Unless you played treaty with Ottomans. Stank at the treaty. I don’t know how they are now, but I suppose they are better because they have improved their army and their economy with economic cards that they did not have before.
there is no world where legacy otto was bottom tier, and was considered the second best by EVERY top player prior to the esoc community patch.
they were trash in treaty, ill give you that
1 Like
@coffeeco01 @dansil92 Aaaaand as I said - the pre rework ottos were far fron top tier. I was talking to some else about the before and after.
Cuz they said ottos have always been top tier…like even before the rework, which is whole field of bs.
Yall going on about current power levels and such - Ive beat then as dutch and indians often enough so far and dont really feel that scared anymore, personally.
What I would call overpowered, 235hp janissaries together with 22 ranged, 40 siege attack (3.0 rof) and 0.50 RR Abus.
As a player who saw that in AoE3 during 2005-2007, I cant say OP for anything else for ottomans but a solid/good choice only.
I agree nerf Otto. But more about abus, and their grens. Janissary probably just need too many cards to reach that stats
Seems like solidados lame is truly on the decline.
The Spanish players are adrift.
I like playing hausa and have tried those levi unit cards various ways but it’s just not viable. Hausa don’t really miss lack of a town militia card though, you can send a palace in age 1 and combine that with an age up tower or in age 2 ship another palace, send 2 towers or sell 2 cows and make a second palace etc. They have a really strong age 2 defence if done properly, almost unrushable I’d say. Unfortunately rushing vs hausa isn’t the meta from what I’ve seen. Most people just don’t fear hausa because if they sit in base and go fortress then what? There’s no 2 falc push on the way usually.
no, the levias (are created on houses and are militians that lose health points over time like other civs and cost 1 population can garrison on a watch tower and gives 10% of 30 = 3 of attack damage per levia garrisoned
Aztec is not only bottom tier in treaty, also bottom in team game.
They don’t have eco, don’t have good units, don’t have musk type don’t have artillery. This is joke civ only for now.
May be we should listen from someone who did deny team game should also have balance with his selfish opinion in 1v1, Aztec is weak? we just don’t use it, better delete it, we still can play other civs. Who cares balance? Just nerf the civs we dislike those they have anything above average.
1 Like
The levied units in general are not at all viable. They would need to be reworked to be viable in the first place for the cards to even make a difference.
Even then, Mass Levies is objectively a terrible card.
Levied units cost influence that’s why it is not viable. Change to cost to coin after that card would make them viable.
thats why im saying merge the mass levy with the fortification card.
Most TM cards have 2 effects, a militia effect and a building attack effect and since Hausa doesnt have a card that boost TC attack, these 2 merged together is a decent compromise
also would not be against just buffing mass levies by say also making it reduce influence cost or spliting cost into food and coin
Splitting the cost with food and coin is the absolute minimum that needs to be done. As it is, calling out these units isn’t even an option when you don’t actually have the resources to afford them. The African and native militias also need to arrive in batches, not one at a time otherwise they get picked off one at a time and are essentially useless.
Mass Levies is also an Ethiopian card, so it would have to be buffed in a way that also works for them. Ethiopia is way less likely to build Outposts, so making it boost their attack would still go largely unused for them.
The “real rocknrolla” spanish players keep running ff’s or try to make a “jogo bonito” by pressing in age II to get the buffed conquerors.
Sometimes we even do both and take us out on conquerors in an aggressive ff.