This is the closest anyone has given me to an actual answer, thank you. However, I believe that they are way overtuned. Every other top civ champions are sort of close to each other. However, Legionaries will beat Japanese champions 1v1 consistently without a centurion. That is ridiculous, imo.
Vikings, for example, have no way to win a late game matchup against romans. They lack good cavalry, hand cannons, and bombard cannons. Archers get destroyed by scorpions. So, what are vikings supposed to do?
All that being said, I think that you have answered my question. Itâs still broken, but legionaries do need a bit of bonus damage against infantry.
You are welcome. Yeah, the bonus damage can be tweaked probably, but I donât see it as that necessary right now. Japanese will lose 1v1 but have a more cost effective unit. They also have both onagers and BBC with SE, so thatâs probably the key.
Probably not let romans get to that point, as vikings have a pretty bad late game even against other civs.
Vikings have a better early game, so press the advantage with archers, and even in the late game having champs with extra HP and supplies and berserkers can patch things up a bit.
Anyway some civs will hard counter other civs, there isnât really much to do, for example Italians hard counter everything turks do, literallyâŠ
Romans donât have an answer to BBC or onagers for example, aside from generic LC and monks without sanctity, or cavaliers, which can be expensive to be used as an anti siege solution. All sub par solutions, as much as what vikings have against romans.
In late game infantry fights, pop-effective is far more important than cost-effective. Infantry units are kinda cheap in terms of gold, and by post imperial, you also should have enough food. So, what matters is that you can keep enough numbers on the field for a snowball.
Also, what do you mean, they get BBC with SE? Japanese do not get BBC. Their imperial age UT is sort of a replacement for BBC.
I have never liked that argument. That argument only works in 1v1 arabia. How do you block them in, say, arena? or a 2v2 team game? Or fortress, or black forest?
Donât let them get to their unbeatable composition hurts the game by making it unbalanced.
Redemption block printing monks. Thatâs the solution.
He already mentioned, they have no sanctity. Itâs very hard to convert a bbc when you die to a single shot and cannot move because that resets conversion progress.
I donât like this either. But itâs really hard to balance. I would want Mayans to not get totally dominated by Goths in late game. But then you may want to give Goths better early/mid game in compensation. Maybe something like replacing Hulâche Javelineers with Plumes +1 attack vs infantry.
Huns (also Tatars and Magyars) have the same problem. They die to halb siege.
But in 90% cases centurion is used for its aura. Can you make it work as a castle age opener like knights? Probably not. In imp you also rather want legionaries instead of centurions.
This means they almost always appear in low numbers, and thus hard countered by monks. They are far from OP.
which is why you need a mass. One bbc is like 225 gold. Make 3 monks for each bbc.
I wouldnât mind giving mayans something like the inca slingers. They are the only ones that lack a good counter to infantry in the late game afterall.
I agree with huns. Tartars, weirdly enough, has the flaming camel. Iâve had quite some success with those, when I managed to distract the halbs. Magyars have the magyar huzar which has a strong bonus against siege. Even if they die, they can take out siege in very few hits. Magyars are fine, but Iâd that tartars still have a bit of a weakness.
Romans still have onagers, redemption monks, and Centurions. This doesnât actually feel like a strategy, it feels like brute force to possibly make it work.
Thatâs what I said, they donât need centurions. They beat FU japanese champions without them.
Whataboutism. There are worse deathballs doesnât mean this one is okay.
I guess weâll see the exact details eventually. However, the preliminary numbers do indicate that romans are pretty broken. As the most extreme example, they have a win rate of nearly 70% against hindustanis, which is ridiculous. They also have nearly 60% win rate against other infantry civs like Aztecs, Dravidians, Slavs, and Goths.
Well, from my own eperience⊠I think at least half of the Hindustani pickers on the ladder donât even know they have CA and HC
But CA play is dead anyways. And I also wouldnât recomment it against Romans and their Scorpions. At least not as an opener.
If the only good counter to Centurions in Castle age are monks then is a flawed design, for sure the UU is expensive but thatâs more than offset with the absurd stats the unit has, up to 140 HP, 15 attack, 4 melee and 5 Pierce armor, so you have an UU thatâs just as good as Leitis without relics and Boyars in castle age without having the weakness to ranged attacks that Leitis has and wayy better HP than Boyars.
Show me a build order that techs into Centurions opening? Talking stats without a way to make it viable is pointless. By your logic I can say war elephant is completely OP.
Wondering what better openers do you go for? Xbows do too little damage. Maybe could work with mangos. But CA could work with mangos too. Canât do your own LS either.
Ghulams will die to scorpions, if you have around 10 or more. So will camels and cav archers. The only play is to us mangonels and CA. However, that combo is expensive, and micro intensive.
Centurions cost 160 resources compared to a knightâs 135. The bigger limiting factor is a castle.A centurion build order is entirely possible by mid-late castle age. War elephants cost 255, which is significantly higher.
Thatâs a huge factor. Centurion takes 24 sec to train. Compare to a 2 stable knight opening, you fall behind in both eco and military. This is almost suicide.
What do you go before that? Knights? And this also means much later imp timing.
Build up militia in feudal age. Or make scorpions with redemption monks.
There are too many variables here to give one answer. This depends on if you are against an archer civ or a cav civ, if you going for a 3tc boom or a 1 tc push, if your opponent gets bombard cannons, etc.
The point is, if you want to make centurions from one castle continuously after mid-castle age, it is absolutely possible to do that. How that fits into the larger game plan is a different, and more complicated topic.
At that point itâs just a matter of who has the best micro, you can have more monks but the enemy just need a good shot, while you might take an insta conversation as much as an hour for the conversation.
They are also more vulnerable against LC.
With the same number of units, yes romans wins, and they can field onagers too, but thatâs not the point.
Japanese champs, with onagers and monks can beat the late game roman composition, having similar tools. Romans composition is slightly better, but good micro/macro can offset that.
If you instead want 2 civs that are "perfectly balanced as all things should be" and that any civ can perfectly counter anything⊠well there are worse cases then the romans, as almost no civs have an answer for everything and at the same time can be countered by everything.
Take Italians and turks, if you set aside the âstruggleâ for the early game, their late game deathball is way stronger then the roman one.
You donât need to watch the individual matches again single civs, itâs too early for that and people simply might not know what to do, or we just have too few matches.
The overall win rate shows that they are balanced, but thatâs the quantitative data, of course we should look at the qualitative data tooâŠ
Let me introduce you to ⊠THE BOHEMIANS. This civ has the most powerful siege weapon in the game, supported by monks that only cost food. Forget about using hussars, their halbs are extra spicy. Thinking of infantry? They have hand cannoneers which are super fast. Archers? Did I mention that houfnice have a large splash damage? If you are going full archers, they also have their otherwise garbage UU. There is literally no counter to this civ if they reach endgame with a good eco.
There are also a few other civs with insane end-game deathball comps like Byzantines, Ethiopians, Portuguese, and Koreans. With infinite resources, Khmer, Persians, and Turks have those as well.
No, the opponent needs 3 good shots, one for each monk. You wonât get that before the BBC gets converted.
That is why I said preliminary numbers. Single civ matchups arenât as important as matchups against groups of civs. Like the infantry group I indicated.
But they do seem alright otherwise.
The reason can also be a legacy issue as Legionary was introduced as a redesigned Elite Jaguar Warrior in The Forgotten (2013). They used to share a lot of stats which didnât change in the official version after 10 years.
