Your economy nerfing alone would make me put Poles at the bottom tier for civilizations that I would want to play in Comp Stomps. Poles are a cavalry civilization and losing Age III Cavalry combat among other changes to their Cavalry potential would just further make my interest in playing them drop even more. I love Cavalry civilizations and wish we had more stronger ones not less.
Making Piechur having a lower attack bonus against ranged cavalry then a Skirmisher/Crossbowman while also nerfing its ranged attack
That is fully improved stats from Poles military and one thing that I think should clearly be changed is the Imperial Kurpie Marksman Hand Attack needs multipliers changed to the following
-Skirmishers cost 11.91% more than Piechurs in Villager Seconds.
-Base armor and hp are even.
-Piechurs have 6.25% more speed.
-Piechurs have 6.67% more base damage.
-Piechurs have 60% higher DPS to other skirms before ranged armor.
-Skirms deal 30% more damage to heavy infantry before CIR. After CIR that drops to 12.5%.
-Skirms start with 25% more range than Piechurs (though few civs get skirms in age 2), but at Vet that is cut to 12.5%, at Guard it’s cut to 0%, and after the card and Imp Piechurs have a 10% advantage.
Seems like a very good deal for the lower cost. With regards to the range, just capping it at 18 very possibly might justify the current multipliers.
Pandours, perhaps the first counter skirm, have 2.5x vs light infantry and 1.25x vs heavy infantry, but they also have a penalty vs all cavalry. With Piechurs you have a unit that at least soft counters 3 units, which as a general matter is somewhat worrisome, and in this particular case is especially worrisome since it’s main disadvantage (it’s range) becomes an advantage over time.
I must admit I don’t Revo much so my experience with them is very low. I’m very aware of the Church FF into Jans, 2 Falcs and 12 Super Uhlans in 1v1, and people sometimes use that same build in team. Note that I suggested some nerfs to that as well. Uhlans with 1 RoF is crazy.
After CIR they do just fine. In treaty skirm wars are inevitable, but I see skirm poking in Sup a fair bit too. If you can delete a few enemy units for free it’s often worthwhile. Real games are also rather messy. If both you and your opponent are mostly making light infantry + light cavalry that 1.5x vs light infantry will be massively advantageous so long as you get into range (skirm goon is also very popular in 1v1 sup of course).
If you’re specifically concerned about Heavy Infantry, especially in a 1v1 context, you should notice I took part of the anti skirm and just flipped it into the anti heavy infantry column. If you believe the real threat is heavy infantry, are you concerned I buffed them?
Right now their eco is insanely strong. It definitely needs some nerfs.
As suggested, Retainers lose +10/10%, CA have the same max stats and Winged Hussars lose +5/5%, but you save a card slot. Uhlans lose +15/15 though, but given the loss of the RoF reduction on Uhlans you could add them to PCC as well.
Winged Hussars specifically also reach max upgrades with one less card, gained 10% RR, and will be a very good deal after the 20% discount. I don’t think I’m de-cav-ing the civ, nor would I want to. I’m refocusing it on Winged Hussars and CA, which pair better than CA + Retainers which is kinda just the play right now due to the insane pop efficiency.
I would have no problem with hand multipliers matching their ranged ones.
Skirm wars are still meaningless, they’re usually the result of all the heavy infantry or cavalry getting killed and the survivors taking potshots at each-other slowly damaging the other since most of the time they don’t have bonus’ against the other and both sides have range resistance. ending in a stalemate until reinforcements arrive.
That’s were piechurs excel at of course the anti-light infantry bonus makes them good at mop ups but only after the enemy heavy infantry are killed.
…if you’re already winning a skirmish you win more but it doesn’t help us much to actually win unless it’s down to skirm vs skirm.
This I have to disagree with. Poland is a cavalry-focused civ and they should get a “universal” cavalry upgrade card that also effects their cavalry merc, outlaw, and other special cav units they can get like Uhlans. All their other combat cards specify the unit they upgrade which is typically just the Retainer, Winged Hussar, and/or Cavalry Archer.
Adding in my suggestion, again on a pop adjusted basis:
Cost in VS 130.953 per pop (same as current)
7 speed (faster).
120 hp (now with 30% RR at base, 40 with the native tech if you get it).
14 hand attack, that’s slightly worse against infantry but 40% better against everything else)
Charged attack is straight up better because it’s the new base attack turned to siege damage +1.5x vs infantry.
By not charging siege goes from 6.667 to 10 on a per pop basis.
The only loss is a +5/5 from cards and a probably necessary nerf to Grand Hetman, but with the buffs this is outweighed. Also you save 1 card slot on your way to FU Winged Hussars. I basically just buffed them and adjusted them to 2 pop.
Edit: btw they will be easier to train on a per unit basis (because affording 5 is less cav overall). Also, I forgot that I added them to Rider of the Apocalypse, so they actually do take the same number of cards to upgrade if you want the +30% siege.
I’m ok with Retainer being one pop if their stats are nerfed. I don’t want a one-pop Chicano that’s too strong and can be massed in the way they can currently.
The civ’s economic output is extremely high with significantly better food collection than a generic civ and the equivalent of 2 factories (actually more than 2 after checking again, the Sejm can reach 6.96 + 3.52 res per second).
