I want some of whatever youre smoking.
I am talking from what I have experienced with them and from what they have. I have 70% winrate with Sicilians (I am 15xx ELO) which is feel so weird how people see them bad. Counters barely do well vs them, 100% faster build castles and TCs, 1st crusade, Hauberk and not that bad eco bonuses either.
To be clear I think Serjeants should cost less from Feudal and also get a reduced cost and training time from First Crusade (but First Crusade should lose its current effects).
As for Archers training from Barracks, to those discussing that, the training time could be decreased from Barracks to make it balanced. Also remember that the average win rating is from all maps (I believe) on land maps Italians are below average.
and is that your overall winrate with them, or your winrate post nerf? and if it’s post nerf what is the number of games played with them?
furthermore you don’t really judge whether a civ needs nerfs or buffs based one ONE PERSONS experience.
not true post nerf.
which is offset by no early economy bonuses.
1st crusade i never liked, but lets not act like Sicilians are some dominant civ, and Hauberk is pretty much their only good late game option against archers.
not that good of eco bonuses you mean. none of them really kick in until castle age.
300 stone, 100% more food on farms and 100% TCs are all eco bonuses.
You sure? Their UU have 3Pa+2 from blacksmith and 65 hp in castle age, in imp the elite have 4Pa+4, 85hp. They have siege onagers, siege rams and heavy scorps.
and also Siege Engineers
and the only one of those that is an early eco bonus is the extra stone. assuming you sell it.
their UU is slow and easily kited, cavalry is not. I have yet to see a pro use their UU effectively against archers.
SO? in 1v1? Rams? against anyone not microing maybe. Scorps? against archers?
No, the farm one is also early eco once you hit feudal just get horse collar and put your farms with +100% more food, it is easy. The 100% build for TCs is a huge advantge even if it starts in castle age, you don’t know how this is useful.
Is it really that hard to get siege rams or heavy scorps?! Yeah in 1v1 I saw it many times, Ongers also easy forget siege Onagers who cares.
Still also very useable especially with first crusade.
You do have a point that their win rate increase starting from 1800 elo (still 1v1 RM arabia on current patch according to aoe pulse). I cannot explain that except that imaging one or two active sicilian OTP in a elo range with few games played (or sicilian being good at high ELO like chinese, but I am still not convinced, maybe I am wrong)
But on the other side, the civ has no early advantage on other civs other than the damage reduction from pikes and skirms. The first eco bonus is the wood saved around the time you go castle age (while others need to reseed their farm). The fast TC build time might not bring any bonus until minute 25.
First Crusade and Hauberk should come at a time so late that you did really well in the game if you managed to hold until then without falling too much behind.
EDIT: I forgot about thr extra stone. How do you personally use it ?
tell me finemood - when do you actually see the benefit of this bonus? not until a farm would normally deplete. until that point the extra food means NOTHING. So until your opponents farms EXPIRE, and yours are STILL GOING, the benefit of thise bonus has ZERO IMPACT.
point is though - in the early game they don’t really have a lot going for them.
SR and HS aren’t a good option against any player worth their salt.
Onagers yeah but you need at least 3-4 to have a real impact and they are expensive.
so then go show me all these examples of Sicilian UU wrecking archers.
i can explain it easily - look at the playrate sub 2%. not a lot of matches being played.
It is so weird because what you have listed I call them advantages, and great advantages.
Tons of examples. You can go early castle drop with sending like 2 vills in feudal to mine stone while going up and even you can buy if you are shorted by time. Another thing you can sell and do many things as you like. The 300 stone gives you a very flexible play, you can drop 4 TCs, you can castle you can stone wall you can sell, etc.
I’m not sure about the double cost reduction. Direct 50f/30g looks good to me. Reduction of training time and removing serjeant spawn will be good.
I wonder what’s the obsession to buff these civs when there ones that are actually in an awful spot (Bengalis, Burmese) or are in a bad place in design (Goths, Koreans) or are too bad in one setting but completely too strong in others (Turks, Spanish, Vikings).
Listen, Sicilians might need a buff to Serjeant (I personally would like to see their attack up) and Italians might need a buff to elite genoese crossbow (again to the attack), but acting like they need something to be buffed hard is stupid, the evidence says that those aren’t civs that will undeperform like others.
Still eco bonus and benefit.
They do, either eco or even their scout rush which is hard already to deal with in feudal with their less bonus damage and 300 stone market abuse some times.
A unit have 8 Pa, 85hp and UT gives you 35 units of them need an example?!
absolutely agreed. Koreans and Burmese need love far more then the likes of Italians and Sicilians.
Exactly this. These civs are not that bad and mostly need no buffs at all and there are a priority for other civs to balance.
Probably because them not getting any compensation for their nerfs despite not having a positive W/R.
Well yeah. But we agree that there is room for buff for them. So opening a thread about that is fine. Anyone can always open another topic for the two elephant+monk+UU neighbors - Burmese and Bengalis.
but the point was - it’s not an EARLY BENEFIT. it’s a benefit about the time you hit castle age.
their less bonus damage isn’t going to do much and Sicilians weren’t even listed on Heras top 5 (with around 3 honorable mentions) civs for scout rushing.
so you should be able to find plenty of examples of both working exceedingly well right?
considering said unit moves at .9 speed base yes. again. you’re the one claiming they work well, back it up. i very rarely see anyone going HS against archers (almost never). I see Rams from time to time, especially against Britons, but that’s about it.
they are bad though. they aren’t outright terrible but Sicilians is sitting around 45% winrate. that isn’t good. for the record the devs have stated that they try to balance for 45-55%. Sicilians is at the very bottom of that.
oh completely agree - i just don’t think either of them need 4-5 buffs. for example Sicilians i would be okay with a simple Sergeant buff.
Italians? buff GC one way or another and call it good.