Why does church give XP but monastery doesn't?

I don’t know if it’s a bug or a design oversight for when DE implemented xp for churches, but I think that if you are going to give it to them, you should do it for monastery as well. Since monastery also doubles as a saloon, I think it could even incentivize people to use more mercenaries when they are playing Asian civs.


It’s neither. The change was aimed at buffing the European Church, while Asian Monastery was already considered useful enough - it has some useful upgrades and even doubles as a Saloon, like you said.


Well, I believe that’s debatable. I would take a building that gives me improved training time, mercantilism, line of sight and healers in most situations over a saloon as most Asian civs. So that being ‘‘useful enough’’ is not necessarily so, specially considering the lack of mercenary use for Asian civs cause they don’t have as many perks as Europeans do.


Sure, it’s debatable. But the TAD civs have so many extras like wonder powers, export, monks, etc that it’s not just a cut and dried issue. It’s not just about the mercs.


The buff monastery needs is, all monk upgrades be made cheaper. Or atleast auto research the first monk upgrade. They are too expensive to see use outside of treaty or long team game imo.

Another issue is lack of ability to train spy like unit for Asians. Which can directly counter enemy mercenary play. Workaround can be adding an Asian spy in monastery. Or better add a new tech to give monks huge multipliers against mercenaries.

1 Like

Its more aimed at civs that are very reliant on tp maps such as germany, France or Spain to give them a bit of a buff on maps where tps are not avaliable.
Also the xp income from tps has been nerfed on DE.
Although that ended up not mattering too much anyway since all competitive maps have a tp line anyway

You forgot one important civ on that list mate

You couldn’t research the training time until industrial age, and mercantilism was too expensive until industrial too, so no reason to build a church until then.

So basically no reason to build a church at all in 90% of supremacy games.

2 monks aint gonma stop 50 mams

Yeah I really feel that most people that comment on these mostly play with European civs and only judge these civs on the outside, specially when it comes to China. The other day I saw Samwise and Hazza saying that China is underrated and yet, they rarely (if at all) pick them in tournaments; more of the same sentiment…

1 Like

China sucks, no way around it, they are just good cause of the “deathball” but midgame to early lategame everyone get fast training and way better units so china gets destroyed

1 Like

Chinas lategame units and training speed is still very good for supremacy, their biggest problem is weak composition in lategame. But even that was buffed with the change in black flag army since EP/DE.

I really don’t know much about China, but in the last couple of days the civ got picked quite a few times and it did really well.
Specially Mitoe beating samwise french which is pretty much sams main and best civ.

Gotta watch that game! Mitoe is OG, a beast of nature lol one of the very few players that can pull off China in tournaments, but that’s been since forever and he is one of the few exceptions; Diarouga is another one, restricted to New England tho.

Back to the original topic maybe you are right, Japan doesn’t need the monastery xp trickle, maybe India does, but China definitively needs it, for the same reason you point out for why it was originally introduced.

Wouldn’t say india really needs it. They already get xp from livestock.
Their xp income was even nerfed because their shipments are quite strong.
Also china has quite powerful shipments on age 3 as well, so something like that could really buff their ff. Nothing against buffing their age 2 though if they really need it.

Well you could say the same about Spain or Germany, and yet…

In Germany case I think their ff can be a bit too strong and their shipments are insane but they do have an xp penalty though. Also u barely see players making a church with Germany. (I do think the civ could use a bit of a nerf to be fair).
Spain has fast shipments and a strong ff timing, u also won’t see they building a church unless they go for piro ff to get guard halbs. Also usually if they go aggro ff there is no eco behind that, if it fails they loose.
Chinese ff is insanely strong. China scales really well on mid game and if you just leave them alone and let them ff for free they can mass an insane army and just z move your base. As far as I can see, they are really powerful on livestock maps like Mongolia and have really good match ups too. The only thing they lack right now is a decent age 2 option.
The devs need to be very careful when buffing the civ so they dont make it too strong.
Same with dutch for example which is my main civ right now. I would like to see the civ buffed a bit, but its a similar problem where even the slight buff like making banks cheaper could cause the civ to overperform as they do have some really good match ups

The best way to change FF civilisations is to move some of their Fortress Age strengths into Commerce Age. Than they are more viable earlier but they don’t get more when the do FF.

In the case of Germany, the “xp penalty” you mention, is actually more of a trade-off for free Uhlans. In regards to Spain, I couldn’t have made the point better myself, other than by also mentioning their quicker xp gather.

China doesn’t have either of those benefits, and as you said

This couldn’t be more true than for China. Now you are making another argument saying that Germany and Spain barely build churches anyway. This I think, is very contradictory to your original point.

They dont build churches because all competitive maps come with tps.
So why waste wood on a church when you can get a tp which is better and the rest of the wood is far better spent on infrastructure and market ups.

1 Like