First off, I’d like to say it’s not in my interest to break the game in any shape or form, but I feel some things would make the game a little bit more lively. For example, I feel the infantry really need some love in this game, would it be crazy to suggest a solution that could be to maybe reduce their cost, or the cost of the Supplies upgrade from 150f/100g to around 100f/75g. Just some slight suggestions, again, but the archers seem a little bit too strong in fights, unnaturally so, I feel a slight nerf to their accuracy(skirmishers included) from a 100% to a 95% hit rate would help smoothen things out. Also, call me a madman, but cavalry are relatively cheap in this game for how useful they are, a 5f bump to scout-line and 5g bump to knight-line would perhaps push the balance on the right track. These were just some things that were bugging me, hope they’re not too ‘‘comical’’ :). Good Day.
the problem with archers is in part due to pathing being messed up. as pathing gets better, archers will get worse.
Infantry have always been an inferior option for the most part, with the militia line being relegated to the role of trash killers, and frankly they do well at that. i do think supplies needs to be cheaper overall, and some infantry UU need some love/cost adjustment, but overall i think Infantry in general is fine.
here is the thing about the infantry, cavalry, archer situation though. they aren’t supposed to be 3 parts of a triangle (or rock paper scissors if you will) with Militia Line, Archer Line, Knight Line. game has literally never been designed or balanced that way.
if you want proof of this, their is trash counters to archers (skirms) and knights (pikes), but there is no trash counter to infantry units.
i don’t think archers or knights need any nerfs other then pathing getting fixed, which will go a long way towards making infantry better and toning down the relative power of archers.
Spread this truth to more people.
There are so many unusable/meme units NOT YET FIXED that the game loses it’s seriousness.
This is absolutely unacceptable, because it means to play this game you need to know which units are known to he underpowered, which are overpowered, and which of them are utterly Memes from the community or hearsay.
One should not be required to worry of such things when deploying a unit in-game. A player should be tasked only with strategy. Not with knowledge from outside the game.
Imagine a beginner who doesn’t know that Siege Towers/Flaming Camels/Missionaries/LS/Shotels/HC/GC/Orjan Guns/Ballista Eles/Condos etc don’t do craap compared to what is expected from the price and the looks! (and hence some are memes too!)
I like your idea of making supplies cheaper. That would maybe make it more of an option in Castle Age or maybe even Feudal Age (at least for some civs).
The problem with archers is probably just a matter of pathing, which will hopefully get fixed soon.
I think cav is fine, especially if infantry gets more cost effective.
There is ALSO near-zero lag and ping, which is why everyone nowadays is able to micro so effectively, and archer-line is the most frequently used micro-intensive unit-line.
This has had a huge compunding effect alongwith Pathing. (think multiplicative effect in favor of Archer-line)
Because of this compunded effect on Archer-line, many UUs now get undermined, and everything in balance goes haywire, to a certain extent everywhere.
That is why I cry out my lungs for BALANCING of unit line choices, because I clearly see this happening and making the game imbalanced.
and yet all but 7 civs are within 47-53% at the highest levels of play. seems balance is fine, for the most part. it’s just the unit balance you care about so much that is the “problem”.
Would these changes be crazy?
According to many on this forum, any changes other than their own would be “crazy”.
not really. their are some things that are pretty widely accepted. i don’t know many who are against adjusting the cost of supplies for example, or buffing turks/koreans/portuguese/etc.
And will you tell me who is against buffing:
TKs (Food cost, after +2 armor for Supplies Champs)
Shotels
Karambits
Missionaries
Flaming camels
Gbetos (Frame delay)
HCs
Orjan Guns
Elephant Archers (by far Worst in poll)
Steppe Lancers
Condottieros
Genoese Crossbows
Siege Towers
Mamelukes (Gold cost)
and Cataphracts? (Up costs)
TKs need no buff as some civs have legitimate problems dealing with them
the people who agree teutons don’t need buffs right now.
the people who agree malians are fine, and don’t need any buffs right now.
in a biased poll with a tiny sample size. just like the other elephant units these won’t be seen regardless because of their high cost. you want them in 1v1 more often? expect lower cost but lower stats for all Elephant UUs.
i’d much rather focus on making Tatars a good civ overall instead of buffing an easter egg unit that is cost effective. but lets talk. in your ideal world, how would you buff the Flaming Camel?
I think make militialine take less than 1 pop space. This would incentivise more players to make infantry. Maybe 0.5 or 0.75 pop space per militia line unit.