This is right. Everyone likes trying new stuff, like buffed civs or Cavalry Archers. I think their playrate will decrease anyways. These statistics are wrong anyways, Vietnamese are top15 civ, not bottom 5.
2 Likes
you dont always have to make a bee line for imperial, and more often than not, its actually better to pressure earlier. as baghi confirmed, stirrups is on par with farimba, while being much cheaper and accessible earlier it is definitely a big power spike for the bulgarians in the right situationsā¦
again im not saying they are OP, but they are really good
but not advocating for any nerf yet
Blacksmith with 50% discount and 80% workrate is a big problem especially with fast opening with free miltia line upgrade, their blacksmith give them the advantage at any stage and you can easly get all blacksmith upgrades in feudal and hit castle age smoothly like anyone. Bulgarians aggression with their blacksmith upgrades in all in feudal is very hard to deal. In RBW3 tournament, the Bulgarains were sick and even the pros couldnāt deal with their all-in feudal aggression even if the tournament was about empire wars not standard.
i mean, it is hard to make a castle and take stirrups (400f 200g) until 30-35 min.
if itās a big problem why arenāt winrates reflecting that? furthermore even at 50% food cost reduction youād still be spending 250 food at the blacksmith, i very rarely see pros make that kind of feudal investment.
yeah, empire wars isnāt standard. you start in feudal which means you take away the dark age advantage of some civs, you take away the bonuses of civs like lithuanians and chinese, and the like.
furthermore it was quite clear that pros didnāt practice for what bulgarians could do and were blind sided by something they werenāt prepared for. based on your logic we should also nerf Magyars who had a great showing at RBW3 but never see use elsewhere. we also should Buff Lithuanians who went 0-2. should we buff Lithuanians?
2 Likes
I donāt think 400 food and 200 gold is an expensive cost even with castle to build
But it did!!! The winrate reflected their BS for sure especially with the last buff.
the winrates that say ābalanced civ leave me aloneā? 51.3% is fine.
At short period they jumped so fast and so high and it keeps increasing and now they are top5 winrate. Well lets see what will happen with next updates and patchs if the pick rate will change this or if their winrate will change. Within all DE civs they are now the highest winrate with last buffs.
it is hard when pumping knights and working 3 tc. also you canāt make a castle if you want to build kreposts
1 Like
yes, because they were a terrible civ and got a good buff to help them.
and thatās a problem why? the winrate is STILL BALANCED at 51.3%. that isnāt a problem.
you donāt nerf a civ because it saw a big spike after a patch. thatās expected.
seeing more play and a big jump in winrate to a number that is still balanced is not grounds for a nerf.
by that logic we should buff aztecs because they saw a 3% drop in winrate and a 32% drop in playrate.
When i talk about the fast jump in winrate i donāt care about the winrate percentage exactly, but what did their winrate jump that fast of course is the last buff. Of course buffs naturally will make the civ better but not at this rate!!! Their blacksmith discount+siege discount was too much and huge enough to change their stats so high and so fast! I am still thinking their blacksmith need nerf for sure.
of course they experienced a fast jump. what did you expect a buff to do?
because Bulgarians biggest weakness was having a terrible early game. now that they have a better early game and people are seeing the pros play them, people are playing them and it makes their numbers go up. their playrate literally doubled this patch because no one was using them before.
you donāt nerf because someone saw a big jump in play after a big buff. by your logic we should buff aztecs because they saw a 33% drop in play after last patch.
are the winrates balanced? yes. then they donāt need a nerf.
No lets put the win rate a side. Do you feel a blacksmith+50% discount and 80% work rate+50% siege discount upgrades is fine?! Because i donāt!
considering thatās pretty much all the civ has going for it? yes. look at the winrates. they say Bulgarians are balanced. i donāt see you complaining about the 100% wood discount that vietnamese get on all eco upgrades, or the 100% gold discount spanish get on all BS techs. i donāt see you complaining about the free 15% faster celt wood chopping or the free farm upgrades for Franks.
say you nerf those bonuses, what do you propose to balance out the nerf and keep the civ good?
Thatās another thing, thatās a personal opinion, not a fact. Statistics canāt say for now that bulgas arenāt balanced, on countrary seems to point out that they are.
You canāt simply say that they feels broken to you because the numbers seems high. If you canāt bring quantitative data, then bring qualitative data, give us some case analysis, some game that shows that bulgas are OP and explain why is so from your point of view.
Feelings can be useful, but needs to be still seen in a scientific prospective, so you need to go further than that, or to collect more people that feel the same thing. Feeling can be a start, but not the whole point. Qualitative data still needs to follow the scientific method.
Otherwise you are just making affirmations out of thin air, without any prove to back them up.
1 Like
I will actually remove their siege upgrade discount bonus because they are already strong in Imperial Age. I will also add the Paladin, but the Stirrups wonāt affect Paladins.
So there is a choice between faster attacking Cavaliers or generic Paladins.
1 Like
When I look at stats, they are top 11 winrate in 1650+ elo.
Feelings canāt serve as a basis for balancing.
I personally feel like aztecs arenāt that good, but I donāt demand any buffs to them, because I canāt āproveā those are necessary.
1 Like
Blacksmith discount is nice. It smooth your economy requiremientw during an aggression.
The higher working rate is good mainly in transitions or after ageing up, but it gives you an small advantage otherwise.
The siege discount is huuuuge butā¦ Their siege is vanilla. And their eco in postimperial is vanilla. They also lack bombard cannon, so they need other siege for big pushes. Massing siege rams or siege onagers would be complicated for them without that discount.
In the last patch there have been some changes that dont apply to them but will make other civs better. While Bulgarians have option to go CA in Castle you wouldnt see them do it normally. Now CA civs should perform a bit better in general (Huns, Tatars, Turks and Indians even).
Also I saw a post in AoEzone that one of the changes they made is quite important. It somehow improves all archers/ranged units and especially hand cannoneers. But running away villagers is now easier to pick with xbows and other ranged units for example. The whole balance of the game might shift towards range units as a whole and Bulgarians dont rely on such. Anyway 52% winrate for a month doesnt seem like the worse thing. I dont think we can ever achieve 50% for all civs.
For those interested check the link below. Sometimes some small changes are enough to shift the meta.
3 Likes