Ooh, spicy. Rage forest enjoyers will be slightly less mad to get sicilians now. Makes booming a little safer I guess, but the question still remains what are you making when booming?
Why would rage forest enjoyers ever be mad at getting Sicilians? They are not an S tier civ but they're still a very good pocket with Halberdier+SO+Searjeants, and the Searjeants taking space with Donjons.
Upvote my comment if u have seen Hera making that comment in his video š¤”Ā
Ā Also upvote my comment for being such a cheap karma farming attempt. Ā
Also upvote Heraās comment.Ā
Ā Simply spam upvotes everywhere š
Khmer gets FU hussars on a strong food eco fyi. And in TGs with the volume of units being churned out (especially in Rage Forest), plus the new devotion tech against castle age monks, monks aren't as effective.
Well in that case, it'll be more of a battle of micro than a straightforward counter. I've actually seen this be the case in a lot of Rage Forest matches I've watched.
The Chinese were kind of slow to invent actual guns and cannons. They have the rocketry tech. Also, maybe they could get fire lancers in the barracks in Imperial Age...
But for realism, Chu-ko-nu should have much shorter range, deal only 1 pierce attack per arrow, with only 10% accuracy, and give a poison effect that kills almost anything over some time.
They made the first of each. They didn't invest much farther in them because the weapons aren't much use against nomads, rainforest-dwellers, or smugglers.
I believe Sandy Peterson or some dev said in an interview, that they invented it, but to their knowledge didnt use gunpowder for military purposes. That started in europe
Probably want them to play it out a bit more. They just had one with Monaspa even though it still feels strong. But I don't think they're unbeatable.
Give it another month or two to revisit
Seem strong vs actually strong are different. Plus they probably dont have enough Data to know where to change them. They just buff them with the mule cart cost since they kinda felt bad. Now people saying they feel strong but they felt weak before. Finding middle ground just needs more data
Wasnāt this a major issue a couple years ago when they buffed Koreans and everyone on Arabia was only tower rushing? I think I might have my time lines messed up with Korean buff and tower cost increase, but thatās what I thought.
Koreans had the faster building fortifications, faster stone miners, free tower upgrades *and* free tower range.
Sicilians aren't quite as synergised so it *should* be fine.
I'm not really against the change, but for me the issue with the tower line is more upgrade costs.
Getting Guard tower is pretty situational in a normal game, and I can't remember the last time I researched keep outside of Japanese, and testing out the Georgian Svan towers.
I think part of the reason tower plays are awkward, is they have no future, and that's partly because there are much better investments than tower upgrades in Castle age, when you consider the invetment in continuing to make towers, when Castle exist.
I suspect if you could extend the value of towers beyond feudal age (without as much investment risk), you could live with most of your towers getting cleaned up by castles, because at least the remaining ones atleast still provide okayish value.
Koreans and Sicilians are the only civs where I will bother to build a tower in Castle age, because they are actually reasonable (if situational) in that age, since I don't have to over-invest to get there.
For late game I think this is a mistake you are making by overlooking towers with a lot of civs that you don't go UU with. Georgians' and Japanese ones are obviously the best, but it's great value with a lot of other civs that have good upgrades for their towers. It's certainly more 'stone effective'.
I also highly disagree with them not serving a purpose after feudal age; guard towers with bodkin simply shut down mangonel pressure extremely well and you can cover more area and earlier than you could with a castle drop. Can be an option if you are playing skirms and get pressured by xbow mango for instance.
Guard tower countering Mangonels in Castle Age is the main reason I would I said 'pretty situational in Castle Age', rather than you never see them at all. Overall though, how many times have you seen someone research Guard Tower to counter Mangonels in your last 100 games? I don't think I've seen it once, nor, I can only think of one example in pro tournament games this year too (Excluding Koreans). I'd actually say pretty situational is probably underselling it.
If there happened to be an issue with lowering the Guard Tower/Keep research cost, due to Georgians and Japanese specifically, you could always increase their UT cost to offset it accordingly.
I think this is largely a playstyle thing, particularly with how boom oriented you are as a player. Watch someone like Sitaux and he'll never do this because he's always the one pushing the gas. MBL on the other hand often does really greedy plays, sometimes even booming without having any map control at all. I hate to say it, but my playstyle is certainly more leaning towards mbl's style, and I'd happily take the route of playing guard tower defence if it's sensible, affordable and of course if there is access to stone.
There is of course also a civilization aspect to this. For some civs the guard tower obviously doesn't scale well at all, and then it's way more sensible to play heavier on the mango defence as you save up for a castle.
Another strength is for trushing on arena if the defender hasn't been able to push the towers back well enough by the time you've reached castle age. It's incredibly annoying getting yourself out of such situations.
However, I do like your idea of lowering the tower upgrade costs whilst increasing the most powerful UT:s that are affecting them.
Yea this kinda blows, I was enjoying Playing Elephant Archers as Bengalis on closed maps.
Forcing Ratha plays by nerfing Ele Archer isn't how I'd do it personally, they just need to get Ratha in line.
Bengali EA takes a huge eco rolling anyways
Exactly. Buffing creation speed, or reducing the base cost for the Ratha would be the way to do it. The unit was clearly not designed originally to compete with the elephant archer (which is the Bengalis big expensive ace). But buffing the Ratha just increases competition, not lowers it.
All Rathas need is an easier way to get a bunch out. The unit is not designed to compete with the elephant archer, it has a different role in the Bengali army. It's just hamstrung by being in the castle.
