What do you think about team bonuses?

I feel that team bonuses are usually gimmicks or a weak effect which helps generally. I like this approach but do you guys also feel that this is the pattern of the team bonuses?

Except for the Teuton team bonus, I find all other civ bonuses weak, which is a good design, since TB < civ bonus < generic technology < unique technology.

I think the Team bonus could and should be used to make “weak” TG civs stronger and also allow for unique strategies to diversify TG meta.

For example I always had and will advertise for making the Byzantine trash discount the Team Bonus.


I feel that the Portuguese and Spanish civ bonuses be merged and given to the Portuguese altogether (since one helps in the early game having no effect in late game, while the other is a successor of the first).

The Spanish on the other hand should be given a decent team bonus to help them in Arabia 1vs1, since Spanish are really good in team games either way (Paladins, Conqs are both useful in TGs).

I also feel that the Saracen team bonus is too strong for a team bonus. It is good for Saracens themselves since it helps them in the early game before Heavy Camel or Mameluke comes into play.

1 Like

The best TB are:

Vikings on Water

(my personal top list, ofc it’s subjective)

I don’t think Saracens TB is too strong. Saracens would probably be a very bad TG civ without that bonus. I would probably more think of nerfing TBs of top TG civs like Mongols, Mayans, Huns, Britons.

(BTW the old Incan bonus would just barely not have made it in this list. It was actually a kinda good TB)

1 Like

yeah thats actually the problem, old civs have incredibly strong TBs

this is how i would imagine TBs should have been designed, but looking at the OG civs they definitely wasnt the case. i wonder if anything it was the opposite, TBs were made strong, so that you could make very strong team matchups by fitting different TBs together

or im thinking that was the intent, but things didnt work out that way

and later civs were just given hot garbage TBs without any relation to how good the old TBs were. consider incan TB for example to britons TB. the worst TB in the game on a very mediocre civ, compared to probably the best TB on an extremely strong civ (especially in TGs) so there doesnt seem to have been any logic to their application.

in the same way we have units that are nerfed without compensation. things are done without considering the greater impact


Are you forgetting the Vietnamese team bonus? Not the Imp Skirm, the enemy TC visibility

1 Like

Probably a bad example since trash units are not meta in TG. Also TG meta lean towards more on pop efficient unit, not cost efficient unit.

I think Incas extra lama bonus will be a better example.

Dravidians is arguably better as you save more wood in the long run.

How? The bonus would have only been (barely) useful for the Poles, but other than that, it was so negligible nothing would’ve changed if you removed it.

Instead it was a bonus that would’ve done more harm than good, by forgetting that you have it, so your farms complete before Horse Collar (or Heavy Plow) did.


Heavily disagree. I think this bonus was way stronger than many people want to believe.
It basically gave every team member a boost of 3 food in the stockpile for each farm placed, this often added up to hundreds of food more available for that team.

I think that makes 2 of us. 11

Should civ bonus only exist when there is teams?
Actually, civ bonus doesn’t help to balance team game because they apply also in 1vs1 and free for all

which would be undone by a single farm miscalculated and finishing before horse collar or heavy plow did :sob::sob::sob:

(having ~200-300 food slowly gained throughout the game is really not that significant. lithuanian bonus is so strong because you get that in dark age, if it happened in imperial it’d be one of the weakest)

1 Like

This word gets used a lot in the context of new mechanics, but I’m not sure what you mean with reference to TBs, which (usually) have pretty tame effects.

Overall I think maybe 2/3rds of TBs are well-designed, i.e. they provide some utility without being overpowered. Some just seem like placeholders, or are both too weak and too situational to really make a difference (like Ethiopian, Burgundian, Magyar, Malay). That said I also don’t think every TB needs to be at a high power level like Spanish or Bohemians.

I get why this was tried, as from a design perspective it makes some sense (a non-Spanish build bonus that affects a building that every civ will make a lot of), but the effect size was small enough that I don’t think it will be missed. I’ve not crunched the numbers, but I would imagine that the Chinese TB is stronger and more useful overall.


You do realise TGs generate tens of thousands of food. So having hundreds more … Is negligible. Combined with the fact Incas are not really a good team civ in comparison to the other good team civs… no thanks. You can keep that bonus

I think that’s literally the point. Trash isnt used much, meaning the bonus is less likely to be OP. Unlike for example making the Mayan bonus a TB.

Yeah this was weird, why didn’t they increase the max LOS with the TB?

Is it really that bad? Now that people are finally accepting that food is so important?

That’s true. But switching their TB with this one will barely make Byzantines stronger in TG. Their viability in TG will remain almost the same imo.

Your thought process was good, but discounted camels are really strong. Imagine Byz as flank and Berbers as pocket, spamming 36% discounted camels in Castle Age itself. That’s even more broken with Hindustani or Gurjara pocket. Cheap skirms and pikes aren’t a big issue though.

Well that’s why we specified “trash bonus” and not bluntly the byzantine discount in general :wink:

1 Like

I don‘t like Teambonuses. Some bonuses are so ■■■■■ stupid op (like Britons, Huns, Saracens, Spanish, etc) and other civs, they are weaker anyways, have trash bonuses. Something like 20% faster Archer/Stable Production is crazy strong and hard to stop in Teamgames.

I would prefer to remove teambonuses or balancing them.

1 Like

I don’t understand why it’s become a tradition that there is always only one team bonus for a civ.

Sometimes more than two smaller team bonuses may be better than one overpowered one.

Yes I agree. Just like Berbers have 2 civ bonus and Vietnam used to have 3 civ bonus