Vietnamese - the civilisation I have been playing since starting only a few weeks back is already a bottom-tier civilisation. But these bonuses are far too strong for each civilisation.
The problem is actually the fact that cavalry civs gets +2 pierce armour auto-matically… when light cavalry have + 4 pierce armour in castle and you take any mildly bad fight they will crush you. The big thing is still going to be cavalry in mid-game.
To adapt archer civilisations here I think different civilisations should get diffierent bonusses that compliment one another at least twice/thrice. Because for example - even Hera thinks in this manner, that double-bonuses towards 1 unit or type of play is what makes civilisations strong.
So Vietnamese need another archer bonus or one that works with their increased H.P., such as for example increased cavalry damage I think. They are very weak to cavalry & a minor bonus to even only skirmishers or cavalry archers would be something to set them up
bit more stabely.
Britons already have double-bonuses I’d argue since they’re always increasing the range of archers twice alongside upgrades & even the archery range speed. But with the nerf I could see +2 LoS for military production buildings or just archery ranges even.
Then for italians their tech is very well rounded. They get anti-cavalry with genoese, anti-infantry with gunpowder, anti-archer with knights and full upgrades (arbs & skirms alongside pavise tech), then also get condot versus gunpowder… even navel bonuses are there for them.
I am all for working on the Vietnamese. I think that the Rattan needs some frame delay adjustments to improve them against siege play. Faster moving archers could be a Vietnamese bonus and would fit in with the Rattan. It should affect all Archers to fit in with the Vietnamese, say 5%. Another alternative would be to have them gather a percentage of extra wood w/ lumberjacks, but not have that affect Paper Money.
Frame delay has the potential to make them a bit too strong. And so although I do want that changed, I feel it’d be a bit too strong there.
Their wood–gather I’ve not really found to be a problem overall, but since Paper-,Money as it is now is difficult to organise between 1 vs 1 & team games (on the latter with lots of wood that’s thousands of gold & free resource transfers).
I’m not sure how this would work overall - whether it would reasonably increase early game archer hitting & later game attack/reload rates, but Faster Moving Projectiles even for Towers, T.C.s & Castles.
I don’t know if Ethioians is faster firing archers in general or faster roload speed like thumb-ring. But alternative ways of coming about the same conclusion would be interestign if possible… and this fits with the Guerilla & Defensive/Fight Back in quick attack themes for the civilisation.
Vietnamese is a solid upper mid tier civ. Most pros would put it in top 15-top 20.
I must say there has been an influx of people on this forum eager to post their “edgy” ideas, but not so eager to learn the game first. I can’t open a thread without seeing some horrible suggestion by a relatively fresh account which is probably 1000 elo. For example, even thinking Italians are bad shows a profound lack of understanding the game. You want to give Italians Halberdier AND Siege Engineers, basically you want them to have every tech? The deal with Italians was always that they are a bit of a different kind of Byzantines, Byzantines excel at counter units + get Camels, Italians are better on water and get a small eco bonus and also are one of few civs who get both a good Stable and a good Archery Range. Their one weakness on land maps is that in late game you have to transition into Genoese due to lack of Halbs. Very often, Italians play Genoese Hussar which is one of the strongest 1v1 compositions in the game, provided you can protect your eco from raids.
You are proposing to remove that, buff their Bombard Cannons (which are already discounted) so that they can just roll you with their cheaper Imp into Halberdier into Genoese + Hussar transition without having a downtime. Excellent suggestion!
Also while Italians and Britons are struggling as we are (on Arabia) in a Knight/Monk/Light Cav/Pikeman meta, archers are still playable to a degree, and Britons while not S tier, are still like a solid A- tier, maybe B+. Certainly not bottom 10. And Italians for the sole reason of having a decent Monastery, a full Stable and a small eco bonus can’t be lower than like, mid tier on Arabia. If you want really bad civs on Arabia, it’s the civs with only 1 option in Castle Age, like Bengalis or Goths. Italians can do like at least 3 different openings on Arabia so they can’t be bottom 10.
all those bonuses have problems. mainly they came out very late, so yeah italian late game is good as is good for many civs, but they have no anti-cav outside genoese, since they lack halberdiers, and geno requires castle and have the worst elitè upgrade in the game probably. condos are weakish. only good thing is you don’t need to upgrade them, but are weaker against arrows than mere champions and with lower attack against anithing but gunpowder which is maybe the nichest niche of the game
and only bonus to archer they have is pavise that requires a castle, a paywall, and doe snot affect skirms and other archer like units, unlike vietnamese bonus which is basically the same but free and from feudal and affect more units, making vietnamese Cav Archer very good for example
First of all its a very minor 1v1 nerf for Britons. Its primarily a nerf for Team games. For 1v1 you get a nerf on archery range production but their tc repair cost is halved now which would make it harder for many civs to push them. Range upgrades, especially feudal and castle age ones for “free” is an insanely strong bonus even when you give it to an awful civ like Bengalis. And Britons are by no means a lower tier civ for 1v1, nor are they going to be after the changes. They’re probably a top-20 civ, might drop to top-25 with a few more bad matchups on 1v1 Arabia but still an insanely good civilization on closed maps, a top-10 probably, A-tier civ for hybrid and Empire wars. They don’t even need a buff, and definitely not something so broken like you’ve suggested.
UU becomes useless with no purpose for them, 1 gold reduction in champion, 2 gold reduction on other units isn’t of any significance. Crossbowman upgrade free is a crazy strong bonus. Its 300 resources, instant upgrade on top of having cheaper castle age upgrade.
The only reasonable suggestion. Won’t change things drastically but still a very useful change.
Duplicate of Korean bonus.
Most of them are super broken. In general, a few upgrades are very powerful and much more important in the game than others. Armor upgrades and bloodlines on cavalry, Attack upgrades and thumb ring for ranged particularly. And earlier the bonus comes in, stronger it is. Free bracer might still be ok, if something else is removed like say chain barding armor or husbandry but free ######### for a civ with dark age bonus is strictly broken.
Quite the opposite. Infantry will still be unviable in early castle age and archer civs will do fine. The mid-game buff through gambesons is a problem for civs that don’t get bracer, arbalesters or some anti-infantry uu. Those civs have to make crossbows to kill gambeson long swords, and those crossbows won’t scale into their imperial age.
Don’t understand how Slavs are in this list LOL. They’re a very below average civ which is why they are getting 2 buffs on top of last year’s new UT. Anyways some of those civs you’ve mentioned are receiving a direct nerf to slow them down like Hindustani eco bonus is reduced by a huge margin, cost of Shrivamsha riders, Kshatriyas increased for Gurjaras, Berbers laming and forward potential reduced. Huns in theory should get hit considerably by buffs for certain civs like Malians, Ethiopians, Incas.