Yeah, I’m saying historically they should be one of the strongest post-imperial age civs. They were still the dominant world power for most of the time covered by Age of Empires III, so it makes little sense to have them weak late game in Age of Empires II.
but if you make them strong for castle, imp, and post imp, it leaves little time for other civs to do anything against them. its a balance point. this game may be historically influenced, but it isn’t historically accurate.
Italians are defined as archer civ. And their UT suggests a theme of armored archers. Clearly free archer armors is following this theme, despite being a pretty weak bonus overall. Italians need something and, even if small, this is fine
I am not a big fan of this idea… but I agree that Italians condos are too weak and need a buff.
Genoese crossbowman does need a buff in training time: it takes more than a cataphract for training
In this perspective the buffs seem quite intuitive to me. GC buff and free archer armors are pretty needed… a really see that a lot of people are supporting this for Italians. Similar for Portuguese (which less consensus tbh)
The main problem I see is that finding a way to buff them while keeping their uniqueness is very hard
If keeping their uniqueness, how is this for an idea: Turkish Hand Cannoneers now only cost food, but their base damage is reduced from 17 to 10 (or something). These trash HCs would give the Turks a way to actually defend against Pikes/Halbs in a trash war, making their Hussars viable in that situation. It would also help them deal with Imperial Age Calvary, though Camels would still be highly recommended. They’d still presumably be at a disadvantage against Halb/Ranged combo but they’d at least stand a chance. If they want the more powerful HC roll filled, they will simply build the Janissaries instead, though massing UUs is obviously much harder than massing regular units.
I don’t know, just spitballing here.
Somehow they need a buff improving the trash war. Trash HC may work if the damage is reduced.
I have proposed a gold trickle like 1 or 2 relics (maybe from feudal or CastleAge). Some people say that this is OP, even if I think that a 2 relics advantage is very balanced as we have seen in 20 years…
wouldn’t be enough, they would get wrecked hard by skirms. 10 damage, with their low rate of fire, combined with their low accuracy would make it absolutely not a good option.
I would just give them Elite Skirms and/or Pikes.
because you can deny relics or even take them away. your gold trickle cannot be denied. it will always be there. no matter what. literally every other form of resource gathering can be denied, including the feitoria.
Is this so important? The fact that it cannot be denied?
If this is the only issue, just making the first monastery you build containing 2 relics? Even of I was thinking of a similar thing to compensate a letis nerf…
10 was an example number, I don’t know what the proper number would be. Regardless, the counter to Skirms would be Hussars in this situation. I agree that Elite Skirm/Pike is the simplest solution.
Happy to notice that solt video confirms how terrible the weak civs are…
1 Like
Kinda surprised with the Tatars, Free Thumb Ring is huge!!
Did he consider the period where they were without it?
Don’t you worry guys, their Flaming Camels are so bad, their addition clearly nullified all the other buffs Tatars got in April!
#CLEARLY
I think they are fine. Ca should have 1-2 less frame delay then Tatars would be much better. Pathing destroy Franks. New CA animation destroy Huns and Tatars.
However I will be able to abuse their strong Keshiks and Hussars just because they are clearly underrated.
But whats the point of Flaming Camels? It’s the worst unit ever creatured. Much worse than Shotel Warriors, Elephant Archers and Steppe Lancers
The flaming camel is a very situational units, but it is fine, considering that Tatars have a great UU extremely gold efficient. I mean, even Missionaries or elephant archer are not top UUs, but at least their civs have another UU which is extremely powerful.
The problem is that some civs like Italians and Portuguese have both the UUs that are situational. Which is very sad considering that these two civs are designed to play with their UUs (GC should be the cavalry answer, while OG was the way to go for portos)
“It is fine” you say
You appease and talk cautiously and defensively
If you admit the truth first,
only then can we talk
Balance TKs, Shotels, Jags, Karambits, Lancers, Longswords, Missionaries, HCs, Flaming Camels, Gbetos, EAs, Ballista Eles, WEs, GCs, Condos, Genitours, Orjan Guns, Cataphracts, Mamelukes, Turtles and Siege Towers NOW!
LOL to the jargon thrown around all the time. “SITUATIONAL”
I don´t know wether this is suggested already or not, but I write it anyways. Maybe someone finds it interesting.
Regarding some UU:s, I think those that resemble the Champion-line needs to be buffed, since they all have been indirectly nerfed after the introduction of the “Supplies”-tech. Champions with Supplies are simply too good to make use of these units in many games. The UU:s that comes to mind for me are Woad Raiders, Berserkers, Samurai and Jaguar Warriors. Maybe there are more?
I think the best way to buff these units in comparsion to the Champion-line would be too reduce their food-cost. Maybe even make the Supplies-effect apply also to them, making them cost 45 f 30 g after Supplies instead of 60 f 30 g?
Just a thought!
Aztecs, celts, and vikings do not need any buffs right now, and despite supplies buffing champions, woads and berserks still see use.
Jags rarely see use as is either before or after supplies.
Infantry UUs are definitely under used. But the majority of Infantry civ do not need a buff… however it would be nice to see them more, and clearly extending supplies to these units is an option