The Burgundians still OP

It will never be a fair design nor a good one. You are talking like every game will go to a late game. On the other hand how many times do you see Paladin 1v1? With Burgundians you will always see and how many civs already have better Paladins or access to Paladin?! You my friend look at things from blind angles.

When you already know that the Burgundians have strong cavalry in the mid game, you should be prepared for it to support you to survive to the late game, like walls, pikes, whatever instead of complaining about them playing to their due advantage.

Besides playing, I also watched some Burgundians’ games. Yes, they are indeed powerful, but they are not considered OP either in my opinion. At least I’ve seen quite a few people survive to the late game and take down Burgundians.

4 Likes

it does change stuff. is it a small change? yes. but you don’t nerf a civ into the ground. the stats say Burgundians are not overperforming right now. If they are too strong we will see come tournament time.

so since the bonus is still too strong in your opinion equalizer you should be able to provide a source that shows them being too strong right now?

Gurjaras are still more concerning than Burgundians

7 Likes

Gurjaras. Hindustanis. Mayans. Etc

5 Likes

Burgundian dont need nurf.
Frank, mayan, gurjaras is need nurf

4 Likes

Cavalry >> Infantry.
Infantry can get way with some massive civ bonuses while Cavalry can’t.

1 Like

definitely true, but Burgundians also lack Bloodlines to offset the bonus.

1 Like

The Stable tech bonus are powerful indeed, but it’s balanced by lacking Bloodlines like MatCauthon said, and it’s also the backbone of the gameplay of the Burgundians.

In my opinion, if their cavalry is considered too strong, it’s because their early economy is so good that the effect of Stable tech bonus is amplified. To be honest, lowering tech discounts won’t effectively nerf them, and lowering the early gathering efficiency is the best way to control them I think.

With archer upgrade cost increased after 22 years, I can see that coming. Maybe a new civ. And their UU will be an archer with charge attack.

I think early Cavalier at half cost as a compensation for Bloodlines is just too much.

Well, I think that’s an advantage they deserve. They rely on this advantage to take their opponents. As the game progresses, the advantage will get weaker and weaker. By comparison, the Franks’ free extra health is still the better and more solid bonus in my opinion.

Even if we reduce the discount, in their booming economy, the difference of prices would make little difference. But if we start to adjust from the economic side, then even if we don’t change the discount, we could still limit them more effective. I would prefer to have their economy techs only provide 50% effect in earlier ages (eg Double-Bit Axe only provides 10% faster until reaching Feudal Age). This should make them a little slower at spawning cavalry and the timing to advance ages.

I also prefer to reduce the research time of economy techs, rather than the cost of food. It wasn’t a very necessary change, but it could slow down their cavalry strategy by having less food.

First go and see how to nerf Gurjaras, Mayans, Chinese, Franks, Britons, the Turks and Poles on Arena and Vikings on water.
Chinese needs to lose blast furnace for instance.

Btw I saw the ?! Again @FINEMOOD9876 are you equalizer?? Last time I saw someone complaining about Burgundians was him in such way

5 Likes

at high level nobody techs into Cavalier atm, the meta is 3-4 TC boom into UU with full walls and few defensive Monks/Skirms/Mangonels.

Burgundians also don’t have THAT flexible of a tech tree, one of their supposed “power units”, the Handcannoneer with extra attack, doesn’t rly work and is never used, their Paladin isn’t viable long-term, their Hussar is below average, their Skirms lack last armor, and they lack heavy CA and Arbalest and Siege Engineers.

I think Burgundians are in a nice spot atm, if they get nerfed further they need buffs to their late game which is lackluster atm.

Btw Cavalier isn’t even THAT strong of a Castle age unit, you have other civs with comparable power spikes, Ethiopian faster firing Crossbows (equates to ~+1 attack which is comparable to +2 attack given from Cavalier), Lithuanian Knights with Relics, Magyar Knights (instant +2), early Mangudai by Mongols, etc.

Burgundian Archery Range is quite awful, and their late game if you take out Flemish Revolution (which believe it or not is fairly niche in its application - it assumes you boom unimpeded to ~160 vills), is not great.

I believe he is. Especially when you add in his complaints about sicilians, and the way he insults those who disagree with him, and thr fact hes not backing up his arguments with any sort of data, pro opinions, or tournament results

2 Likes

I’ve never seen anyone think that the Chinese are OP due to their melee units.
Almost all of the balancing issues I’ve seen about the Chinese are about CKN.
If increasing the cost (the most frequently mentioned solution) is not the way that able to implement or improve the problem, maybe we can consider other ways. Make Rocketry only +1 attack for CKN and the elite fire only 4 arrows per volley.

I’ve seen people complain the problem isn’t so much their melee as their adaptability due to having a plethora of options. hitting BF at least accomplishes that. I’m not really a fan of the idea, but i can see why it would be considered.

I think versatility is the core design and main identity of the Chinese.
Losing the blast furnace just made them a classic archer civilization, but the issue of the strength of their archers may still be there. Not a fan too.

3 Likes

the reason Chinese are considered OP is that by early Castle age they not only have more resources gathered thanks to the 2 extra Villagers, but their techs are cheaper, allowing for easier transitions and in Castle age, but also partially in Imp they have a full tech tree which allows them to play anything.

Notably they can play Camel, Knight, CA, full Crossbow in Castle age and in Imp those options stay long-term options because they get heavy CA (missing only PT which is a good enough CA), FU Cavalier, FU Arbalest, Halbs etc.

It’s basically like playing vs Byzantines where they have an answer for everything only they have an eco bonus so when you are in late Feudal/early Castle you always have the feeling Chinese are 1 step ahead of you, it’s very hard to remove this lead they naturally create in most games.

Most games vs Chinese go like this, they hit Castle age 30s earlier than you and you thought you had a good Castle Age time, you decide to make Knights, you are at 6 Knights, they have 8 and 1 Monk while you are still building the forward Monastery.

Yes if you take a good fight it’s possible to beat the Chinese but on even terms they are always ahead without rly having to do anything which is why they are so strong, if you notice most top tier civs are those that can create an advantage without the player having to do some miracle or necessarily find damage.

1 Like

Maybe that is what they should be.

Regarding CA, I think it is not the issue. Many civs have same Castle Age CA, and some have even better.

Regarding Camel, I believe it’s okay to remove Heavy Camel, or maybe even the entire Camel line, especially after the civs like Jurchens, Khitans and Tanguts/Tibetans are introduced.

Don’t want to divert the topic. I think it is the flexible eco and ease to switch or transition from one unit to another. Chu-ku-nu can be nerfed but the civ in general needs a nerf on the flexibility.

Exactly.
I’ll remove discount on unit upgrades and maybe improve non unit upgrade discount by 5%.