In my Historical Realism Mod, I switched the Aztec and Mayan techs around. Garland Wars gives the Aztec infantry +20 HP (including Jaguar Warrior), but no attack increase. And El Dorado is returned to its 50 second research time, but gives +4 attack to Eagle Warriors, as opposed to +40 HP. I feel this is killing two birds with one stone because Jaguar Warriors are under-utilized due to their extreme weakness to any kind of ranged unit, while the Mayans get a one-two punch with hard-hitting Eagle Warriors+ Plumed Archers. They still beat the 80 HP EEWs of the Aztecs. I wish the devs would switch this in the game.
Why is it always you making random balance threads with heavy opinion about X. Also no need to attach Y pro to it. If pros think something about balance they can give their input directly to devs on their discord channel.
Why would you wish for such a switch? Mayans are an archer civilization, so they need their EEW to be tanky to act as a meatshield for their archers. A very stupid idea to make them deal more damage instead when its their archers job to deal damage.
They still have Siege Rams for damage sponges. I think it makes them even more hard-hitting. But even the pros admit they have too much HP with a very high HP archer unit and High HP EEWs. Plus the Aztecs need some help with their UU in my opinion.
I changed it back- however I did change the Jaguar Warrior to have a lot of HP and very low base attack (upgraded through Garland Wars) with the same +10(11) vs. infantry. Makes the Jag tankier but still mostly useful against infantry.
I must report that, I have not found a single valid counter-argument to none other than TheViper’s as well as Nili’s suggestion that nerfing the incredible +40HP awarded to 8 Pierce Armor Mayan EEW is necessary, on this entire thread.
Hera was also for nerfing El Dorado in breakdown in stream.
To all of you here arguing “Winrates”, “Majority”, “This will be Unpopular”, “Unnecessary change” etc. etc., there is only one thing to say…
except you aren’t a lion, and no where close.
and before you say that the pros are.
show me where the pros asked to change Indians into an elephant civ.
show me where the pros asked to change the design of the game to revolve around UU being the core of armies
Show me where the pros asked to buff Infantry UU and Militia Line.
show me where the pros asked to reduce Elephant cost by 20%.
or that SL civs should lose Knights and SL should be redesigned?
also that last one - viper has since rescinded his opinion and feels EA are a good unit, so yeah, stop trying to use him to support you argument about EA
If you want to say that you argue for the pros. then only argue for what the pros call for. instead of trying to use “I speak for the pros on a few issues, and use their voice to argue for what i want else where”.