United States Overnerfed

one rush strat doesn’t make a civ.

1 Like

I easily won vs that highlander opening. Just made some spies and xbows. Meh.
Especially as many civs recieved new age 2 cards, like native skirms. Gg :slight_smile:

1 Like

They needed to be nerfed, I know that at least in supremacy the state militia didn’t seem like much, but in treaty with all the cards it was really broken. Perhaps he was one of the most powerful skirmishers in the game and cost little more than a crossbowman, to this we add that thanks to New Jersey, the USA never suffered from a lack of wood, and that the texas forts gave him 5-6 free units every so often, so what you had was an undrainable civ. It is also important to mention new jersey USA had almost instantaneous artillery. In addition, we must add the marines, the outpost spam, and that all their units were created super-fast. Because of this, many players would kill 20-50 villagers each game because they knew they would never drain no matter how poorly they played. It was literally a cancer because in each lobby there was USA player .

Only Ethiopia or Mexico could face him for a certain time, but even so it was difficult to beat them.


Go mono gatling something to cover it from the cavs and win. GG EZ

All countries have unique features. This patch has nerfed almost or perhaps all of those components for USA. Literally each thing you mentioned, and another paragraph just as long, was nerfed. The tier lists for treaty that community are publishing moved them from S-tier to high-C or low-B tier. As you mention, a couple civilizations had the ability to go head-to-head while USA was at its peak, now most civilizations can win head-to-head without much skill/attention from USA’s opponent.

I think any civilization that ranks S-tier or C-tier should be revisited for balance (whether simply tweaking numbers or adding features that breath life into that civ’s gameplay), but I don’t think USA was nerfed to be balanced, I think they were overnerfed for a new META.

-90% of the changes are obviously focused on treaty play. (group, flag, imperial…etc.)
-the civ had so many features which made them s tier and these features just got tweaked down so they are as good as an avarage a-b tier civ.

->They can still have 100 villagers maybe even a bit more with the bank tickles etc. (avg.)
->most efficient group skirmisher in treaty got hit hard so it isn’t the best anymore (sharpshooters should be an alternative now)
->forts, towerspam and minuteman nerfs (special things for the civ himself, USA was S tier as a whole so maybe this cards also could be an reason so an nerf like about -10% to -15% was made)
One of the best treaty civs won’t fall down to C or D tier when its skirmisher and economy which were arguably very strong tuned down to an avg. economy and millitary


Sharpshooter range nerf was a bit uncalled for though especially if they want to move people away from the state militia.


It seems to me that the developers overnerfed the civ in order to shake up civilization selection, so I don’t think they will be touching USA for a while, but since you mentioned 100 villagers, I did want to point out: USA villagers are individually the weakest gatherers in the game, in terms of “late-game/steady-state” resources per minute, I calculated them as being #5 out of 20+ civs/permutations to now being #18 with their villager, new jersey nerfs and buffs to other civilizations. Even when USA had 115 effective villagers, they weren’t even at the top because of the poor gather rates. In reality they were OP because of a combination of “strong cheap unit” and “strong economy”. Either only the eco or only the military nerf alone would have ###### #### into a ‘balanced’ tier, but in lobbies I’ve joined for treaty, it doesn’t seem like USA will see serious usage (or even be preferred amongst casuals) until the next balance-update.

If you’re interested, you’re welcome to join any of the Treaty Servers like “Treaty Universe”, “AOEMC”, “House of Jagers”, “VALHALLA” to get a deeper idea and have discussions of the impact the nerfs had on the viability of this civilization. Just to be clear, I never said they’d be down to D tier, I said low-B/high-C, but you can check any of these communities for discussions and tierlists, some of which have incredibly detailed spreadsheets that argue their placement.

what strength does the US have now if not skirmisher and economy? Average does not cut it.

If we look from an treaty persective:
-It still easy to spam cheaper towers than other civs.
-Faster horse arty spam than many civs with flag and age 4 card. (many civs don’t have engineering school)
-Pretty good hussars which are also cheaper. (better than avg.)
-Its still possible to do 5 Forts which could spawn about 600 ress every 90 secs (+/-) which is about 6,6 ress per sec which is better than unupgraded factory. (5 forts are better than 4 upgraded factorys in theory) if usa players would do more millitary production buildings rather then forts…
-fully upgraded state milita in groups are still as good as fully upgraded yumi-archers (which are same cost) against HI and have way more Ranged HP and also more Base HP.
-the musketeers are one of the better ones which are out there.
-cheap strong minuteman

1 Like

I mean the overall strong millitary of the states is still a thing, just the turboefficient not dieing skirmisher isn’t the best anymore rather the expensive sharpshooter which is still an ok alternative like said. They have about 7% less HP against Ranged Attacks but have therefore 2 more attack range and better multipliers agaist High Infantry than an normal skirmisher also now you can get one more economy card instead of your state milita card :slight_smile: .

