And also Franks, Franks, and Franks. I have recently played a game (ara 4v4) with hidden pick: 4 players got Franks.
3 Likes
âi watched this thing and there werenât that many Franks so obviously Franks are balanced man, git gudâ
But yeah i donât understand why they havenât nerfed Franks already⊠Clearly the ladders mean nothing⊠
2 Likes
First SotLâs vid, and now all the âFranks are OPâ rants are what cause this 100%. Like how do you expect people to get a result different from âFranksâ when they type âbest AoE2 civâ or âAoE2 OP civâ in their favourite search engine with all this exposure? They will probs get shafted in the next patch like Celts were. I hope they will go the âdamage controlâ route and not actually remove halbs or BBC like some geniuses proposed. Then while waiting for the outrage Sicilian/Burgundian will inevitably cause and the predictable overnerf, we will have time to have fun betting on the next OP civ everyone must hate and blame their losses on.
3 Likes
Chu Ko Nus are actually pretty strong in castle age, as they are much better than crossbows against knights. I think Chu Ko Nu can be nerfed in the castle age by having their attack damage reduced by one. But I think they are well balanced in Imp, so elite Chu Ko Nus should remain the same.
Not only vs Knights, Chu Ko Nu can shred everything in their path, even Rams canât stop them while Rattans, Genoese, Plumes and Even Longbows Canât do what Chu Ko Nus do.
I would personally tone down a bit their HP a little bit and leave the attack untouched.
That is the point of balancing, right? Having a civ which is picked in every lobby makes the game less enjoyable. Ofc over nerfing is equally wrong, since also civs too weak like Italians ruin the game.
Removing BBC, berries, and halbs from Franks is not the solution ofc. You will get the new Italians.
I do not like nerfs like steppe lancer of buffs like khmer. For the current S tier civs like franks and the bottom civs like Italians I would say that a right change can be comparable with the Vietnamese buff (that made the civ from bad to ok).
Let us hopeâŠ
1 Like
Well unfortunately civ picking wonât be stopped by a nerf, it will just replace the over-picked civ.
7 Likes
Civ picking will not, but balancing cleary reduces the problem. At least the variety of civs will increase.
Balancing is also something which helps random civ pick. For instance getting Mayans vs Italians is a huge penalty. And in the game there were like 10 civs underpowered like Italians, for instance khmer, Vietnamese, Teutons, Tatars, Koreans, Portuguese and others. The risk of starting with a huge disadvantage was very real.
Now you can more comfortably go random since there is a small chance you get an underpowered civ (or that the opponent gets an OP civ). However there are still some cases that hopefully will be fixedâŠ
1 Like
Hereâre my suggestions regarding the Chinese civ:
-
Make their CKN a bit more expensive
-
Cancel their Heavy Camel upgrade, since they never really used camels in battles. They are still able to train Camel Riders, but is no longer able to upgrade them to Heavy Camel Riders
-
To make them more unique, more playable, and also more historically accurate, give them a fire-lancer type of unit as their second unique unit, acting as an equivalent of the Fire Ship on land.
Some lands that Chinese ruled were the former habitat of the Bactrian Camel, and Chinese had access to them much like Byzantines, anyway Cumans never used camels still they can train Camel Riders, and for the game they need a strong and mobile option against heavy cavalry.
As much as I love to see the âExplosive theme for Chineseâ they are pretty strong in almost all stages of the game (basically too dominant for every tournament) and this type of units would mess up their balance.
In history the Chinese never really used camels in battles, they only used them for transport, hence the cancellation of the Heavy Camel upgrade is very much justified. And the habitats of the Bactrian camels are found around Mongolia and Central Asia, which historically speaking were nomad territories, not traditional Chinese territories.
Anti-siege is pretty much a glaring weakness of the Chinese, their CKN can serve such a function, but is still hard countered by Onagers and Siege Onagers. And they donât have access to BBC, Hussar, and have lost Redemption as well, meaning that their anti-siege options are fairly limited compared to many other civs. So perhaps giving them a fire-lancer unit that specifically serves this function isnât going to break the balance.
Well nobody really used Camels in warfare per se so thatâs not really a justification
3 Likes
I wouldnât nerf the Chinese. According to aoestats, Chinese have a low winrate on every elo level except 1650+. Chinese arenât an easy civ to play for most people, not only because you start with no food, but also because there is no obvious game play like Goths going infantry or Franks going cavalry. If you nerf Chinese, they will become one of the worst civs for the players under 1650 elo (which is 98% of the players) and wonât even be a good choice for the top players.
Also, they lost Redemption and Supplies recently, and they donât get their extra villagers on Nomad anymore until a new Town Center is built, so I think theyâve already been nerfed enough.
6 Likes
Buffing the weak civs is better than nerfing the strong ones.
false, that just leads to power creep. nerfing the over the top while buffing the bottom lets us keep things reasonable without snowballing.
1 Like
I agree, but maybe the Franks should get nerfed a little, since they perform really well across all brackets. A small nerf like 25% berries to 20% would suffice.
1 Like
Chuk unit design is that itâs an archer thatâs soft-countered by everything but onagers. In return, Chuks have the additional weakness of being weak against other archers (loses to Arbalests, loses to Longbowmen).
TBH, even non-onager units counter Chuks decently well, but the problem is when Chinese gets an econ advantage. Since Chuks are soft-countered, they can run over the units (except onagers) that are supposed to counter them simply by getting more Chuks.
===
That said, it makes Chinese rather monochromatic and boring when enough Chuks can take out everything but onagers and outranging archers. In the Chinese unit composition, chuks should not be a mainstay, but a support force used to plug gaps in your unit composition. At the same time, though, the Chinese are very dependent on Chuks, and nerfing them would weaken the Chinese too much.
If Chuks are nerfed, other parts of Chinese should be buffed.
Also:
-Chinese should get Supplies back
-Chinese should get Redemption back, and Block Printing should go. The Chinese should have the potential for a monk rush, even if itâs a weak one.
The civ identity should be as a flexible force with a slight econ advantage (2 villager advantage in perfect play, effectively free loom) that relies on being able to exploit your weaknesses while minimizing its own. Overly strong Chuks arenât conducive to this.
2 Likes
Nah the purpose of losing Supplies was because to make the tech more unique like arrowslits back to 2015.
The lost of Redemption was awful but deserved TBH, at least with Block Printing they can convert Briton archersâŠ
I feel like you keep on getting wrecked by high-skill Chinese players, TBH, and donât want to get good (synonymous with onagers in this case) but would rather get the civ nerfed.
1 Like