upgrades will be more expensive than paladin upgrades, but the eagle is completely weaker than paladin with the same gold cost , how can the nerfs be reasonable ?
Also, nobody can afford plume and eagle all at once in early imperial

Seems like, seeing as most comments in this thread are along the lines of “why don’t we nerf … also”, the most common opinion is that removing the Imp archer armour wouldn’t do enough.

What if the Castle age archer armour were to be removed too?

Between the discounted archers and the eagles, I don’t think there’s any risk of Mayans becoming weak to archer play.
When Mayans can’t afford eagles or archers because gold is too scarce, I think it’s fair that they’d lose. They’re strong enough in the early game.
There’s also space to increase the effect of the skirm UT into something silly strong like “Skirms have 50% better rate of fire”

You don’t have to.
There’s nothing preventing the base-stats from being left as-is.
There might be fun ways to tweak Plumes after a nerf like this, but if Plumes and Arbs are nerfed equally, (and if we’re of the opinion that currently neither dominates the other,) there’s nothing forcing the devs to change the Plumes’ base stats.



What if Mayans loose Thumb Ring like Aztecs? The archers overall won’t be as strong but on the other hand it will help Mayans to spend more resources in units than in techs.
It will be a less pointy arrow that hits you faster

I’m pretty sure that would kill Mayans. They would fire as slowly and inaccurately as Britons, without the extra 3-4 range. Aztecs are an infantry civ and don’t need fully upgraded archers, their champions and jaguars can beat enemy infantry without any ranged support (maybe skirmishers if enemy archers or hand cannons become a problem that can’t be solved with eagles). Vikings lost Thumb Ring and their Crossbow/Arb play is much worse now, but at least they have good economy and infantry (extra health and damage to cavalry, as well as berserks), where Mayans don’t even get champions.

I love this non-conformist approach, others wouldn’t dare to touch Mayans in this manner.
Let me sharpen this point and perhaps help you adjust it further more.

  1. Discounted unit DOESN’T necessarily have to be weaker - Yes, Huns CA, Berbers not-Paladin-Cavalier, Goths Infantry, Malay Elephant, it’s very appealing and convinient way to balance thing, but do not fall to this methodical over-simplified way to design a civ, Byzantines Skirms, Magyars Hussar, Slavs Siege, and Mayans Archers of course, all legitimate workable designs.
  2. Elite Plumes must have 6 Pierce Armor - Design wise Plumed is a CA, worse stats, yet cheaper price, with the additional benefit of lacking “cavalry armor type”. It must be efficient engaging bigger numbers of Arbalesters, just like CA that have 6 pierce armor, besides that it would differentiate their Unique Unit from the regular Archer-line even more.
  3. Do not forget Mayans is a meso civ, and therefore must have a powerspike to play with - All meso civs lack Hussar and BBC which makes them awful as game progress towards to no-gold post-Imp phase, they need a tool to finish the game earlier, to get enough advantage to bring the enemy to a defeat, so it’s a little bit edgy trying to sand-down this Arbs powerspike though doable. Vikings are also a “meso-civ” conceptually (minus the Eagles) yet Devs did the same kinda with the Thumbring, which was a great idea. Armor has less impact than damage offensively.
  4. Mayans Skirmishers need to be addresssed - Their UT is already quite bad, more of a gimmick rather than an actual buff, it pretty much just gives +1 damage, I’d adjust it a little, making Skirmishers shoot 3 projectiles/spears rather than 2. As mentioned, meso late-game is already bad to begin with, it won’t be OP by any more, especially when lacking BBC to form any sort of a death-ball.
  5. Mayans eco and meta driven design is what makes them broken - rather than their late-game supiriority. As you mention its the early game where they shine, having 1 extra vill, 15% more resources which means mostly Boars and Deer (which is tons), and their cheap Archers. The only way to solve this one for good is to address the meta, we’re currently having the narrowest most single dimensional meta we’ve ever had, some civs simply benefit from it. To fix this phenomena you’d first need to change Arabia relatively back to what it was during AOC times. Check my post regarding this subject.

Overall I really like this change, much less impactful and edge than Vikings one, but definitely a great step towards a balanced civ pool, we have to start nerfing OP civs rather than buffing desperately weaker civs. You deal here with identity, diversity and playability which is just the right approach when balancing/designing a civ. Well Done.