1 Like

“Pretty good” hussar?
They are just regular hussar tha cost slightly less

Almost all civ have cavalry combatant the very least
USA also has pretty poor anti_cavalry abilities just going all-in on cavalry is a way to make USA fall.

1 Like

Especialy since the cowboy nerf.

Not sure what kind of decks you are running, but having all eco cards for all civs is a requirement for treaty, as for any even average combat the drain rate (resource per minute) exceeds even the highest economic gather rates (such as British). The only real ‘tossup’ cards are personal preferences for age1 cards such as spanish immigrants vs exotic hardwoods etc… Deck building for USA is sadly quite one-dimensional, and compared to Mexico, so is their age-up options.

I feel like we’ve already gone over this, but USA has the slowest individual settler gather rates, and that is because they have so few eco cards (e.g. age1/2 mill or age3 all-coin) and the weakest imperial gather boosts (40% compared to 50% on all other civs).

I haven’t used the Texas Forts in treaty, but perhaps the changes to USA were based exclusively around this variation of their gameplay; perhaps using Texas Forts is now a requirement. Disappointing, considering I enjoyed illinois (eco/flag) and connecticut (artillery and building time).

1 Like

I’m absolutly don’t understanding where you got the information I would be thinking eco cards aren’t a must have in an treaty deck.
If its really the Texas Age-Up instead of illinois which lets villagers gather (10%) faster, in this case the texan forts would produce even more ressources with its free unit production but its ok, despite the fact I having it explained why the forts are this efficient.
We can even calculate it, how much the Land of Lincoln is worth in reality
->Lets say we are joining an team furtrade/have furtrade in our own deck an because of that we go “100” [vills,coureurs, sw] vills on food in this case the land of lincoln would be worth about 0,05 food/sec worth for each settler. Probably lower but for taking things simple I take this rate.
This multiplied by 100 is 5 food/sec which is economicly worse than the texan forts. Atleast in the theory

what? don’t compare the sharpshooter to state milita, compare them to the skirmsher. infact the sharpshooter is more expensive than the skirmisher since gold take long to gather.

the Sharpshooter will lose reliably in a skirm war and is one of the weakest light infantry in direct fight. Even with the 40% range armor its ranged hp is pretty trash and its durability get badly out paced by dutch skirm.

the -1 range nerf was completely unjustified.

I compared them to an dutch skirmisher actually, and the the diffrence between gold and food gatherrate in the lategame is less than 10% diffrence normaly so the diffrence in cost is little and like said they have less HP but more DMG against HI and more Range than an normal skirmisher (dutch skirm vs sharpshooteer both w/o upgrades).
The fight between skirmisher is not great because they have less HP for same DMG but can be won because of the more Range but I’m not sure how good/bad the setup Animation of Sharpshooters are.
An Imperial Skirm has 257 HP against an Ranged unit while the Imperial Sharpshooter has 238 Ranged HP.

The standard build was unidimensional because all the people want to take Pennsylvania for cree over pop, but with Massachusetts, u can take the fur trade and extra vills overpop. Now USA wasn’t the monster that used to be. is just a normal civ. I’m very glad that they finished that cancer that was USA.

1 Like

Answering your question, your words “now you can get one more economy card instead of your state milita card :slight_smile: .” my interpretation of your comment was that you were missing an economy card that now you could put in.

On the other point, to my understanding, Texas age-up is now an absolute non-negotiable requirement for USA to compete on equal footing in treaty. It seems to me that the nerfs for USA were to balance the civilization around the singular Texas age-up; the other ‘more balanced’ options (such as the very small illinois economic boost, which from your calculations is much worse than 1 auto-fort, with 0 on wood btw) are basically irrelevant now.

If the changes to the civ were based on Texas age-up, I would have liked to see alternative reworks of the other age-ups (e.g. most Mexico’s federal states are usable in treaty). But as the developers said " Even a mammoth project comes to an end at some point."

An Imperial Skirm has 257 HP against an Ranged unit while the Imperial Sharpshooter has 238 Ranged HP.

There’s no “generic” skim. Dutch and french skim get triple card and the Spanish Skirm get unction (45 damage). Even the German skirm get drummer nowadays.

A Dutch skim late game have 411 range hp vs 356 ranged HP on the sharpshooter (no cree, no illinois).

we are talking about 5 cree CDB (IE 6 normal settler), and the US is still capped at 200 pop max.