Maybe but from nerf 20 to 25 f, make eagle header for use in feudal and castle age, I agree they strong at flood push but it until to imperial age more. 30 f I don’t think many people will agree with you, and 45 g I don’t think so, make same g with archer but stronger so much 
- Eagles food cost increased to 30F instead of 25.
No. Maybe increase the gold cost and lower the food cost instead.
Malians
- Buildings cost -10% wood instead of -15%.
No.
Byzantines
- Camel riders, Skirmishers and Spearman lines 15% cheaper instead of 25%.
No.
Incas
- Military units cost -10/15/20/25% food in Dark/Feudal/Castle/Imperial instead of -15/20/25/30% food in Dark/Feudal/Castle/Imperial.
No. They already don’t have supplies.
Gurjaras
- Start with 1 Forage Bushes instead of 2.
YES. Great suggestion. It should be more of a strategic choice if you garrison sheep. It should hurt in the early game.
Franks
- Castles no more have 25% discount and back to normal cost.
Lol.
I am in favor of nerfing Franks, but removing their identity, I mean wtf?
Celts
- Infantry units move 15% faster start in dark age instead of starting in feudal.
Yes.
LOL. What make them broken is the cheap food not the gold. Ok make it 30F, 45G then.
Malians winrate now is 60% do you know that? The civ didn’t even need buffs in the first place and the devs buffed both of their eco and UU. Then what do you suggest?
Even though this bonus already cover the lack of supplies.
Identity? But their identity that they are the knight civ not the cheap dirt castles spammer, what identity? The civ is already strong and cheap castles make them spam their UU easier which counter their counters.
Byzantines now are one of the most civs that need a nerf, they are so strong and hard to deal with them at any type of maps.
The imbalance suggestions of the first post should not be taken into account. Many inconsistent. Nerf of well-balanced things and buffs of abused things (example: peekaboo spam eagle)
LOL. What make them broken is the cheap food not the gold. Ok make it 30F, 45G then.
They have no cavalry, so Eagle warrior have to be strong to compensate it somewhat. Compared to Huskarls they are already extremely balanced. The unusual costs are part of their identity. So rather nerf the gold cost, not the food cost.
Malians winrate now is 60% do you know that? The civ didn’t even need buffs in the first place and the devs buffed both of their eco and UU. Then what do you suggest?
I don’t know that they have 60% win rate. As far as I can see it is 51.31%. But I know that they didn’t need buffs in the first place. If there should be a change I would suggest to give them 30% longer lasting gold again.
Identity? But their identity that they are the knight civ not the cheap dirt castles spammer, what identity? The civ is already strong and cheap castles make them spam their UU easier which counter their counters.
Their Cav-bonus barely compensates for missing Bloodlines. 25% cheaper castles is the biggest bonus. I would say the Forager bonus for them is a mistake. Maybe just remove it again if necessary. It was already lowered to 10% recently. Having their UU and Hand Canoneer also makes not much sense. Maybe remove HC if necessary.
Didn’t you get tired of this dumb 1999 arguemnt? And seriously are you comparing a generic unit for the meso civs which all of them have great eco to a UU for Goths?
They have 60% winrate at +1900 ELO.
It won’t help to remove hand canoneer at all. The cheap castles make them take map control so easy and also defend so easy and allows them to spam ther UU which counters pikes and halbs very well. The cheap castles should not stay at all and if not then make it 10% cheaper instead of 25%.
Didn’t you get tired of this dumb 1999 arguemnt? And seriously are you comparing a generic unit for the meso civs which all of them have great eco to a UU for Goths?
Well, It is true that these civs don’t have cavalry, so they can have something else that is great. Eagles warriors are good, but already extremely balanced compared to Huskarls. It is not even close. They have less pierce armor, less bonus damage, and take much longer to create. And the cost was already nerfed. Nerfing it once is one thing, but repeatedly nerfing something that is in the game for very long isn’t right. For me Eagle Wariors do not seem even that strong. They are a joke compared to Huskarls or lets say “very balanced”.
They have 60% winrate at +1900 ELO.
It is a low samples size and diferent websites say different numbers.
It won’t help to remove hand canoneer at all. The cheap castles make them take map control so easy and also defend so easy and allows them to spam ther UU which counters pikes and halbs very well. The cheap castles should not stay at all and if not then make it 10% cheaper instead of 25%.
