No I saw some Pro playing and the Chu Ko Nu power is scary
Which is sort of the most asinine response possible, no?
You see pros using a civ thatās usually more difficult to use to some success, and you assume itās broken.
TBH, when it comes to Chinese, one aspect of racial design is that the Chinese donāt get strong civ bonuses anywhere, beyond their wonky econ start. The Chu Ko Nu ARE their civ bonus, albeit one that forces them to build a castle to get. Which is what Iād consider a problem, since it reduces the Chineseā flexibility.
Thatās why I think giving them a fire-lancer infantry trained at the Barracks as their second unique unit would not only improve their flexibility and playability, but also more historically accurate, since they were the first to invent gunpowder and mostly used them for arson purposes.
This is a short documentary about the ancient Chinese firelances. Sorry itās in Chinese, but this is the only documentary that I could find about this topic.
ćå¤å µåØ大ęē§ć ē¬¬äŗå£ ē¬¬å «é ę¢Øč±ęŖ | CCTVēŗŖå½ - YouTube
2 Likes
Chinese do not need anything else, they are already super strong, with a lot of FU units, and a super UU that breaks the game often.
They are not reliant on Chu Ko Nu, CKN is just so strong, it is always the best option.
You can play Chinese as a Halb + Siege civ, or a Trash civ, or an Arbalest + Cavalier civ.
They need nothing. They are already one of the best civs.
1 Like
Maybe a nerf 11
No Huss, no Paladin, no Supplies, no Hand Cannoneer (although Chuk fills its slot), no Bombard Cannon. No Siege Engineers, no Redemption. Itās a Castle Age civ where you save 25 wood per TC that falls apart in late Imperial due to Siege Onagers and the lack of a decent counter. That said, you can build Bombard Towers to hold off Onagers defensively and Trebuchets to provide a mobile partial counter to Siege Onagers, but you canāt rush a position, and your Chuks / etc are vulnerable to Siege Onager hits.
Itās actually a straightforward civ, in Castle, either end the game or get a better eco. In Imperial, if you donāt have an eco advantage, you die.
3 Likes
no they just have cheaper techs, starting with extra villagers, arbalests, halbs, etc.
Chinese are one of the best civs in the game, its just hard to take advantage of their bonuses well.
4 Likes
If chu ko nu were just āsupport unitsā (probably something weaker than arbs) Chinese could still be good with some changes but then āChinese weakā threads would pop everywhere, because they would become like say Byzantine: a good civ but it without huge bulldozer unit to rely on every game. They are a bit like that already since chu ko nu are good, but not as good as stuff like paladins.
2 Likes
Iām not sure why you think Chu Ko Nus are weak against other archers. Head to head, they are about evenly matched with arbalests. But they do much better dps than arbs, so they are much better against units like cavalier/paladins. Plus they are cheaper than arbs in terms of gold. So they are actually pretty cost effective vs arbs in the late game.
1 Like
Theyāre not, Chuks have 1 range deficiency vs Arbalest and that will count for a lot in a fight between the two unit types. Thatās not counting Longbowmen, who have closer to what, 3-4 range advantage? Then consider plumes, who wipe the floor with Chuks.
Chuks are also more expensive overall (in terms of villager seconds) than Arbs. And in late game, you should be abusing China with halb onager anyways.
2 Likes
Not to mention additional arrows have an horrendous accuracy so if the enemy archers are at max range you just end up with weaker attacks with a bad rate of fire instead of an excellent one.
4 Likes
Chuks are balanced by their shorter range and that Chinese donāt have good support units like Hussar or bombard cannons
Guys, I think we can discuss if Chinese civ is the strongest one or not, maybe it is not imo. But it seems that you are asking for a buffā¦
In my case, Iām asking for Chinese to be buffed elsewhere but Chuks to be toned down slightly.
The funny thing about Chinese in most AOE games is that theyāre strategically mono-dimensional; in AOE2, Chinese are rather dependent on chuks, despite having a civ design that wants them to be versatile. In AOE3, Chinese are addicted to the FF strategy because their Commerce Age got nerfed badly.
===
TBH, given average skill level, unless the pros are asking for Chinese to be toned down (and they already lost Redemption, which is when they were really overpowered), if you lose to Chinese, youāre likely losing to a higher skilled player because of the difficulty of operating their start, as well as the subtle nature of their eco bonus (2 villager lead once loom is researched)
1 Like
Chinese start requires a slightly different build order (like loom, more vills on food and similar).
A pro player is capable to make it +2 vills. A decent noob would be still ahead (around +1 vill, which is a huge lost of efficiency with respect to a pro player, but still an advantage).
Chinese are the most versatile civ in the game, ckn is just one of their strengths, especially in the late game.
Their tech tree is so good, they can do everything above average thanks to the tech discount.
If a change is implemented, it should be a nerf, since they are by far a top civ. However nerfing ckns and boosting Chinese somewhere else can be seen as a nerf (I assume in the late game) and a buff (I assume in the mid game) so it is fine
Hereās my proposed second unique unit for the Chinese civ
UU2 for the Chinese: Bamboo Firelancer, available in the Barracks at the Castle Age, an infantry that wears layered paper armor and carries a bamboo firelance, and deals bonus damage against Siege Weapon. It has no elite upgrade, and is not affected by Blacksmith upgrades too.
Cost: Wood 40 Gold 30
HP: 45
Attack: 2 pierce 1 melee (same as the Fire Ship)
Attack bonuses:
+3 vs Siege Weapon
+3 vs Ship
+2 vs Building
+1 vs Fishing Ship
+1 vs Turtle Ship
Rate of fire: 0.25
Frame delay: 0
Range: 2.49
Projectile speed: 3
Melee armor: 1
Pierce armor: 4
Armor classes: Infantry, Unique Unit
Speed: 1
LOS: 6
why does chinese need a second unique unit? the civ is already great as is and doesnāt need any buffs.
3 Likes
Youāre ignoring the fact that the Chinese lack an effective counter to halb onagers. Trebs and bombard towers work, but theyāre asking to get countered by bombard cannons or the other sideās trebs.
===
Also, the claim that the Chinese tech tree can do everything above average is false. Lack of supplies means that champ flooding is more expensive than otherwise, and the Chinese lack Paladins / Hussar. In Monk line, the Chinese lack Redemption so Monks are now a lot less versatile against buildings and siege units (seriously, swap Block Printing for Redemption, the switch was stupid). In Siege, the Chinese lack Siege Engineers so theyāll always be outranged when it comes to their siege equipment.
Of course, note that excepting Monks and Swordsmen, Chinese donāt āsuckā in Castle, meaning that opponents are likely to try to move to Imperial ASAP to leverage how the Chinese peter out in late Imperial.
===
As the meme goes, āthe entire Chinese civilization vs one wooden boiā. Who wins?
3 Likes
Iād actually be more entertained if the Chinese swapped Chuks for Firelancers. Itād also be a great opportunity to adjust Chuks.
1 Like
All you mention is between mid imp and late imp. The majority of the games ends way earlier. At that point Chinese are carried by an almost OP UU.
Chinese have a superior eco also thanks to the tech discount. They can easily tech into xbows or knights, and they do both the meta strategies above average. They can even go camels, pikes, or skyrms.
Ofc CAs and standard infantry are not that great, but it is typically something none goes for (unless you have some specific bonus like hun CAs).
Overall, Chinese are one of the best civ, in fact a top pick in every tournament. I really cannot see how it is possible to buff a civ that is always a top pick and in some tournaments even banned because too OP
This sounds interesting. What should the unit do? The same of the post above?
2 Likes