The Chinese Village

The Chinese variation of the house (Village) is currently unbalanced, being overpowered. I understand and agree that China as a civilisation needs buffs in order to remain competitive, however, the previous continual buffing of the Village creates clear, uneven values of buildings in DE. I will explain in much more detail now.

First let’s look at the current version of the village:

  • Costs 180 wood
  • Has 2500 HP and provides a walling protection (like all buildings)
  • A line of sight (LOS) of 32 I believe
  • Provides 20 population space to start (its main function)
  • Functions as the Chinese equivalent of a livestock pen with 5 maximum gatherers
  • Provides a shipment point for home city shipments
  • Can garrison up to 20 villagers
  • Provides accessibility to the population upgrades for China

The village has too many functions, and is too cheap for everything it includes. I agree that the village should be valued at 180 wood: to make it a cheaper alternative to other civilisations houses, and so China can focus less on cutting trees in the early game. However if you give estimate prices for each function based on other building’s statistics and their functions, I calculated the estimated price of village based on its function to be at least 250 wood or more.

  • Based on 4 straight walls making a square shape (to resemble the shape of a building and the pathing it blocks) for all/most buildings that would approximately be 20 wood (5 wood x 4 walls)

  • To calculate the effective cost of population space alone I looked at the Indian house at 70 wood cost, as its only function besides walling/protection of that small space, is to provide 10 population, meaning that 70 wood - 20 wood (walling effect) = 50 wood for 10 population, giving 5 wood per population space based on a civilisation’s bonus (cheaper house). For the village providing 20 population space, this means 100 wood of the village should be allocated just for population.

  • I personally believe that the livestock pen should be much cheaper; however if you count the fact that the village can have up to 5 herdables fattening on ONE village at a time (and most players would have multiple villages), it has access to produce goats, and has the selective breeding technology accessible, it would function as half a livestock pen (at conservative prices) rounding down to 100 wood for this function.

  • Guessing looking at the town centre, the outpost, war huts, blockhouses and other buildings with a shipment point, for the only function of having a shipment point would cost at least 50 wood as a low measure (up to 150 wood) based on the percentage function of the outpost being used as a shipment point over the defensive aspect of that building.

  • To garrison population I estimated to be at least (as a minimum) 2 wood per population housed, meaning 40 wood for the village ability to garrison villagers based on rough calculation from the tc’s functions.

If you add these costs up, it totals 20 + 100 + 100 + 50 + 40 = 310 wood (as conservative measures).
What this means is that certain buildings have certain functions that are valued much less or severely less when compared to the village.

My suggested balance for the village (nerfs and buff):

  • Reduce the number of maximum garrisoned villagers within the village to 10 down from 20. This change means that villagers can still hide inside the village, however much less, meaning villagers must be more separated and therefore more vulnerable.
  • Reduce the line of sight to 18 down from 32. This makes the building more in line with the LOS of other buildings, and yes even though it has a shipment point as well 18 LOS is still considerably larger than other houses.
  • Reduce the maximum number of herdables being fattened at the village to 4 down from 5. This makes the number the same as the Japanese shrine, and more comparable. This will mean that the herdables (when more than 4) must be spread out to other villages, making them slightly more vulnerable.
  • Last nerf suggestion is the biggest one, removal of the shipment point at the village altogether. Let be honest, the village has too many functions especially since with the removal of the shipment point, it would still be able to garrison villagers, provide 20 population space and function as a livestock pen equivalent.
  • Buff: the village should be given greater build xp (and therefore also bounty xp). This would boost China’s economy and experience curve in a game.

In summary, if you have read this long you are really cool. I believe that China needs numerous other buffs (don’t get me started on flamethrowers), to their units and other economic components, and that the chinese village should remain affordable and cheap at 180 wood, but it should be balanced with some or all of the suggestions I made above.

Have a good day


Yes, we need to consider somethings that give us too much compensation for their value.

1 Like

Chinese do not have Musketeer or Hussar equivalent (Steppe Rider is not Hussar equivalent, it is actually a Siege unit), so they do need all their Village tricks at full potential.
It is not like China is OP, so there is no need to further tweak the Village, specially with nerfs.


Well, the author’s suggestion seems to have all the really important features and only remove the less needed ones.

It may not suit all situations, but it may be better to balance by removing some unnecessary features than to make the price less expensive.

1 Like

Yes, my point is that China needs more military options or buffs, and I agree China is not OP, that is why i believe they need buffs, but the village itself has too much value for every function it has.

Do you know the Chinese weakly against cavalry?It weakly against Japan and the India.They r Asian country!

I acknowledge the village is great for China.But,Chinese No 400Wood.No 3 settlers.No strong Cavalry in age2.No Musketeer against cavalry.You said is later game.But,I said 1v1 is most important in the game!At least,Chinese not op.If you think you want to do that.
StepperRider become better
Keshik become better
Village become 150 Wood can let me send 3 villagers
Giving Chinese 400 Wood Choice
Thanks a lot


Isn’t it more straightforward for a house to consume 150 wood and provide 15 people?

I agree.Be like The India.Only 70 wood get 10 population!Chinese 180 Wood get 20 Population and 25% pet gather speed!!I think this is not broken the banlance!

And Chinese is not op,weaken Chinese?The Japanese?The India?The France?

China villages work differently. They actually provide more population as you upgrade them, reaching into 220. I think they are the only house with pop capacity upgrades (which is nice and makes China unique).

1 Like

Allowing more buildings to be built can reach 220

Yes, you can achieve the same thing in other ways, but let’s not demote all civilizations to play the same way. We have aoe2 for that.


Indians only get taht, because their Vills cost Wood, which is actually a HUGE negative.
That is also why they have the first 2 Wood upgrades for free, otherwise they would be too slow.


And Chinese get what?You said the India villager need wood.But India starting is 400 wood and 200 Food.More than Chinese.And India have 15% wood gather speed.Inportant the India a shipment giving one villager!Although speed is 107%.The India Army card I don’t want to say!Ignore the Villager cost question.Chinese 180/20,India 70/10.I admit that Chinese villages have more functions
Against cavalry ability,Game rhythm.control map ability.Age 2 up speed.
No said Chinese good for FF.If they weakly FF.Please Delete China.At least in the forum Chinese Disadvantageous against India.This is fact!If you think Chinese op.Tell me.
If you think Chinese village is op.Okey.It can become that.But,Please giving Chinese 3 villagers card.400Wood age up option.Better quality Heavy cavalry in age2.Keshik become a half of Bowman.
I agree you more
Thanks a lot!
Best wish

That is because they will always assign less Vills to Food that other civs, so they need 200 Food, and 400 Wood.

All their buildings still cost Wood, so they usually have fewer buildings than any other civ in Age 2, because they will want to keep making Vills.

China has 300 Wood, it is enough for a Village and a Market, and almost enough to get Hunting Hawks upgrade.
China actually has the advantage in Economy, compared to India.

I would nerf the Village HP if they give them an attack (albeit a small one).

That attack could be improved with the Village attack card

But honestly china is in no way OP, even in team games, it struggles to reach late fortress. Nerfing it is not the way to go


So lets make all euro civs have special house to be fair.
100w for 10 pop house is really a joke.

1 Like

I agree, China overall needs buffs not nerfs, I am saying that statistically the village building is overpowered for its cost, the village needs a nerf but China in other areas needs certain buffs

When we compare the average European house of 100 wood for 10 population without any additional bonuses, to the Indian house (70 wood), Japanese Shrine, or Chinese Village, the european house seems underpowered. However this I consider balanced because those civilisations have other specific civ bonuses, where a better house is not one of them.