They had these cheap castles since AoK. I agree that Throwing axemen can be annoying and a bit op in comparison with Castles and Heavy Cavalry, and castle spamming can be also annoying. But this is their identity. Make the early game more difficult by removing the Forager bonus and maybe change the casle cost to -150 stone so it is flat 500 instead of 488. But the three main boni which Franks have since 1999 should be basically unchanged.
Whatever I look to your replies all go to the same direction and lead to same result, which is:
" It was in the game long time ago, it was in the game since AOK…"
Believe me my friend those bonuses are not holy books from the heavens. Many things changed since 1999. If changing them will bring fair play and fair match up and better balance why not to change?
Which pro players made these suggestions? Please be specific about your sources.
Whatever I look to your replies all go to the same direction and lead to same result, which is:
" It was in the game long time ago, it was in the game since AOK…"
Believe me my friend those bonuses are not holy books from the heavens. Many things changed since 1999. If changing them will bring fair play and fair match up and better balance why not to change?
Concistency is a value. So there have to be good reasons to change a civ. For example strengthening the identity of a civ or to make it more interessting. For example it would be an idea to give Gujaras 1-2 sheep instead of Forage bushes at the start, to point out even more the decision they have to make in how much sheep they want to garrison. The bushes just have the function to make it possible to garrion all sheep. There is not really an independent idea behind the forage bushes.
So changes are for balance and for better implementation of an existing idea of a civ. But removing ideas from a civ like Franks cheap castles is not ok imo. Also balance-wise I think they would fall very low.
Yeah this why we listed these suggestions, because all these civs have imbalance issues due to their performance and the unfair match ups they bring on the ladder and the huge advantages they have.
I even doubt if removing castles bonus will make them fall, at least make it 15% instead of 25%. Franks have advantages from dark to imp, free farms, bushes bonus, free hp, ranged UU with melee damage, BBC, Handcannoneer and FU Barracks.
A 1700 rated player who got banned and now evaded the ban.
1 Like
Yeah this why we listed these suggestions, because all these civs have imbalance issues due to their performance and the unfair match ups they bring on the ladder and the huge advantages they have.
Ok, here some suggestions for alternative changes which go better along with the identity of civs/units:
General
- Eagles food cost increased to 30F instead of 25.
Eagles gold increased to 55G instead of 50. Reason: Efficient gold-focused economy is part of the identity of a civ like Mayans. It is a cool thing about them that they can work with low economy with just many vils on gold. This is balanced by their suffering when gold runs out.
- Monks no more able to garrison in TCs.
They are already so vulnerable to Mangonels for example. Instead remove the stupid trick that their conversion time is stored in the monk instead of the enemy unit. When they change from converting a building to a unit, there should be an ############ timer for the unit. This is just an nonsensical interaction and oversight by the devs.
- Heresy cost reduced to 650G instead of 1000G and available to all civs.
Give it to Persians. I have no opinion regarding the other civs, but “all civs” is most likely to much. It is normal that techs are not available to all civs.
- Starting Eagle scout no more able to garrison in TC.
Some more hate against eagles here. What about changing the Camel Scout instead? Give it only 1 damage in dark age but all the attack boni. It should beat Scouts in dark age but suck hard against villagers, so it has a stronger identity. It should be a Camel unit with all Camel benefits and weaknesses, and not generic.
Aztecs
- Researching Monastery techs gives monks +3hp instead of +5.
Seems to much. Maybe +4. But it is the strongest bonus of Aztecs, it would be better if it is not nerfed. If you give all civs Heresy this is way too much of a nerf. If you give Heresy to everyone it should be +6hp.
Malians
- Buildings cost -10% wood instead of -15%.
- Universeties work 50% faster instead of 80%.
Rather nerf the gold bonus. Apparently the devs thought 30% laster longing gold was too weak. Instead of faster gold collection it would be an more interessting idea to let the gold just last even longer, like 50% longer. So the idea would be just endless gold but not faster gold, what is maybe more balanced.
Burgundians
- Monasteries generate food rate reduced by half.
- Gunpowder units deal 15% more damage instead of 25%.
- No more acess to redemption.
25% means actually +4 pierce attack, +3 attack against infantry and an extra +1 attack against Rams
This should be more clear. Just change it to “+4 damage” without increase of bonus damages, which may be unbalanced against certain civs.
Byzantines
- Camel riders, Skirmishers and Spearman lines 15% cheaper instead of 25%.
- Advancing to imperial age 20% cheaper instead of 33%.
Byzantines don’t seem op to me, and this is too much. -20% cheaper units seems more discussable, but I would not suggest that.
Portuguese
- All units cost -10% gold instead of -20%.
