Mexico and inca lamers everywhere. Not much fun really.
I disagree, since the recent mexico dlc it’s the most fun I’ve had on the game.
I will agree that there are a few little things to change with mexico in particular age 4 shipments and the fast industrial, those can be annoying.
I see so much whining about inca atm, I believe they actually got nerfed in the most recent patch too though it wasn’t mentioned because I’m sure they used to start with 6v and now it’s 5v.
What is so strong about inca right now? The kallanka thing was busted but that was nerfed ages ago along with huaraca range in age 2 to just 12.
Bolas warriors are worse than they used to be vs infantry, now they’re exclusively good vs cav and not much else. They have a significant negative multiplier vs infantry and now tech up based on age 2 stats not age 3 which nerfs not only there veteran/guard/imperial upgrades but also the cards that upgrade them.
There must be something I’m missing about inca?
I suppose it mostly depends on the civ matchup but since you’ve gone on the record as playing mexico right now I don’t think you would understand.
Because I’m not a total bore and play and enjoy new content in a game I love I wouldn’t understand you, got ya.
The game is sucking at perfomance even at single player for me
I want to know how to send a crash dump to report bugs or random crashes but the forum does not accept the format of the file
There are many people who only play ranked, it deverts them to play in a competitive round in case you did not know, do you understand? v
I only play ranked, and I have no idea what ‘diverts them to play in a competitive round’ means. So no I don’t understand whatever it is you wrote.
So are you going to tell me that you have fun playing against a Mexican FI at 7:40 in ranked ??? ah, unless you go to Mexico or the Incas
use mediafire to upload things then share link here
Meet the new boss, they’re exactly the same as the old one! We had this issue with the launch of TAR and freelo Hausa Tower Rushes, launch-era Sweden, etc. I’m not surprised that Mexico is a broken mess given the current track record we have.
The new civs shouldn’t be able to do everything. There’s no restraint, and they can rush just as well as they can turtle or boom or FI/FF. Only USA has a bit of a slow start.
I said in my original post, that age 4 and revolts needed some tweaking.
It’s far from an instant win though it’s just a matter of surviving those shipments which can certainly be done because after they’re in age 4 with just 20 villagers and no eco to support anything.
Most people with mexico are doing a standard hacienda boom anyway.
Mexico have a few small things like that to nerf it’s far from a ridiculously op civ, nothing compared to how strong sweden was for like a year and I bet you didn’t quit ranked for the whole time that swedes were OP.
With Inca the only thing I’d say is very strong now is the native rush, which the devs intended because they changed the age up war huts to tambos so they obviously knew this would happen, I didn’t like the change because when I play incas I like to FF or water boom so I want those in base war huts, I’m not a fan of rushes and if it were up to me I’d take the war hut age up back, nothing else is OP about inca.
The Swedes were rediculously strong for a year, but you could beat them by playing with your head or even doing a hard rush like the Aztecs were in those days when they were a little stronger.
Now although the Swedes were too strong in relation
Ecomia-militarism in the case of Mexicans is different since they have enormous versatility and different ways of playing, it is not predictable like Sweden is, in addition to the fact that Mexicans rely very well on sending them to be able to play turtle later leave at age 4.
I have not played almost anything lately, in fact I still have Mexico level 1 but I have seen many videos, professional estraming, comments by discord of professional players about Mexico, from what I have seen and read you do not have to be a genius to infer that Mexico it’s broken
I adore this game, for something I have been playing it since October 15, 2020, but something that does not support are the pay to win that this game is unfortunately getting used to doing
so voltarei a jogar daqui a 1 mes ou mais pois esta muito chato inca muito forte e México também
Ok well we’ll agree to disagree, maybe you should try mexico yourself and make your own judgement because many people cried so much when USA was released stating that it was OP and it turned out it was a weak B tier civ.
Mexico’s standard hacienda boom is just a weaker brit manor boom, the haciendas are mostly useless because if you want to win the game you need to be gathering natural resources until at least 20 minutes in and most supremacy games don’t last that long.
I watched a video yesterday by lenlenlen I think it was of the number 1 ranked player doing the fast revolt and he lost quite easily to nothing special really. Now we know what a mexican player will do, it’s not so hard to prepare and counter it as they’ll be stacked with cards in age 4 so just checking their deck gives it away. All that being said I’ll repeat myself again I agree that age 4 shipments are too strong and the FI is too fast and we’ll almost certainly see both of those things nerfed, it’s far from the only thing being done in ranked though and it’s not that hard to beat.
People were yelling US op before the release, but immediately find out it is weak within a week.
Now Mexico has been out for a week.
I don’t think it requires a top10 player to realize that safe early economy + fast industrial + very good industrial card + the best factories (do they even need this?) + very good basic unit stats + ability to grant them 2 or 3 more abilities and counter bonuses + 6 additional full decks to choose from (again, most of them are not even needed because the others are so good) can not be broken. Because this is intentional. This civ design basically overcomes all weaknesses US had (slow start and mediocre units) which is the main reason why US was weak despite all those seemingly good bonuses.