For non-treaty you can remove the pig eco, but Aztecs also have to lose more economic upgrade cards than Poland does. Poland then gets their food upgrades off of 0.69f per second instead of 0.5, which is a massive difference. You also save resources off of the transition to mills. 170w +150w is 320 + a free 10 pop slots.
On coin, Russian vills (who I choose because they get a lot of upgrades) fully upgraded can get 1.55c per sec with a lot of cards, and if Poland actually goes for coin rates they can get 1.45c if they want on Estates. They easily have the best overall farming eco in the game (assuming no one is livestocking).
[edit, btw, you can get part of the normal +50% gather rate Sejm techs in ages 3 and 4. It’s a higher overall cost, but getting them sooner could be a big deal.]
You are somewhat right here, and I’ll be changing my suggestion after a deeper dive into the math on Retainers.
Hussar (pop adjusted):
6.75 speed
160hp, 20% RR = 200 effective hp (if my math is right)
15 hand attack (1.5 rof)
10 siege (3 rof, range 6)
Retainer:
7 speed.
210hp (or 200 if you want)
22 hand attack (1.5 RoF, 2x vs art, 1.5x vs cav, 1.3x vs shock, 0.5x vs heavy inf)
16 siege (RoF 3, range 6)
Even without the armor on Retainers being counted at all, the unit has the same health, like 50% higher base attack, higher speed, and more upgrades. Comparing them Fully Upgraded to British Hussars (prob the best from a stats/pop count) and it’s still an ugly picture. Retainers get 10% RR, lose the negative vs heavy inf, and more raw percentages added. Of course Retainers cost more, but that doesn’t matter enough that late in the game.
Having said all that, after relooking at the math, I think they should keep the 1 pop cost and simply have their cost, training time, attack and hp reduced by roughly 15-25% instead. That would push them closer to Coyotes or Chimus which are reasonably balanced at least. The biggest issue with the unit is the pop effectiveness, which I had correctly diagnosed, but had been insufficiently creative to fix correctly.
Regarding removing CC, I was basically combining it with Polish Cav Combat. It would declutter the deck a bit and allow you to reach a higher level of upgrade for all-actions-damage and hp on Winged Hussars with one less card, while removing a +5/5% on WH, and a +10/10% on Retainers, though that could be cut to same loss as WH get if Retainers had their pop effectiveness lowered.
Anyway, I’ll prob be posting a new set of change suggestions later this week for the base civ. Having run more numbers and gotten some feedback I think I have a better idea of to suggest.
This is only a problem in the super late game. The economic trickeries only really hold if there’s no pressure applied in the early and mid game and allows a full boom of 99 villies and lots of wood. Win rates don’t currently suggest the need for huge nerfs.
For treaty only i’d just nerf the food to gold exchange from 80% to 65%.
Retainers could use a nerf, but comparisons equalizing pop can be somewhat misleading. The Hussar will fight at full efficiency until it’s dead, but two Retainers will lose half their attack power once one dies. So if you wanted to scale down a Hussar to 1 pop and have two of them effectively fight a regular Hussar they’d need +25% attack (or some equivalent stat buff).
Their cost could also be a bigger limiter if Poland’s eco wasn’t so ludicrous.
Have nobody used the trample mode on Winged Hussar? Normally, a unit would do damage passively to nearby units under trample mode only if it was moving, not when attacking (Royal Dragoons, Royal Horsemen etc.), but Winged Hussars do damage constantly, and their trample mode has 5x damage cap, unlike 2x for most aoe damage actions. So they’d insta kill most infantry with trample mode when grouped.
Secondly, a lot of ppl have been discussing about Folwark. It indeed has broken gather rates, but source is not HC cards, nor Farm/Sejm techs, but the Farm upgrade itself. The upgraded Folwark provides 38% extra gather rate on top on existing number (not base gather rate). In fact, with all techs and cards combined, a villager would have 1.21/s Food gather rate on Folwark without an upgrade, which is pretty normal if you compare to other civs with decent Food gather rates. It is just the 1.38x multiplier being broken, i’d simply lower the cost of upgrade and cut the multiplier to 1.0x. It is also good to mention that teammate vills can also gather on Folwarks, so only cutting the Food to Gold exchange ratio and leaving the abnormal multiplier will not help. Standardizing the trade ratio to 1:1 and remove the extra multiplier on Folwark completely fixes all problems with Folwark abusing.
te puedo asegurar que la taza de victorias en contra de los polacos se debe a un factor muy determinante… yo con un amigo siempre que vemos a un polaco le vamos con todo y le matamos todos los aldeanos posibles antes de que crezca, sino, nos jodemos y siempre… Siempre tienen la carta de kielbasa
Firstly, and perhaps most importantly, with an ELO system everyone is pushed towards 50%, meaning people playing an OP civ will experience ELO inflation and find a new spot where they hit about 50% WR.
Secondly, it takes a little while for people to learn the civ and catch up to the math, which isn’t everything, but is a lot. You will have a lot of people playing highly suboptimal builds right now, and a few who find what’s good more quickly.
While what I’m suggesting is definitely a net nerf, but there are currently and will end up being some buffs to earlier portions of the game.
