The Portuguese are about renewability, diversity, and precision. But at the expense of strong military bonuses and the final tiers of some key units.
It’s one of my favorite civs, no nerfs please.
Absolutely no. Unit already nerfed last patch. Let the change play out for a few months. Slow moving melee infantry units with 0 base p.armor in castle age are always situational.
LOL, its now a complete garbage unit. Its the worst generic non-siege unit in the game already and you want to nerf it more?
Champis are supposed to be weak vs CAVALRY, not infantry.
None of this matters because those ships are very situational and made in fewer numbers. Lou Chan is very good but has low range, Drommon has low range but good dps when ground attacked on groups of land units and siege. Anyways water gameplay is still poorly designed and needs a lot more changes and this isn’t one of them.
One of the worst civs if you don’t do some kind of siege push all-in. Absolutely no need to nerf it. This change can be fine if towers, generic infantry play and siege are re-designed to become more mainstream like cavalry and ranged units.
A zero impact change. Chinese are OP because they can hit castle age quite fast, afford too many techs while still being able to add tcs and do vills in the castle age. 5% extra in a few imp techs isn’t going to change the outcome by much. Ideally the civ should get +2 vills for -150 food, -75 wood in the start so that its balanced at both pro and noob levels. Or should get +3 vills for -150 food, -50 wood but 10% slower work rate in dark age. Both changes shrink the villager lead to 1 vill and that’s not A LOT compared to what most other civs get.
No. Villager discount nerf early game was tried already and it made them garbage. Much slower to castle age. Civ lacks Knights and handling crossbows + siege, eagles, fire lancers will be very difficult if they’re much slower to castle age. Ghulam require castles which cost 650 stone. Given this, the balance is fine. Viper executing phosphorus is just Viper’s good build and quickwalling skills, not that Ghulam are broken.
Did you read last patch’s notes at all? Champis have been destroyed. They’re not even usable anymore. What bonus will Incas even have if you remove the food discount? Makes zero sense.
This could be an ok change if militia line is more mainstream. Like right now 9 out of 10 games its scouts, skirms into some other generic stable or ranged unit. Even in maa opening, its usually just the first 3 or 4 maa and then followed by ranged units. If that somehow changes to make Longswords main stream, this CA bonus could be removed. Otherwise its bad since Japanese used to be a bottom 10 civ on open and closed maps before that +2 bonus. What’s needed for the right balance for Japanese is their fishing ship hp being reduced or workrate bonus starting from feudal age, so that they’re less powerful in hybrid maps, the setting where they’re considered OP.
Will be ok to do this if Elephants are reworked to become more playable without making them overpowered in the scout-archer TG maps.
This could be fine if the civ gets thumb ring and the extra resources are for each tc.
Its not brutal at all. Its a very modest bonus. This civ was abysmal before this bonus with <40% winrates for 5 years. Its just a very decent civ now. If Chinese, Mongols and a bunch of other situationally broken civs and units are fixed, the thing I’d probably change for this civ is removing extra hp on fire lancers for free and making it a part of Chakras (Battle elephants +100 hp, Fire lancers +15 hp)
When units do what they’re supposed to do, its not OP. Knights killing vills and crossbows is not OP. Crossbows killing monks, camels and longswords is not OP. Likewise Tiger cavalry, an expensive unit produced from the castle not dying to cheap ranged units is normal. Make monks, camels to fight them. Since you seem to have missed the past 2 patch notes - This civ’s main issue was Xianbei numbers and their training time and cost have been nerfed. Let it play out for a few months first to first verify if this civ is even problematic anymore.
Phosphorus strats still work only because of resources spawning too close to the tc making it very difficult to get value from forward feudal aggression. Right way to handle that is fix resource distances, make stone prices at market more expensive and buff towers (simply reduce bonus damage taken from vills and increase attack vs skirms and vills). Not by making a whole bunch of units unusable and forcing skirmishers upon everyone.
Anyways major imbalances in the game at this point imo is skirmishers being overpowered at higher elos, towers and generic infantry units fetching too little value for cost, water gameplay design still being equally awful, siege towers nerfed back to being completely useless, Dravidians and 3 champi civs (except Tupi) being extremely weak and flawed by design, some expensive unique units and Elephant units being limited to TGs. I’d still want a lot of balance changes addressing these issues and some situationally overpowered units like Conquistadors, Aztec monks, Elite Mangudai, Houfnice.