And as they have not reverted a single broken design (except maybe carolean which took several months), we’d expect what a “balancing” patch would be: nerf their economy so that “you would not be able to get all the bonuses”. But that possibility is still there. Once you didn’t press hard enough you’ll face 2x musketeers with AOE damage and longer range, or hand cavalry that effectively counters their counters and with a range and a charged AOE damage (and can also stealth if you send the card). Most other civs would not be able to do so.
The US was an impression because what was seen in the image, had banks, submachine guns and factory in third. The Mexico beta was more open, where there was much more pather who could participate, unlike the US Beta, the only ones I remember who participated was “Aussie drongo and fitz bro”, in the Mexico beta many were invited to participate so Which could be detailed in depth the strengths and weaknesses, in the case of the US, only the good and not the bad were detailed.
Already with a week of play I have not seen post of people saying that Mexico is weak, as it was with the US so I leave you by yourself to draw your conclusions, I understand that I must try Mexico to be able to criticize it and see that it is not so easy as it seems, but if this game had the API to see the statistics of the game, they themselves would speak for themselves
Yes, you are missing a lot of things about Inca. You must be in the 1000 ELO range or below to think there is “almost nothing wrong with Inca”. Sounds like you’re an Inca main, go figure?
I’d be very surprised if the age 4 cards and FI are not nerfed, I think that’s perfectly reasonable especially as the 9 soldados + 2 falconets is worth over 2K resources. The fast revolution card is also too good for age 1 and saves you too many resources when you do a FI. I’d expect that will be moved to age 2 at the least.
Mexico have a lot of options but it’s down to you which you choose and you’ll never be able to do everything, you can max chinacos if you want and send 3 cards for them but that doesn’t seem a great idea to invest so heavily in 1 unit type because then the opponent can go full anti-cav and then it’s 3 cards sent for little effect. Chinacos do have a multiplier vs cav but that only brings their damage in line with normal cavalry in regards to fighting other cav, they certainly don’t counter hand cavalry.
I’d disagree with the US having mediocre units, what they had was a mediocre dragoon which is now an ok dragoon at best, regulars are great units, state militia were considered very op and have been nerfed several times, gatling guns are better vs infantry than falconets but worse vs other artillery. US also has some great cards to train units from forts for some strong uhlans/dragoons or the incredible magyar hussars.
I’d expect once mexico receive some nerfs they’ll be much like brits in that the main focus will be an early game boom for settlers with the haciendas, so like brits they’ll be vulnerable to early pressure before their eco pays off, even more so as they receive all the settlers only after completing the boom.
Post patch I don’t think the current mexico FI will even exist which is fine by me.
How about instead of replying with nothing useful you tell me what you think is wrong?
Native rush is strong, but was obviously intended by the devs due to their change of age up war huts to tambos. Never argued that it’s not.
Kallanka build has been nerfed, not really worth it anymore with the card costing 500 wood and huaracas having the same range as a musk in age 2.
The kancha age 3 card to make them trickle wood is not really worth sending in supremacy because you can age up with free wood gathering techs and your units cost almost entirely food or food and gold.
Kancha boom was changed to 1 less house and chicha brewing changed accordingly to make up for the loss of that house, not buffed any further. It now costs you 400 wood more to complete the same kancha boom as before.
3v and 5v shipments were sorely needed to bring their eco in line with other civs, brits also get 3v and 5v as well as being able to manor boom 20 free settlers, whilst kanchas are only worth about 12 basic vills on food which is already the fastest gathering resource.
Chimu’s got nerfed so they can no longer constantly avoid snaring just temporarily.
Bolas have a significant negative multiplier vs infantry, and benefit from cards/upgrades based on their age 2 stats, previously it was age 3 stats.
But it has not happened yet. So Mexico is broken right now, no doubt, right?
Yeah but “soldado cannot beat two triple-carded redcoats so they are perfectly balanced”.
And you remind me they even have faster xp income. I forgot to mention that.
BTW, not just ant-cav but also anti-heavy infantry.
Regulars are more expensive so cost-effectiveness wise they are bad. State militia is good but it is the only thing they can rely on back then.
So does Mexico, and they do not even need them because those card can be saved to buff their regular units. That’s why I say Mexico is simply an improved version of US, having all its advantages and getting rid of all its disadvantages.
Also you seem to really like the idea of “having 10 different options but not able to use all of them” when most others only have 5. So what is the point of having all those 10 options then?
Or what is the point of playing other civs if one civ can do almost everything pretty well? Is there anything, in any aspect, that Mexico cannot do? Which playstyle? Which unit composition?
Oh maybe they cannot do FF better than FF civs because they can directly FI.