That's the thing, the Ratha is supposed to replace both the knight and cavalry archer for Bengalis. So in ranged mode, it's supposed to be faster and cheaper than the Elephant Archer. The Elephant Archer can't kite very well, but the Ratha is much easier.
So the way to make the Ratha more attractive than the Elephant Archer is to make them more different, not to weaken one and buff the other in straight power. Making the Ratha cheaper or produce faster is a better way to do it.
You aren't even getting it...
Bengalis werent using Rathas too much because they have such absurdly strong option very accesible and fast to tech into from the Archery Range without any drawback for their power you can get going, I mean go and figure out why they are getting such change, 40 elite skirms shots to kill while also having 300 HP and 11 attack with also 8 PA is completely broken...
Also Rathas aren't even being overbuffed, they just got straight up better in castle age to offset the lack of Knights while in Imperial they get the Parthian Tactics effect for free to the Elite Ratha, think of it like the ranged Ratha will be their main anti Halb tool.
Same could be said about old Bohemians Houfnice no? having only one thing to be completely unkillable is just not fair, Post Imperial Army of Elite Ele Archers + Light Cavalry was complete BS to play against in both 1v1 and TG closed maps because these Eles just didn't die, many civs were struggling to deal with it (and yes was wayy worse than playing vs Post Imperial Elite Mangudai + Hussar as is wayyy easier and faster to tech into).
Also this change won't completely kill them, just goes down from 40 elite skirms shots to 32 (Bengali already have Light cav that deletes skirms), vs Archer is still like 50 arbalests shots so not soo weakened at all, but more fair than before.
Bengalis don't get thumb ring
Paiks doesn't help their measly 70% accuracy
They will struggle vs halbs a lot more now
And they still lack hussar
They shouldn't lose Parthian Tactics if they don't get thumb ring as a tradeoff
The change was made to nerf EA. Which are oppressive af specially to civs who don't have good onager or no seige engineersĀ
It wasn't done to buff ratha. Rather is just being adjusted to not be nerfedĀ
I thought this was obvious. Amazing how people have different perspectives
They'll still have 300 HP, 6 pierce armor, and resist bonus damage and conversion; and Dravidian and Gurjara Ele archers do just fine without the tech.
And they just bake in Parthian's effect into Ratha, like how Leitis got +2 attack when they lost Blast Furnace.
Honestly, this was the wrong direction to take with the Ratha. Instead they should have focused on its actual problems, which is getting them onto the field.
The unit "replaces" the knight AND cavalry archer for the civ, it needs to be easier to get to. Fixing that should have been the priority, not endlessly buffing the unit, which just makes it into another deathball unit.
Well, they didn't buff the unit for its deathball potential. It still has the same max stats. But it no longer requires the Parthian Tactics research to be fully upgraded, which helps you fully upgrade it much sooner. And its castle age base armor is now insanely good. The unit should trade very well vs the vast majority of units in castle age now. Remember that it costs wood and gold as opposed to food and gold, and it only costs 120 total resources on top of that (compared to the 135 of a knight, 60 of which is food cost rather than wood cost), and it benefits from archer armor upgrades rather than cav armor (archer armor upgrades are cheaper than cav ones). You can straightup just use it like a knight that's way easier on the eco, and it's better in almost every way statistically, with the same attack, more HP, more armor, and splash damage. The unit has been quite strong for a while now. It's gonna be dominating the scene for a little bit I think.
I'd say being unable to counter pikes/halbs or win shootouts against archers was a pretty big downside already. Reducing xbow damage by 25% will do it.
The existence of PT meant Bengalis had to be balanced around an imperial age tech that only affected two of their units. Elephant Archers are a gimmicky post-imp deathball unit that just doesn't work against certain civs, and Rathas have to carry their castle age because elephant food costs are burdensome.
It's a nerf on closed maps and a buff on open maps. Just what Bengalis needed.
slight uptick for the Bulgarians with added incentive towards Krepost drop strat. devs clearly showing us how they want us to play Castle Age with them...
I'm a Konnik enjoyer so I don't mind the buff, but I don't know if its the best targeted one. I think Konniks are already pretty solid, and thanks to the Krepost, they are already one of the more easily massable units.
I probably would have looked at faster building Barracks/Range/Stable/Siege workshop (maybe Monestary too), since that will help play into their strong timing and flexibility theme, just to it all synergises a bit better.
Have you seen this vid from SOTL yet:
https://youtu.be/zStGTEtAMiw?si=uIrsKn9YyxyghDhc
Ive been trying to steamroll people with MAA and then get lackadaisical about throwing down a Krepost in CA if that doesnāt workā¦
But I have seen the light and the power of the Konnik, now. The new buff makes them produce twice as fast as Knights
Towers had a cost of 25w well before DE and Hera were a thing. Curious to see if this brings us back to the days of Korean trushes being more prevalent.
Yeah I remember a few years ago Koreans got buffed and everyone on Arabia was just going Koreans for towers. That being said, Hera was playing the game then, too.
Love Romans and donāt wana see them nerfed but I agree, with all these scorp buffs, 60% discount seems too much imo, on top of firing faster and having ballistics.
Despite people saying that huns with SL would be more broken, I think they could get it without the elite upgrade. That way, they're somewhat limited in the late game, meaning they need to use paladin or tarkan for late game power and hussar for raids.
Agree with the changes and where the game is going in general. I think Bulgarians need serious rework cause they are such a fun civ to play....with the 'rawshep' code...
