ive played aoe over two decades and i only play turks (dont ask me why). i think turks should get an update and this is my feedback on that civ.
description: gunpowder civ
should be changed to attacking and gunpowder civ. if byzantines r described as defensive civ then turks should be described as attacking civ and get bonuses that r correlated to attack.
turks r specialists at siege warfare and to break walls and castles. bombard cannons should get 100% damage increase to walls, castles and towers and u could include this in the artillery tech.
janissaries and hand cannoneers r on similar level. janissaries as an unique unit should be a bit better. u could for example increase its accuracy. currently its accuracy is horrible.
turks most often have larger army than opposition. thats their tactic, to overwhelm. historically that is. so maybe they could get +5 or +10 pop in imperial age.
janissary appearance is wrong. they should get that hat and be distinguished from hand cannoneer. https://i.imgur.com/4pa6idI.jpg
ps: it was difficult to create an account on this forum. had some problem with xbox stuff and outlook stuff. make it easier to create an account here.
ps2: when watching pros play, they just play with some civs, the best civs, and that sucks. make the other civs better man. there r 35 civs and around 10 r used in tournament play. that means the civs r unbalanced and broken.
Actually in the AoK alpha/beta they considered using “offensive” as a civ description but since all of them but Teutons and Byzantine ended up getting this description they replaced that with infantry/cav/gunpowder and so on.
That’s already represented by their bombard cannon having more HP and more range, as well as being built faster.
Janissaries are much better statistically than HC. They only are 5% less accurate, as well as somewhat more expensive, but to make up for that the basic Janissary is already better (same HP and attack than a HC, while having a more shorter frame delay and more range) and the Elite Janissary has 22 attack (that’s as much as a maxed Lithuanian paladin, without having to buy tons of upgrades and get 4 relics) as well as a 0 frame delay, which makes them much more convenient to use than normal HC. And the Elite upgrade is among the cheapest.
The Goths already get that. And it’s an horrendously bad bonus, so it wouldn’t matter that much.
Back in 1998 they planned to make Janissaries with a hat, but the testers said it made them look like the Klu Klux Klan and they removed it. However there is a Janissary unit with his hat in the scenario editor now(Royal Janissary | Age of Empires Series Wiki | Fandom) and devs might consider making it the “legit” Janissary skin, after all they changed Spanish, Byzantine and Viet architecture.
That’s already represented by their bombard cannon having more HP and more range, as well as being built faster.
im talking about damage increase to make them really special.
Janissaries are much better statistically than HC. They only are 5% less accurate, as well as somewhat more expensive, but to make up for that the basic Janissary is already better (same HP and attack than a HC, while having a more shorter frame delay and more range) and the Elite Janissary has 22 attack (that’s as much as a maxed Lithuanian paladin, without having to buy tons of upgrades and get 4 relics) as well as a 0 frame delay, which makes them much more convenient to use than normal HC. And the Elite upgrade is among the cheapest.
statistics r one thing and gameplay is another thing. HC r better against infantry than janissary. i think that should at least be equal. and janissary accuracy is 50% at long range i believe. thats ridiculously low.
The Goths already get that. And it’s an horrendously bad bonus, so it wouldn’t matter that much.
You mean that having 3 bonuses (HP, faster creation, extra range) is not enough to make them special ? Ok…
For the record there are only two other civs with bonus for their bombard cannons (Spanish and Portuguese) and they each have only 1 bonus.
Janissaries are better against anything else while remaining really good vs infantry. And HC themselves are 55% accurate which is just as bad.
I mean if you were paid 200€ and your boss announces you that you got a super meaningful raise of 10€ you would feel played right?
You have to highlight what you want to quote and then left click on the “quote” button that appears
They suck at 1v1 on open maps. Not because of their cannon but because of the bad spearmen and skirmishers. So buffing the cannons wouldn’t make them any better there. However they would become OP at what they are already good, like team games or Arena.
Yeah, this one is a pretty interesting topic on its own, however it’s not quite as unbalanced as it used to be. Actually there were 26 civs picked in total during the last turnament (https://www.reddit.com/r/aoe2/comments/fnh8sf/hidden_cup_3_civ_league_analysis_and_stats/, in the comments) The problem with the last turnament is that most maps were biased in favor of civs who get a food bonus. It’s like if there was a map where all food is replaced by gold and you had to use the market, you would only see Turks and Saracen. In the NAC3 turnament however there was more variety, with people picking pre-buff Khmer or Vietnamese or toying with new civs (Daut even gave the Bulgarian a 100% win rate).
It would be moderately interesting if starting resource amounts would be slightly modified at the beginning of the game. This would be displayed in the lobby, of course.
For example, you might start with more food but less wood, or more stone but less gold. Maybe shift the value of the civs a bit.
Agree. Altough some might say their identity is to run out of gas when they run out of gold. I respect that. Leave them with spears, since is a have camels. But they need elit skrims
So their problem is their overreliance on gold and lack of long-term sustain?
Why not replace their castle age tech? It’s a massive bonus for the equivalent of like 2 cavalry archers, so it’s basically free already, so just give it to them for free as a civ bonus.
Then, give them a new one:
Banks: Turks gain 0.5% interest on stored gold, up to a cap of 1000 gold.
That would lead to some interesting changes in playstyle. Up to 5 gold per second, but only if they float a significant amount of resources.
But why would you do that? Saracen aren’t OP and it’s been their thing for 20 years, and now that it’s at last good you would give it to someone else?
5 relics = 5 gold every two seconds. So basically this is twice as good as 5 relics and once the Turk dude has the tech the enemy can’t do anything about it. You can stack it with Guilds and actual relics, and then good luck to your opponent to make you drop below 1000 gold. I really don’t think that the Turks should be given such an easy way to bypass gold starvation (I guess Feitorias do better if you sell absolutely everything but that’s 500 of the rarest ressources+ 20 pop slots locked away)
Their castle age tech costs 350F 150G. It gives cavalry archers +20 hp.
And obviously the numbers could be adjusted. The fundamental idea is that it’s a small percent of a large amount of gold, giving the Turks the option of floating a large amount of gold(something they otherwise would not do) to reinforce their long-term economy.
Given their utter deficiency at the lategame, I honestly don’t think even that much gold per second would be broken, since even with that they’ll still be absolutely rolled in the trash battles(AND it means spending quite a bit of time accumulating the necessary surplus to get the bonus in the first place), but at least it gives them a chance at success.
Right now their only real hope is to crush their enemy with overwhelming force immediately, before they run out of gold.
