I mean they did get quite an indirect nerf with the arb and xbow upgrade cost increase. Byzantines especially were hit hard because their main strategy was fast imp with their cheaper imp.
Byzantines is the last civ that needs a buff, nor the Cataphract needs.
byzantine actually is going to get a slight buff with access to tread mill crane. But I don’t think that’s a good compensation for the upcoming nerf. if they get siege engineer then yeah, it would be a better compensation.
That tech is almost never useful outside DM where it’s auto researched or in very late game teamgames where you need production buildings up or bombard towers spamming
You forgot free los techs. You underestimate how much harder it is to get raided when you can see it coming 4 or 8 range sooner.
As an Eco bonus it saves TC time and if you can keep that scout raid out for that much longer then the eco bonus is that you don’t need to worry as much.
flex civs dont get powerful units, they get beneficial units but even Byzantines nearly access all units, all techs: byzantines has one of the most powerful unit in the game and buffing it is not a good idea.
-Fastest attack speed after fireship
-Thick armor againts bonus damage. cataphract do better vs camels then paladins. Archers are good counter vs cataphracts but cata has mobility. Knights are not cost effective.
-In late game some civs has absolute domination over somecivs(like poles on aztec but catas has absolute domination on severel ones like archer+inf civ has no thumb ring (britons, vikings, aztecs, vs vs)
Catas are already powerfull unit.
1 Like
Where do the 3400 resources come from ? Paladin upgrade costs 1300f/750g, to wchich you remove 150f/100g from bloodlines and 275f/225g from blast furnace. So in imperial age, you pay 875f/425g more to get something better than cavaliers. And less if you would include the cheaper imperial.
Okay in 1v1 people do not research paladins. But in 1v1 there is a gold limit which makes byzantines arbalests, camels and trash units great after they pass their early game. And if we are talking cavaliers, we are way after that.
If you are in team game pocket with Byzantines, you can go subpaar knights with cheap camel in castle age, and you end up in imperial age with paladins that are bettern that regular FU cavaliers, which is better than at least half of the civs. And in team games you can afford paladins.
Obviously in tournaments you do not get byzantine pocket due to the civ selection and the position selection. I only remember one team game where Yo played byzantine paladins, forgot the setting but it looked far from ridiculous (not saying better than a great pocket civ)
And why play them pocket if you can play them flank ? With FU arbalests, cheap imperial age, free town watch and high building hp, they are a pretty good flank civ…
Byzantines have great range units, decent infantry thanks to great halberdiers, decent cavalry thanks to cheap heavy camels, decent siege thanks to BBC and siege rams.
But the point is they are not a top cavalry civ and are not meant to be.
And for the fact that cataphracts are niche: yes it is, you mostly need it against eagles, huskarls. But this happens. And when this happens, you are really happy to have them, it is like a civ win.
By the way, many UU are situational, and it is okay for a UU to not be the default strategy. Cataphracts are far from being the leaat used UU, really far from it.
1 Like
Catas are fine, the problem is that infantry is not meta.
There are several UU that would be great if devs find a way to make infantry more viable, at the same level than knights or xbows… around 60% (if not more) of the current UU are strong vs infantry but you don’t see infantry… not to mention some nonUU like HC
1 Like
Indian imperial camel attacks faster, has bonus damage against units actually used (cavalry and cav archers), so good at countering to the point civs have to change their ganeplan, is much cheaper to upgrade and produce and is produced from stables.
1 Like
that is why imp camles very comman and halbs can counter camels. Their attack speed not as good as catas and has no blast damage.
Imp camels have 1.6 attack rate, catas have 1.7. Japanese infantry and Bulgarian Hussar and cavalier attack faster too
What is the need of making UUs more well rounded? UUs just need a purpose that the common unit can’t do well, but get some weaker areas that makes the UUs balanced, that’s why Cataphract is overall fine balance wise (just a TT reduction is acceptable IMO).
We already had Konniks and Leiciai that were in most aspects just straight up better than knights and remember how that ended…
1 Like
The problems is that most UU designed that way have a very limited purpose.
Franks TA it’s a well designed UU, franks wants to play heavy cav and TA will help a lot against camels and pikes
Byz in the other hand has FU archers, so a UU thats good against camels and halbs does not complement their playstyle so much.
It’s neither good at melee with missing blast furnace and loses to heavy cavalry and it’s melted by ranged units. Even skirms do fine against low numbers
I do not agree that killing a unit in 75 hits and dying in 3 counts as doing fine.
Yes cataphracts lose to heavy cavalry, but that is the point of the unit: winning to infantry (and siege) and losing to cavalry and archers… And with the (costly) UT they do fine against cavalry too.
But the point of the Byzantine civ is to use canels and pikes against cavalry. As said, Byzantines are a bad civ for players needing a power unit because it requires using counter unit to be strong.
- You are not supposed to swam with cataphrats like you swarm with berzerkers or mangudais
- You do no throw your cataphracts to arbalests and cavaliers like you do not throw huskarls against cavaliers and champions. You mix it with other units.
1 Like
They’re ranged unit and trash, 30-40 skirms isn’t an unrealistic number until plate barding Elite catas come out.
Paladins: Look what they need to mimic a fraction of our power