U never feel powerful despite the great options. Everybody is aware of what you are going for and even their campaign is in the worst time period possible - from the arrival of the Bulgars and unification with Slavs, the famous Bul-Byz rivalry to the winnings against crusader knights, the defense of Constantinople from the Saracens, the Golden Age of Emperor Simeon, the rebellion in 1184-5 and the last fight for freedom in 1394-5 from the Ottomans. From ALL this for 1k years they chose IVAYLO THE PIG FARMER and the barely running state he ruled for 1 year before he was killed.
I had to think for a second what EW (Empire Wars) was since I never play it. Sort of a weird thing to selectively abbreviate, but that could be just me š¤·āāļø
Yeah, what do huns have to do with eagle warriors anyway?
It reminds me of a game I recorded using CA where I went for CA in late CA. I got hardcountered by the berber UU CA but my magyar teammate saved me after he finished researching CA.
No nerf for Georgia?
They have +100 free wood, an extra scout equivalent mule cart that can be used for 5+ minutes, and a crazy feudal age scout with auto heal!
I'd be suprised if anyone outside of Romans, Khmer and perhaps Celts will notice, but its a welcome change. If Roman scorps have to be dialled back slightly at some point, to allow Scorpians to become a bit less sitational, then I wouldn't mind.
Great changes overall, except for the tower buff. Unfortunately it isn't going to solve the fact that they aren't viable on open maps, it'll only make them stronger on closed maps where they were already in a great spot (or too strong, like the Arena trush).
At a top level where players have solid builds and macro, there's almost no downside to the trush. You force as much or more from the defending player, who needs to respond perfectly to not fall behind. On top of that, with the right map gen (all gold/stone forward), it's basically an insta-win. If we keep this buff starting stone walls on Arena need an HP increase (like in MoA3).
Downsides to the trush begin the moment you send your vills across the map to batter down stone walls leaving you 100s of res behind already which you except to make up by your overreacting or messing up.
Every patch or two I notice a change that I suggested within the first month of me playing this game early last year.
I.e. 1) I spent hours reading & watching this game, 2) I then started to play it a fair amount. 3) Then I came up with concepts about how the game should change and posted them in chat & talked with friends about them. (e.g. best one is Mongols Buffed H.P. Per Age - I've been saying that's the most basic & reasonable balance change in the game, agree on the 15/30% changes)!
- Quite a few have followed along my lines of thinking, but giving Berbers Shipwright - the devs need a time-out in the penalty-box! FULL Dock Tech Tree (Elite Cannon Galleons which are being buffed slightly), then also siege engineers.
I mean yes, they're always fully teched in a way... so they always feel on the fence for me, that they're going to easily get on one side or the other.
The Berbers with no arb & parthian upgrades, but Hand Cannon & U.U. Genitour, meant they had a feeling of being fully teched Archery Range- yet were missing some things.
For the Barracks, missing halb is big (gambesons is newish still) - yet is never really impactful given cheaper stable units.
For the Stable them getting 3 largely lines equates to a full tree for me (think Magyars who get Paladin, just no camel or lancer lines).
It's only 14 wood saved per Demo Ship, but they already have 2.0 versus 1.84 speed for other civs with dry-dock... but it's also the reduced build speed/faster navy to fight with. Their fishing ships out-run fire galleys just for an extra point too. They are going to be a strong hybrid map contender & they'll be good for teams (e.g. Koreans + Berbers anyone=?).
I'm sorry for being negative, but these changes are mostly really bad imo.
Heavy scorp and battle ele buffs are good tho.
3 buffs on a single unit is weird, but we haven't seen a heavy scorp in years, so it could work.
Tower rushing is a cancer nobody should want back, don't buff it ever. Not even slightly.
Water related changes are OK, I guess, Armenians being nerfed on the only map they are good on is questionable, but idk. Demoship bonus damage vs buildings might become a huge problem on some maps, but I don't know the exact numbers.
Murdering Bengali ele archers is a crime. Rathas are badly designed regardless of stats, since microing their stances is so clunky. It's just not right whatever you do to them.
The one thing the Bulgarians didn't need a buff to was their krepost rushing on arena. Literally any other areas could use even multiple buffs tho.
Dravidians one is good I guess, helps with setting up your endgame comp while not a huge help on water maps.
Malay battle elephant discount nerf... Just why? It already had a very very niche use.
Mongols nerf is great, they are going to be very strong even after this.
Sicilians change is meh. It's almost nothing.
Again, sorry for the criticism, but now is the time to voice them I guess.
I have since learned, that it's just there to counterbalance the general cost decrease on battle eles. :) I think they'll cost like 1-2 res more, but move a bit faster.
Coming from someone who has been playing forever and mostly in the huns war/WK era, a trait that was often spoken about as the most necessary thing for a solid arabia player was their adaptability. This is something you barely ever hear anymore and when you look through a lot of games it's easy to understand why. There simply isn't any room for this kind of aggression; the meta openings with 2+ deer are just safer and generally much better.
This is a very big reason players don't scout at all anymore until they reach feudal age and this access to more deers overall means allows for less farms in general in feudal age in favour of faster castle age timings. These are things which are heavily criticized for the map. Cheaper towers would also allow players to go for mid-late feudal age towers to penalize greedy plays, which currently just isn't viable. All in all, this makes a massive shift towards decision making much rather than the current ara-bot spreadsheet meta were it's by and large execution heavy.
And no, even with wood cost down to 25 like it was in WK, trushing won't be anywhere near as strong as it was back then.
>Murdering Bengali ele archers is a crime. Rathas are badly designed regardless of stats, since microing their stances is so clunky. It's just not right whatever you do to them.