The civ is already runied probably. Just get rid of the damn Forager bonus. It is a nice bonus, but it is not worth it if everything else is nerfed about the civ. Give back cheap Feitorias. We are talking here about nerfing core aspects of Franks and Portuguese, while such Foragers boni were added. Don’t you see that the Forager boni are the problem?
Mayans
- Resources last 10% longer instead of 15%.
- Team bonus changed to wall 25% cheaper instead of 50%.
- Hunting and fish traps no more affected by last resources bonus.
I am against the ressource nerf, but what is really bad here is that you don’t want it to apply to specific things like hunt and fish traps. You want to streamline every civ and that is really terrible. Special use cases for boni are the fun part, and such suggestions make me angry.
The number for the wall discount make all no sense. Walls cost 5 stone. So with 50% and 25% it is unclear what the result is. Incas have effectivly -1 stone cost. Maya should be a bit better. Just make it “-2 stone” for Mayans. It should be rather -3 than -1, since it is a unique thing about the civ.
Incas
- Military units cost -10/15/20/25% food in Dark/Feudal/Castle/Imperial instead of -15/20/25/30% food in Dark/Feudal/Castle/Imperial.
- Blacksmith imperial age upgrades no more applied to villagers.
The cost for all the effected units were changed in detail before the discount was introduced. So a broad change of the discount seems reckless and wrong. But in case of a balance issue, it is maybe the correct thing to do.
However I disagree with the villager armor nerf. The armor upgardes should apply to villagers from feudal age, since this is the time they can help most against raiding. Maybe such a change would also justify the discount nerf for the military.
Gurjaras
- Team bonus changed to Camels and Elephant units are created 15% faster instead of 25%.
- Start with 1 Forage Bushes instead of 2.
- Shrivamsha rider no more dodge ranged melee attacks nor gunpowder shots.
Gunpowder does just pierce damage. I am against such special rules like distinguishing it from other pierce damage. But maybe Shrivamsha riders could just have 10 pirece armor for 5 consecutive shots in 20 seconds instead of dodging it. So high pierce damage would do some damage like against Huskarls. Another idea is to just give the unit high pirce damage without special mechanic. This special mechainic does not really belong into the game. The idea of the unit is to be a mounted Huskarl anyway.
Saracens
- Mameluke gold cost reduced to 70 instead of 85.
- Scout line +1 attack start in feudal.
Seems a bit random. Mameluke are one of the strongest unique units in the game. Cost reduction is very nice for them, but this is like the Malians buffs. 2 month later some will come with stupid nerf ideas. Mamelukes are fine.
The Scout buff is against the Saracens identity. Saracens are a Camel civ not a Horse civ. Saracens are also a Archer civ with bonus damage against buildings. So if there is a feudal buff it should be more damage against buildings for Archers. A cavalry bonus is the last thing a Camel, Archer and Navy civ should have.
It did apply in feudal in the past, but was changed because incan tower rushes were too strong.
But he specifically said “These balance changes were made based on high level 1v1 Arabia/Arena and S tier tournaments performance and some pros tier lists and suggestions”
It did apply in feudal in the past, but was changed because incan tower rushes were too strong.
In combination with the cheaper towers it is maybe to strong for this usage.
It should be defensivly strong, not offensively.
Incas are an Pikemen civ. They have cheaper Pikmen, and their unique unit is an better Pikemen. Maybe we can give the Inca villegers something like +3 damage against cavalry and maybe +1 pirece armor instead of the infantry armor upgardes. It would be nice if they could resist enemy Cavalry and maybe also Archer attacks better from the early game on. But in combat with enemy villagers there should maybe not be a bonus.
It seems you know nothing about history. Saracens got the best light cavs, horse breads and mobility in early medieval ages and in the whole world. You literally know nothing.
Anyway instead of commenting on every point with “I don’t like it, No”, just say no to everything, better for you and me.
It seems you know nothing about history. Saracens got the best light cavs, horse breads and mobility in early medieval ages and in the whole world. You literally know nothing.
I am talking about their in-game identity. Their real historic identity may be different. It is like Goths having Hand canoneers but Chinese don’t. Its not historically correct, but that doesn’t mean it should be changed in the game.
Anyway instead of commenting on every point with “I don’t like it, No”, just say no to everything, better for you and me.
I don’t say no to fast Celtic militia in dark age and less Berrys for Gujaras. There are also a lot of supposed changes I have no strong opinion about, like more expensive Leitis.
Saracens have been there is worst 5 civs for many years, I don’t think reducing their Mameluke gold cost and giving their scout line a buff would hurt.