Arrow knights and coyote racers with tolerance for siege and fixed issue.
Coatlicue Temple Support:
In addition to its current benefits +1 against artillery and 30% tolerance to siege.
Xipe Totec Temple Support:
In addition to its current benefits 20% tolerance to siege and / or bonus against siege in X.X.
If they do that, then give the Ryder Rifle, Musket Ryder, and Huaraca exactly the same benefits. I’m really tired that the main azzys demand benefits only for Aztecs and completely forget that there are 3 other native civilizations with exactly the same problems.
The haudenosaunee have cannons that, as you suggest, must be enabled in senior years. If I’m not wrong, they also have bonuses against artillery.
The Lakota have that cavalry that kills everything (horseman with rifle), the problem is that they have mele defense. Maybe they should have a range similar to the American carbine and ranged defense. Reduce its base damage, but give bonuses against what it is supposed to attack.
The haudenosaunee field cannon is available from THE INDUSTRIAL AGE, so how do I go up to Industrial and get the cannons before a European spamms me with falconets and knocks everything I have down? Come on, explain me as bro.
And lakotas, the rider with the rifle is very nice and all, but do you know the suicide attacks I have to do to kill cannons? Have you ever played competitively with a native civilization other than your precious Aztecs? Lakota cavalry is very good, but extremely expensive and difficult to replace, you lose them and it is GG. I cannot afford to lose so much cavalry to destroy a pair of falconets, the exchange will always be beneficial for the European.
And to finish, the AK has more than enough range to kill artillery and not suffer damage in the process, the exchange is always safe for the Aztecs, while the Incas, the Haud and the Lakota must ALWAYS commit suicide army to kill artillery, the rest of the civilizations in the game have alternatives available in FORTRESS AGE to deal with artillery. And with all this, they continue with the blatant idea of saying that the Azzys are weak against art? It seems to me, and with all due respect, that the problem is no longer civilization, the problem comes from another side …
That’s why I say “how do you suggest” move the light cannon at age 3 for haudenosaunee.
I understand that your focus is more on supremacy, but I see it more from the point of view of the treaty where civilizations develop their maximum potential, and that is why I believe that Aztecs are among the worst in NR.
However, I think the Lakota are even worse. Especially in its economy.
The Aztecs were like the Indians. Good in supremacy, bad in treaty.
Talking about late game…
Latokas have no problem vs artillery, the explorer is heavy, super fast and 1 hit kills cannons, it can be revived again and again.
Haudenosaunee has field cannons a mix between culverin and falconet, can’t be moved to age 3 because it would be too OP for how they can rush.
Aztecs and Inca maybe are the ones lacking options as they fully rely on infantry, and cannons are the main counter. At least inca chimu have artillery damage multiplier and run faster.
In the late game for Lakota the problem is not the military, it is the economy.
Some of us speak of supremacy and others of treaty and that is why we seem to contradict ourselves.
The Aztec economy is better than that of many civilizations. If the problem of facing the artillery is fixed, it does not need any more military improvements.
My topic was about late game. Read 1st post, you’re the ones mixing things.
They don’t need that much eco because they can destroy yours in a blink. They are super fast and got one of the highest siege damage. They don’t even need to engage as they can see your army and flank to your base every time. One of the lamer civs in the late game.
I speak from the point of view of the treaty.
The late game in standard games can vary because it depends on the path and the decisions that have been made throughout the game.
uma coisa chata dos coyotes as veses eles não conectão as unidades inimigas na hora do ataque
So, if we talk about treaty, is a unit of 30 rank not enough? What if the Champion and Legendary updates simply give you +1 range, so that at the end of the game you have an anti-art of 32 range, to that add the 4 attack improvements that the AK has, and it would be more than enough to kill any artillery unit.
PS: What a great trick to edit the first post of all specifying that the topic was about the treaty 4 days later.
That was the main purpose, early game coyotes are OK.
The range is fine, of that there is no doubt. That’s why I mentioned that if they improve this they don’t even need captured mortars.
wtf lol, its no way i want to invest in the falc vs aztec especially when aztec can mass pumas and coyote and outmassing you because aztec need to put some damage age 2 ofc and then coyote pumas ( double melee unit ) and mace destroy skirm goon lol, because tell me how goons can block that double melee unit comp ??? with skirm ?
And yeah coyote are buffed since 16 March 2021, and not only coyote
this is the result of you being a very good player and playing against good players
What would you propose for the Aztecs to be good at the treaty? … or are currently fine?.
oh for treaty i have no idea of how good or bad aztec are, i am a only 1v1 sup player
Thanks for answering. The economy of the Aztecs is very good, but I think that the coyote and the arrow knight could have tolerance to the siege in the late game or treaty. For me that would solve the problem.
I’m not an elite player, but I got to be level 24-25 in the treaty in the old ESO.
We are talking about late game, outta here.
Please be more courteous. You just have to clarify what it is about.