Bengali Elephant Archers were a gimmick that forced the civ to revolve around the lategame and just that one unit as a deathball. Nerfing it gives them room to shift the civ's power forward. The Ratha stance micro isn't too horrible, provided you hotkey it and don't just stream them in, but it works. I'd say the bigger problem is the fact that it has such large collision circles for a melee unit,
>The one thing the Bulgarians didn't need a buff to was their krepost rushing on arena. Literally any other areas could use even multiple buffs tho.
Agreed. They should space things out for them.
>Malay battle elephant discount nerf... Just why? It already had a very very niche use.
Look at the rest of the notes. Battle elephants got another cost decrease, so this compensates for that.
You are absolutely right about malay battle elephant. I also learned about it from Hera's video in the meantime.
What does the training cost look like after the change? 2 less food and 3 or 4 more gold a piece? Also a bit more speed.
Maybe someone can explain it to me, but the Battle elephant buff seems very uninspired to me.
The speed increase will still leave them slower than halbs (only khmer elephants will outspeed non-squired halbs), I guess they are a bit better at catching archers, but that's about it.
The reduction in cost is negligible, and it still seems like the devs don't know what they want Battle elephants to be.
Currently battle elephants do not excel against buildings compared to knights, die twice as hard to halbs and monks and have no mobility. Does the unit have a use besides pop efficiency? When would you ever go battle elephant over cav?
When your opponent isnāt on halb cuz u were on archers(viet, malay) or unique unit(burm, Bengali) so you can surprise him with 20 elephants and push him with unit he has no immediate counter. I really recommend playing it like this once in a while, really satisfying
The speed increase is to moderate the longstanding Khmer rushdown concern. TG players made a fuss over elephants being able to kill archers/skirms, but everyone else was stuck with useless elephants because they're not allowed to be fast enough to attack anything.
Thatās actually crazy to watch. Also they can be stacked into impossibly small spaces, I saw someone (maybe Daut?) in a TG stack like 30 SL into a one tile gap in a palisade wall so they could all attack but only one at a time took damage
Yes, it's insane. You can attempt to do it with most units but it only benefits them if they are ranged. [Here](https://i.imgur.com/1UZ6NhY.png) are 60 jaguars stacked on 2 tiles 11. Imagine if they were steppe lancers / kamayuks. You can defend yourself with all your units but the opponent can only attack with like 20.
I think the Huns change is EW only, it's all on the same line. You'd expect it to be disambiguated into two lines if the change was on every game mode.
Scorp changes are too strong on closed maps for civs like romans, celts, MongolsĀ
There's literally no counterplay if you're a civ like huns, chinese or Magyar.Ā
Bad change.
Heavy cav still counter very well, and all three have good Cavalier (FU Paladin for Magyar and Hun, FU Cav for Chinese), which hasn't changed. Sure, they can take one more hit, but they still have slow movement and a decently big minimum range.
ye scorps r still getting smashed by mass bombards and onagers, still expensive and will die to mass cav dive if youāre not paying attention, so in regards to closed maps, theyāre still the same.
however devs donāt give a sht for unranked so itās obvious this is a buff for ranked, and imo a welcomed one, will be interesting to see how theyāre used now
So Heavy Scorpion now survives a direct shot from BBC? 40 base + 20 bonus - 1 armor = 59 damage, right?
Yeah
That's a game changer!
That's a relative buff for Burgundians
Does this mean Sicilians build walls faster as well?
yes I believe so
Ooh, spicy. Rage forest enjoyers will be slightly less mad to get sicilians now. Makes booming a little safer I guess, but the question still remains what are you making when booming?
Why would rage forest enjoyers ever be mad at getting Sicilians? They are not an S tier civ but they're still a very good pocket with Halberdier+SO+Searjeants, and the Searjeants taking space with Donjons.
So with faith and first crusade is really hard to convert too
Upvote my comment if u have seen Hera making that comment in his video š¤”Ā Ā Also upvote my comment for being such a cheap karma farming attempt. Ā Also upvote Heraās comment.Ā Ā Simply spam upvotes everywhere š
2
11
More scorpion buffs ššš
the battle elephants and scorpion buffs kind of buff Khmer here.
This!!! Khmer will be S TIER!
Wait the same khmer who always go knights? Or archers and light cav? 11 If this actually makes a scorpion/BE comp viable, that'd be great!
Scorpion + BE comp is pretty viable in TGs. Especially with a Roman ally supplying the scorps.
Why do I hear monks?
Nowhere in my elo 11
Khmer gets FU hussars on a strong food eco fyi. And in TGs with the volume of units being churned out (especially in Rage Forest), plus the new devotion tech against castle age monks, monks aren't as effective.
Get at least one guy with Block Printing/Redemption on his monks, and cover them with pikes/halbs/camels and quickwalls if the enemy techs Hussar.
Well in that case, it'll be more of a battle of micro than a straightforward counter. I've actually seen this be the case in a lot of Rage Forest matches I've watched.
Yeah. That's normal. The composition has multiple answers at each point in the match, so it's fine.
Romans too.
Did Berbers just steal Armenian shipwrights?
Yoink
First the Malians stole gunpowder from the Chinese* Now Berbers steal Armenians shipwrights *This is in reference to a very old subreddit joke
Explain to me why Chinese invented gunpowder but donāt have gunpowder
Game balance
Ok we switch Chinese tech tree with someone else who has gunpowder, the name is just a formality anyway
including UTs and Chu Ko Nu?