I’m not sure how much to trust the winrates right now. According to the winrates Tupi are 41/53 but Hoang seems to be doing amazing with them. Perhaps people are stuck at higher elo’s and slowly falling back down or maybe the civs require a lot more skill now?
Need to ask some pro player on their opinion of the current state of the civs.
The winrate for the Tupi is 48.8% overall. The winrates for high level ELO e.g. 1900+ are distorted. At such high ELO only 5 civs do not have a winrate above 50%. Funnily, Incas have a super low winrate across all ELO ranks. They are really unplayable competitively.
2 Likes
Chemistry I think could be removed from the Tupi (elite blackwood archers could then get +1 damage to compensate). Would then become a bit of a gimmick of the civ (so low tech it doesn’t get chemistry, but has poison arrows instead). And then there would be the option of adding a graphics change to poison arrows (not likely to happen). Would hurt their naval late-game, but it’s not like the American civs had good navies anyways.
Khmer have a strong late game: FU hussars combined with a farming bonus is potent, and Khmer have backline options as well - arbs that only miss thumb ring, hand cannons, ballista elephants and top-tier scorpions. And Khmer aren’t balanced around a weak early game (no building requirements is a good early game bonus for rushes and FCs). Hussar upgrade is a relatively unimportant upgrade anyways, mainly being valuable for the +15 hp (which is less than bloodlines), but still remains worthwhile because food-only units are incredibly spammable in late-game. Removing hussar upgrade just makes Khmer a little more gold-dependent in imperial age.
Some disagreement as to what the most powerful civs are. Celts definitely aren’t on that list though (they’re great for Hoang rush, but are otherwise lackluster). Chinese are at a high level, but that’s due to their start (which isn’t so great at lower ELOs). Romans definitely are on the list (eco bonus is strong, and late game is also strong when they aren’t up against gunpowder). And some civs are OP in one setting but lackluster in others (like Bohemians and Poles on closed maps).
The discount change is a buff in dark/castle age, which are probably more impactful than the nerf for Feudal/Imperial age. Dark age is often longer than Feudal age (and even if it isn’t, Feudal still benefits from the savings in dark age), and Castle age is where you can start adding TCs. The numbers do look nicer than 8/13/18/23 though. The change is small enough that it would probably be fine (though small changes to early eco bonuses can have surprisingly large impacts, so maybe not), but it’s not really an overall nerf.
1 Like
Hussar upgrade is a bit important in the super late game when it comes to pop efficiency. I’m ok with that nerf if their gold imp units become more playable since they dont have bombard canons anymore. So if Battle elephants are reworked to be more mainstream, its perfectly fine for them to lose hussar upgrade.
1 Like
Well, if pop efficiency is the prime aspect. Then Khmer should be incentivised more to go for battle elephants.
Remove - Bloodlines
Khmer has farmers which are 15% faster due to needing no drop-offs, making them probably the best in feudal age. If you combine this with not needing barracks, they have the best scout rush in the game. If there is a change which is needed to make their scout-line balanced, it will be removal of bloodlines from tech tree and as compensation buffing tusk swords by +1 attack to +4 total.
I like this change regardless of the outcome. The design aesthetic of the numbers some justify it.
I just want to check something, are you primarily a multiplayer or vs campaign/AI player?
It’s not that I particularly agree. First, we need to discuss whether we’re ready to let go of some gimmicky stuff:
- Spanish without Crossbows;
- Burmese without Leather Archer Armor;
- Cuamans with a 2nd TC in Feudal Age;
- Burgandians with Flemish Revolution;
- The Bengalis’ reliance on their own UU;
Just to name a few.
Only relevant after players start farming, and scout rushes are generally far more dependent on starting food sources than farming. Khmer do have a great scout rush, but I wouldn’t say it’s better than Magyar’s (free forging is 150 food saved - pretty comparable to saving 175 wood, and Magyars have a discount on scouts as well). And by the time players might get bloodlines, wheelbarrow is starting to become a worthwhile pickup (reducing the Khmer’s eco advantage) and players are often walled (make scouts much less effective)