hi! just a simple question, as for the title: what’s the reasoning behind this choice in your opinion?
Italians historically are a technologically advanced civ so it does make sense for them to have at least decent siege, but their siege it’s pretty luckluster in general, and while they have discounted BBC, their lack of SE hurts a lot imho
the tech being also a university tech would also be sinergic with their UNI discount, and it seems to me that italians are not a well performing civ outside of water atm and could use some help.
so why they lack SE? and would it be OP to give them the option hipotetically? as always, i’m very curious to know opinions of others more knowledgeable on this topic
As always, while civs are informed by history where possible, game balance is a priority as well. You’re right that the Italians were a very technologically advanced civ, and their wide tech tree, Uni tech discount, and gunpowder discount all reflect this. However, they were specifically denied Siege Engineers because:
-If they had it, they would have a full University tree, and currently only the Koreans have that; devs generally like to preserve unique features of specific civs.
-They have discounted Bombard Cannons that are actually cheaper than other civs’ trebuchets, so having cheaper-than-treb cannons that hit for maximum power might be too strong.
-Italians already have great archers, great monks, an S-tier dock, FU Hussar, and a bonus unique infantry unit, plus the aforementioned gunpowder. Basically, something’s gotta give and so they have a weak siege tree.
Its called an elegant Civ design, something that developers failed to do with Bohemians.
Please stop this Historical-Justice-Warriorism. You’re killing the game.
Every 2 days there’s a post about filling a gap in civ’s tech tree. Unbelievable.
But since they have discounted bombard cannon I don’t think this is the main reason.
Chinese, for example, lack also cannons, that way they have little to deal with onagers, but Italians have means to kill them.
Even condottieri are nice for that, since they are fast and ready without any pre-requisite.
Eh, just remove another tech like Arrowslits then, which, by the way, is almost useless since nobody spams towers in imperial age (and aside from Koreans, nobody fully upgrades them if they tower rush) and on water maps Heated shot is way more important.
Italians have bombard towers, which are way stronger than Keeps with arrowslits, and overall require less investment.
Assuming obviously Ballistics, Chemistry and Range/dmg upgrade which is required for both towers, FU Keep requires 850F 950W and 175s, FU BBT 800F 400W and 60s. Italians obviously get discount on both, but the proportion is the same.
Chinese misses BBC because chu ko nu is much more dangerous than genoese xbow. They kill infantry and siege faster than arbalest and genoese xbow. When mass up (which is easiest among all archer UU), they are not weaker than genoese xbow to kill knight/camel. While Genoese xbow is better in killing elephants. It is reasonable for Italians to have means(albeit not perfect) to deal with onagers/scorpions. I think Italian BBC being countered by other BBC with siege engineer is meticulous design.
Hmmm, thinking about it again, adding SE removing arrowslits would make Italians 99% like Portuguese so I retract that.
Even now they have almost identical tech tree, they trade halberdier for Hussar and Fast fire ship for Heavy demolition ship, plus just a couple of techs, but the unit roster is almost the same, UU excluded obviously.
The Italians don’t even suffer this much from not having SE since their late game is good + since no civ has discounted SE they all gotta pay the full 1100 res for it, and by the time they do so the Italians will have saved tons on their BBC already.
yeah i was thinking about balance as well since, to my understanding, italians arent a great civ outside of water without a proper archer bonus outside the UT in castle age, not outstanding eco, and hole in the roster like weakness to cav that requires expensive genoxbows, so in my view SE could help them while being also sinergic with the civ bonus. i did not know koreans were supposed to be the “all uni tech” civ, but that could be easily solved by removing another tech from the university i suppose?
but hey, if it would make them OP then of course no, i just thought that was not the case since vietnamese already have better archers, and SE bombard cannon with equal siege options, and almost (lacking only blast furnace) FU hussar, and better eco, and better trash, without even be a great civ themselfs, but i may well be dead wrong
It’s quite ironic, since Italians were pioneers in the later renaissance fortress building and siege warfare, and it’s also a big waste of their uni bonus.
Having a full uni tech isn’t a unique feature of a civ, that’s just something that people made up… it’s like saying that a civ should be unique just for having a full blacksmith, or a full monastery.
Which would be quite weak even with SE, since rams, onagers and scorps would still lack the last upgrade or any kind of bonus.
Lol, GC doesn’t counter neither onager nor scorps… I don’t know where you get that…
He said that their counters are onagers and scorpions. But regardless, slapping siege engineers on Italians does nothing to help them in situations they struggle and is probs going to overbuff them in others.
Its true. But considering civs that lack bracer (mostly cavalry civ), they actually have solid siege options. Giving Italians SE makes siege/ BBC more competitive against those civs.
Not as unbeatable as Bohemian composition. But more unbeatable than Portuguese one.