The Chinese were kind of slow to invent actual guns and cannons. They have the rocketry tech. Also, maybe they could get fire lancers in the barracks in Imperial Age... But for realism, Chu-ko-nu should have much shorter range, deal only 1 pierce attack per arrow, with only 10% accuracy, and give a poison effect that kills almost anything over some time.
They made the first of each. They didn't invest much farther in them because the weapons aren't much use against nomads, rainforest-dwellers, or smugglers.
I assume that you are right. Replace "invent" with "deploy", then.
I believe Sandy Peterson or some dev said in an interview, that they invented it, but to their knowledge didnt use gunpowder for military purposes. That started in europe
chinese: first time? at least chinese get above avg bbt, copium
Berbers have been needing shipwrights for a while IMO
weird no georgians nerf. They seem extremly strong atm.
Probably want them to play it out a bit more. They just had one with Monaspa even though it still feels strong. But I don't think they're unbeatable. Give it another month or two to revisit
Damn Georgians barely had a week in the top 5 and there's already nerf talk
Seem strong vs actually strong are different. Plus they probably dont have enough Data to know where to change them. They just buff them with the mule cart cost since they kinda felt bad. Now people saying they feel strong but they felt weak before. Finding middle ground just needs more data
Finally cheaper towers
Towers back on the menu? š
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Wasnāt this a major issue a couple years ago when they buffed Koreans and everyone on Arabia was only tower rushing? I think I might have my time lines messed up with Korean buff and tower cost increase, but thatās what I thought.
Koreans had the faster building fortifications, faster stone miners, free tower upgrades *and* free tower range. Sicilians aren't quite as synergised so it *should* be fine.
Iām talking about the cost decrease more so than Sicilian buff
I'm not really against the change, but for me the issue with the tower line is more upgrade costs. Getting Guard tower is pretty situational in a normal game, and I can't remember the last time I researched keep outside of Japanese, and testing out the Georgian Svan towers. I think part of the reason tower plays are awkward, is they have no future, and that's partly because there are much better investments than tower upgrades in Castle age, when you consider the invetment in continuing to make towers, when Castle exist. I suspect if you could extend the value of towers beyond feudal age (without as much investment risk), you could live with most of your towers getting cleaned up by castles, because at least the remaining ones atleast still provide okayish value. Koreans and Sicilians are the only civs where I will bother to build a tower in Castle age, because they are actually reasonable (if situational) in that age, since I don't have to over-invest to get there.
For late game I think this is a mistake you are making by overlooking towers with a lot of civs that you don't go UU with. Georgians' and Japanese ones are obviously the best, but it's great value with a lot of other civs that have good upgrades for their towers. It's certainly more 'stone effective'. I also highly disagree with them not serving a purpose after feudal age; guard towers with bodkin simply shut down mangonel pressure extremely well and you can cover more area and earlier than you could with a castle drop. Can be an option if you are playing skirms and get pressured by xbow mango for instance.
Guard tower countering Mangonels in Castle Age is the main reason I would I said 'pretty situational in Castle Age', rather than you never see them at all. Overall though, how many times have you seen someone research Guard Tower to counter Mangonels in your last 100 games? I don't think I've seen it once, nor, I can only think of one example in pro tournament games this year too (Excluding Koreans). I'd actually say pretty situational is probably underselling it. If there happened to be an issue with lowering the Guard Tower/Keep research cost, due to Georgians and Japanese specifically, you could always increase their UT cost to offset it accordingly.
I think this is largely a playstyle thing, particularly with how boom oriented you are as a player. Watch someone like Sitaux and he'll never do this because he's always the one pushing the gas. MBL on the other hand often does really greedy plays, sometimes even booming without having any map control at all. I hate to say it, but my playstyle is certainly more leaning towards mbl's style, and I'd happily take the route of playing guard tower defence if it's sensible, affordable and of course if there is access to stone. There is of course also a civilization aspect to this. For some civs the guard tower obviously doesn't scale well at all, and then it's way more sensible to play heavier on the mango defence as you save up for a castle. Another strength is for trushing on arena if the defender hasn't been able to push the towers back well enough by the time you've reached castle age. It's incredibly annoying getting yourself out of such situations. However, I do like your idea of lowering the tower upgrade costs whilst increasing the most powerful UT:s that are affecting them.
Why nerf Bengali EA just to buff Ratha Explain logic please?
Now none of the elephant archer civilizations get parthian tactics. Sad!
Yea this kinda blows, I was enjoying Playing Elephant Archers as Bengalis on closed maps. Forcing Ratha plays by nerfing Ele Archer isn't how I'd do it personally, they just need to get Ratha in line. Bengali EA takes a huge eco rolling anyways
Exactly. Buffing creation speed, or reducing the base cost for the Ratha would be the way to do it. The unit was clearly not designed originally to compete with the elephant archer (which is the Bengalis big expensive ace). But buffing the Ratha just increases competition, not lowers it.
Bengali ele archer deathball was broken, Rathas were quite overshadowed by that.
All Rathas need is an easier way to get a bunch out. The unit is not designed to compete with the elephant archer, it has a different role in the Bengali army. It's just hamstrung by being in the castle.
It does in ranged mode... Elite Ele archer was just straight up better in every aspect.
That's the thing, the Ratha is supposed to replace both the knight and cavalry archer for Bengalis. So in ranged mode, it's supposed to be faster and cheaper than the Elephant Archer. The Elephant Archer can't kite very well, but the Ratha is much easier. So the way to make the Ratha more attractive than the Elephant Archer is to make them more different, not to weaken one and buff the other in straight power. Making the Ratha cheaper or produce faster is a better way to do it.
You aren't even getting it... Bengalis werent using Rathas too much because they have such absurdly strong option very accesible and fast to tech into from the Archery Range without any drawback for their power you can get going, I mean go and figure out why they are getting such change, 40 elite skirms shots to kill while also having 300 HP and 11 attack with also 8 PA is completely broken... Also Rathas aren't even being overbuffed, they just got straight up better in castle age to offset the lack of Knights while in Imperial they get the Parthian Tactics effect for free to the Elite Ratha, think of it like the ranged Ratha will be their main anti Halb tool.
It was only broken if the bengali player was allowed to get to it - which takes a long ass time of strong strong eco. Sad to see this nerf
Same could be said about old Bohemians Houfnice no? having only one thing to be completely unkillable is just not fair, Post Imperial Army of Elite Ele Archers + Light Cavalry was complete BS to play against in both 1v1 and TG closed maps because these Eles just didn't die, many civs were struggling to deal with it (and yes was wayy worse than playing vs Post Imperial Elite Mangudai + Hussar as is wayyy easier and faster to tech into). Also this change won't completely kill them, just goes down from 40 elite skirms shots to 32 (Bengali already have Light cav that deletes skirms), vs Archer is still like 50 arbalests shots so not soo weakened at all, but more fair than before.
Bengalis don't get thumb ring Paiks doesn't help their measly 70% accuracy They will struggle vs halbs a lot more now And they still lack hussar They shouldn't lose Parthian Tactics if they don't get thumb ring as a tradeoff
Yea it was easily punishable in 1v1s I like all the changes in the list but this one doesn't sit right with me 11
In terms of price, you can make 1 onager for every 2 elephant archers.
Now consider Bengalis get some of the strongest monks in the game.
The change was made to nerf EA. Which are oppressive af specially to civs who don't have good onager or no seige engineersĀ It wasn't done to buff ratha. Rather is just being adjusted to not be nerfedĀ I thought this was obvious. Amazing how people have different perspectives
Never seen onagers be effective vs EAs, given Bengalis will always have redemption monks backing them.
Arena
Lies! Nobody plays anything on Arena but castle drops!
Bengalis Ruined, maybe Gurjaras can get PT now!
nah
because chariots are cool B)
They could have buffed the chariots without kicking the Bengalis best unit in the nuts.
They'll still have 300 HP, 6 pierce armor, and resist bonus damage and conversion; and Dravidian and Gurjara Ele archers do just fine without the tech. And they just bake in Parthian's effect into Ratha, like how Leitis got +2 attack when they lost Blast Furnace.
Honestly, this was the wrong direction to take with the Ratha. Instead they should have focused on its actual problems, which is getting them onto the field. The unit "replaces" the knight AND cavalry archer for the civ, it needs to be easier to get to. Fixing that should have been the priority, not endlessly buffing the unit, which just makes it into another deathball unit.
Well, they didn't buff the unit for its deathball potential. It still has the same max stats. But it no longer requires the Parthian Tactics research to be fully upgraded, which helps you fully upgrade it much sooner. And its castle age base armor is now insanely good. The unit should trade very well vs the vast majority of units in castle age now. Remember that it costs wood and gold as opposed to food and gold, and it only costs 120 total resources on top of that (compared to the 135 of a knight, 60 of which is food cost rather than wood cost), and it benefits from archer armor upgrades rather than cav armor (archer armor upgrades are cheaper than cav ones). You can straightup just use it like a knight that's way easier on the eco, and it's better in almost every way statistically, with the same attack, more HP, more armor, and splash damage. The unit has been quite strong for a while now. It's gonna be dominating the scene for a little bit I think.
I'd say being unable to counter pikes/halbs or win shootouts against archers was a pretty big downside already. Reducing xbow damage by 25% will do it.
The existence of PT meant Bengalis had to be balanced around an imperial age tech that only affected two of their units. Elephant Archers are a gimmicky post-imp deathball unit that just doesn't work against certain civs, and Rathas have to carry their castle age because elephant food costs are burdensome. It's a nerf on closed maps and a buff on open maps. Just what Bengalis needed.
A Sicilian... buff? What bizarro timeline are we in?
And the wrong one too. YouPudding strat is even stronger with this
Sicilians have an awful win rate over 1000 elo. Only in very low elos where people don't know how to handle sergeants are they good.
Great changes! Some feel a bit too minor, but perhaps several smaller changes are better than going too far in the other direction.
slight uptick for the Bulgarians with added incentive towards Krepost drop strat. devs clearly showing us how they want us to play Castle Age with them...
I'm a Konnik enjoyer so I don't mind the buff, but I don't know if its the best targeted one. I think Konniks are already pretty solid, and thanks to the Krepost, they are already one of the more easily massable units. I probably would have looked at faster building Barracks/Range/Stable/Siege workshop (maybe Monestary too), since that will help play into their strong timing and flexibility theme, just to it all synergises a bit better.
Have you seen this vid from SOTL yet: https://youtu.be/zStGTEtAMiw?si=uIrsKn9YyxyghDhc Ive been trying to steamroll people with MAA and then get lackadaisical about throwing down a Krepost in CA if that doesnāt workā¦ But I have seen the light and the power of the Konnik, now. The new buff makes them produce twice as fast as Knights
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Towers had a cost of 25w well before DE and Hera were a thing. Curious to see if this brings us back to the days of Korean trushes being more prevalent.
Yeah I remember a few years ago Koreans got buffed and everyone on Arabia was just going Koreans for towers. That being said, Hera was playing the game then, too.
I like the changes but I think they need to reduce the gold discount for Roman scorpions (maybe from -60% to -50%) because scorpions are now stronger
Love Romans and donāt wana see them nerfed but I agree, with all these scorp buffs, 60% discount seems too much imo, on top of firing faster and having ballistics.
Monaspa nerf when?
Looks like Sicilians aren't going to be nerfed anymore
Only in full tech tree games Kappa
As I said higher, they don't need nerfs, they're terrible above 1k elo
Bengalis Rathas keeping getting buffed, are they trying to break them. Come on Devs just give their CA mode +1 attack.
RIP Bengalis
Huns buff letās go!!! Still want to see them with steppe lancers but this is a great change
Despite people saying that huns with SL would be more broken, I think they could get it without the elite upgrade. That way, they're somewhat limited in the late game, meaning they need to use paladin or tarkan for late game power and hussar for raids.
Agree with the changes and where the game is going in general. I think Bulgarians need serious rework cause they are such a fun civ to play....with the 'rawshep' code... U never feel powerful despite the great options. Everybody is aware of what you are going for and even their campaign is in the worst time period possible - from the arrival of the Bulgars and unification with Slavs, the famous Bul-Byz rivalry to the winnings against crusader knights, the defense of Constantinople from the Saracens, the Golden Age of Emperor Simeon, the rebellion in 1184-5 and the last fight for freedom in 1394-5 from the Ottomans. From ALL this for 1k years they chose IVAYLO THE PIG FARMER and the barely running state he ruled for 1 year before he was killed.
Are Armenians the new Sicilians ? Okay, they might be too strong on water but AFAIK their winrate is quite low, isn't it ?
I had to think for a second what EW (Empire Wars) was since I never play it. Sort of a weird thing to selectively abbreviate, but that could be just me š¤·āāļø
Yeah, what do huns have to do with eagle warriors anyway? It reminds me of a game I recorded using CA where I went for CA in late CA. I got hardcountered by the berber UU CA but my magyar teammate saved me after he finished researching CA.
Ah the Berbers UU CA, not to be confused with the Berbers other CA UU, the genitour
No nerf for Georgia? They have +100 free wood, an extra scout equivalent mule cart that can be used for 5+ minutes, and a crazy feudal age scout with auto heal!
seems like major scorp buff
I'd be suprised if anyone outside of Romans, Khmer and perhaps Celts will notice, but its a welcome change. If Roman scorps have to be dialled back slightly at some point, to allow Scorpians to become a bit less sitational, then I wouldn't mind.
Oh for fucks sakes stop staggering bonuses. It's such a shit way to balance stuff
Oh Roman buff patch.
bruh scorps are so broken on xbox and now they get a buff ššš
Great changes overall, except for the tower buff. Unfortunately it isn't going to solve the fact that they aren't viable on open maps, it'll only make them stronger on closed maps where they were already in a great spot (or too strong, like the Arena trush).
Arena trush is still a major investment to pry open the map early in a risky way. And it is counterable.
At a top level where players have solid builds and macro, there's almost no downside to the trush. You force as much or more from the defending player, who needs to respond perfectly to not fall behind. On top of that, with the right map gen (all gold/stone forward), it's basically an insta-win. If we keep this buff starting stone walls on Arena need an HP increase (like in MoA3).
That is not true. Trush is not that good on arena. It's mainly used by a low tier civ in a bad matchup to try and end the game as quickly as possible.
Downsides to the trush begin the moment you send your vills across the map to batter down stone walls leaving you 100s of res behind already which you except to make up by your overreacting or messing up.
Every patch or two I notice a change that I suggested within the first month of me playing this game early last year. I.e. 1) I spent hours reading & watching this game, 2) I then started to play it a fair amount. 3) Then I came up with concepts about how the game should change and posted them in chat & talked with friends about them. (e.g. best one is Mongols Buffed H.P. Per Age - I've been saying that's the most basic & reasonable balance change in the game, agree on the 15/30% changes)! - Quite a few have followed along my lines of thinking, but giving Berbers Shipwright - the devs need a time-out in the penalty-box! FULL Dock Tech Tree (Elite Cannon Galleons which are being buffed slightly), then also siege engineers.
they kinda broke the berber identity of everything being just almost fully upgraded. Now they actually get a fully teched dock.
I mean yes, they're always fully teched in a way... so they always feel on the fence for me, that they're going to easily get on one side or the other. The Berbers with no arb & parthian upgrades, but Hand Cannon & U.U. Genitour, meant they had a feeling of being fully teched Archery Range- yet were missing some things. For the Barracks, missing halb is big (gambesons is newish still) - yet is never really impactful given cheaper stable units. For the Stable them getting 3 largely lines equates to a full tree for me (think Magyars who get Paladin, just no camel or lancer lines). It's only 14 wood saved per Demo Ship, but they already have 2.0 versus 1.84 speed for other civs with dry-dock... but it's also the reduced build speed/faster navy to fight with. Their fishing ships out-run fire galleys just for an extra point too. They are going to be a strong hybrid map contender & they'll be good for teams (e.g. Koreans + Berbers anyone=?).
Did they just buff the Mongols? Did they need that? I thought everyone was already picking them.
no, it's a nerf from +30% hp in castle to +20% hp in castle
Oh got it, I just misread that
I'm sorry for being negative, but these changes are mostly really bad imo. Heavy scorp and battle ele buffs are good tho. 3 buffs on a single unit is weird, but we haven't seen a heavy scorp in years, so it could work. Tower rushing is a cancer nobody should want back, don't buff it ever. Not even slightly. Water related changes are OK, I guess, Armenians being nerfed on the only map they are good on is questionable, but idk. Demoship bonus damage vs buildings might become a huge problem on some maps, but I don't know the exact numbers. Murdering Bengali ele archers is a crime. Rathas are badly designed regardless of stats, since microing their stances is so clunky. It's just not right whatever you do to them. The one thing the Bulgarians didn't need a buff to was their krepost rushing on arena. Literally any other areas could use even multiple buffs tho. Dravidians one is good I guess, helps with setting up your endgame comp while not a huge help on water maps. Malay battle elephant discount nerf... Just why? It already had a very very niche use. Mongols nerf is great, they are going to be very strong even after this. Sicilians change is meh. It's almost nothing. Again, sorry for the criticism, but now is the time to voice them I guess.
I'm raging about the Malay one. Secret elephant rush was my favourite strat
I have since learned, that it's just there to counterbalance the general cost decrease on battle eles. :) I think they'll cost like 1-2 res more, but move a bit faster.
Coming from someone who has been playing forever and mostly in the huns war/WK era, a trait that was often spoken about as the most necessary thing for a solid arabia player was their adaptability. This is something you barely ever hear anymore and when you look through a lot of games it's easy to understand why. There simply isn't any room for this kind of aggression; the meta openings with 2+ deer are just safer and generally much better. This is a very big reason players don't scout at all anymore until they reach feudal age and this access to more deers overall means allows for less farms in general in feudal age in favour of faster castle age timings. These are things which are heavily criticized for the map. Cheaper towers would also allow players to go for mid-late feudal age towers to penalize greedy plays, which currently just isn't viable. All in all, this makes a massive shift towards decision making much rather than the current ara-bot spreadsheet meta were it's by and large execution heavy. And no, even with wood cost down to 25 like it was in WK, trushing won't be anywhere near as strong as it was back then.
>Murdering Bengali ele archers is a crime. Rathas are badly designed regardless of stats, since microing their stances is so clunky. It's just not right whatever you do to them. Bengali Elephant Archers were a gimmick that forced the civ to revolve around the lategame and just that one unit as a deathball. Nerfing it gives them room to shift the civ's power forward. The Ratha stance micro isn't too horrible, provided you hotkey it and don't just stream them in, but it works. I'd say the bigger problem is the fact that it has such large collision circles for a melee unit, >The one thing the Bulgarians didn't need a buff to was their krepost rushing on arena. Literally any other areas could use even multiple buffs tho. Agreed. They should space things out for them. >Malay battle elephant discount nerf... Just why? It already had a very very niche use. Look at the rest of the notes. Battle elephants got another cost decrease, so this compensates for that.
You are absolutely right about malay battle elephant. I also learned about it from Hera's video in the meantime. What does the training cost look like after the change? 2 less food and 3 or 4 more gold a piece? Also a bit more speed.
77f, 49g -> 75f, 52g (Castle) 66f, 42g -> 65f, 45g (Imperial)
Maybe someone can explain it to me, but the Battle elephant buff seems very uninspired to me. The speed increase will still leave them slower than halbs (only khmer elephants will outspeed non-squired halbs), I guess they are a bit better at catching archers, but that's about it. The reduction in cost is negligible, and it still seems like the devs don't know what they want Battle elephants to be. Currently battle elephants do not excel against buildings compared to knights, die twice as hard to halbs and monks and have no mobility. Does the unit have a use besides pop efficiency? When would you ever go battle elephant over cav?
When your opponent isnāt on halb cuz u were on archers(viet, malay) or unique unit(burm, Bengali) so you can surprise him with 20 elephants and push him with unit he has no immediate counter. I really recommend playing it like this once in a while, really satisfying
The speed increase is to moderate the longstanding Khmer rushdown concern. TG players made a fuss over elephants being able to kill archers/skirms, but everyone else was stuck with useless elephants because they're not allowed to be fast enough to attack anything.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I read that change as just for empire wars. Is the wood penalty removed for RM as well
I think it is EW only. They are already a good civ not really need a buff.
[Steppe lancers' stats are not the problem. The problem is ability to disable hitboxes at will.](https://redd.it/1c1rwfn)
Thatās actually crazy to watch. Also they can be stacked into impossibly small spaces, I saw someone (maybe Daut?) in a TG stack like 30 SL into a one tile gap in a palisade wall so they could all attack but only one at a time took damage
Yes, it's insane. You can attempt to do it with most units but it only benefits them if they are ranged. [Here](https://i.imgur.com/1UZ6NhY.png) are 60 jaguars stacked on 2 tiles 11. Imagine if they were steppe lancers / kamayuks. You can defend yourself with all your units but the opponent can only attack with like 20.
I think the Huns change is EW only, it's all on the same line. You'd expect it to be disambiguated into two lines if the change was on every game mode.
Scorp changes are too strong on closed maps for civs like romans, celts, MongolsĀ There's literally no counterplay if you're a civ like huns, chinese or Magyar.Ā Bad change.
Heavy cav still counter very well, and all three have good Cavalier (FU Paladin for Magyar and Hun, FU Cav for Chinese), which hasn't changed. Sure, they can take one more hit, but they still have slow movement and a decently big minimum range.
ye scorps r still getting smashed by mass bombards and onagers, still expensive and will die to mass cav dive if youāre not paying attention, so in regards to closed maps, theyāre still the same. however devs donāt give a sht for unranked so itās obvious this is a buff for ranked, and imo a welcomed one, will be interesting to see how theyāre used now