the Needs of its Citizens Citizens’ Needs Balanced by Civil Government
- This topic has 4 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 1 year, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I highly recommend following Orlu’s YouTube channel as he is currently going through his yearly “State of the Civ” review.He covers six additional civilizations, sharing his opinion on their power creeping eco, Flemish Revolution, team bonuses, UT techs, and more.
He also makes suggestions for improvements for each civ, such as adding a third archer armor to the Celts, switching UT techs for the Burmese, adding a Fire Tower to the Byzantines, and more.
>Celt are pretty much Complete, Hera suggest they get the 3rd Archer armour to help vs Cav Archers which seems fair.
I’d rather they actually fix scorpions in imp rather than just have yet another ad-hoc bonus to fix a civ which relies on siege.
As a bonus it helps Teutons who suffer the same weakness.
I mean scorpions are significantly weaker in imp compared to castle age.
Lower relative range, take significantly more damage from archer units, onagers now out-range them, monks significantly outrange them, and bombard cannons exist.
This obviously raises the question of why?
How is it possible for castle age to be balanced and yet scorpions deserve a nerf come imperial age?
Fixing structural problems with ad-hoc civ bonuses has really hurt the game over time.
It turns balance into a much harder game where instead of changing the underlying units you have to change multiple civ boni or tech trees.
>BURGUNDIANS
State of the Civ: Somewhat Problematic
To say the least.
A no-lose sitaution where you have an inflation of eco bonuses.
Followed by a discounted Paladin.
How convinient.
Strategy at its best.
That’s how you civ design these days.
The civ requires much more than some tweaks.
It’s less about the numbers and more about the concept.
​
>BURMESE
>
>Switch the UT techs would also make sense.That’s the problem with every single UT that applies to BE.
​
>CELTS
State of the Civ: Almost There
Celt are pretty much Complete, Hera suggest they get the 3rd Archer armour to help vs Cav Archers which seems fair.
So now we’re going to get suggestion from Hera, the textbook boomer.
Nothing personal, he used to be an awesome player, highly strategic and bold.
These days he just goes for the classic 4TC boom meta, no action till he reaches Imp.
I wouldn’t take notes from him.
Anyways, Celts are in a great place, aggressive players (not just Hoang) can approve.
​
>CHINESE
State of the Civ: Complete
Hard to change this Civ with out messing it up.
Kinda yeah.
​
>CUMANS
>
>•Feigned Retreat (Cav Archers gold cost replace by additional wood)⭐️*Cav Archers would cost of about 80wood but the Civ loses access to Heavy Cav Archer.
Why though?
Kipchaks aren’t good enough?
The civ feels extremely weak in the post-imp post-gold era?
What’s the reasoning behind it besides “because we can”, sure the idea of a trash-CA is possible in AOE, but why forcing it into Cumans?
In order to pull it off properly the civ that’ll have this kind of a tech would have to lack not just Bracer but also the HCA tech (or bloodlines), it’s way too OP and oppressive, serving no strategy nor micro, especially when you have a FU Hussar with it. (and of course 5% movement speed to both)
Please don’t go there, and if you do, it has to be implemented elgantly.
​
>Replacing Paladin, The Imp Steppe Lancer could be a Cheaper and equally strong unit.
You can’t do it.
Cumans need the Paladin as an Anti-Archer answer.
Otherwise you need to give them Siege Eng or FU Skirms.
Don’t make Cumans another version of Tatars.
1.
The burgundian eco is really strong while also having awesome late game options so an eco nerf is fine though it might not be needed.
I’ve never found the team bonus to be too strong, it’s not bad or anything it’s just that it provides food which is a resource that’s pretty much unlimited.
Though flemish revolution is just a terrible idea that should be removed, I like silly things but suddenly getting 100 champions is really powerful.
2.
Burmese deserve some changes but adding elephant archers seems like it just gets rid of their intended archer weakness or will just do nothing because of the lack of armor.
I don’t use Burmese too much though so I can’t say too much, but they do need some change.
3.
Byzantines are great, no changes needed.
4.
I don’t feel like celts need anything changed, maybe replacing stronghold with something infantry related or gimmicky.
5.
Chinese don’t need changes, they might get nerfed though.
6.
You say cumans need lots of changes yet you only remove paladin and cuman mercenaries?
Cuman mercenaries is just bad so it’s justified.
Burgundians:
Mechanically I don’t like either Counstillier charge or Flemish revolution and I would rather replace both.
But thats not going to happen.
Flem rev is so expensive at the moment it’s not really disruptive anymore so that is a fine compromise.
Coustillier I would tone down the charge a bit more and maybe give it some base attack to compensate.
Also vineyards shouldn’t cost gold.
Burmese:
Still could use some more compensation for lacking the second archer armour and arambai might still need a small buff in castle age.
Battle eles sucks but thats an elephant problem, not a Burmese problem.
They also could use elephant archers.
Byzantines:
Probably the civ the least in need of balance changes in the entire game.
Only thing that still needs looking at is greek fire.
Celts:
I actually think this civ could use some more work, it’s left behind a bit by meta changes more so than actual balance changes, the weakness in late castle and early imp has become much more proncounced as the meta progressed and they really need some more to compensate.
Changing strongholds would be a good start but woad raiders honestly could use a cost reduction or at the very least a cost reduction on the elite upgrade.
It costs as much as imperial age and is the second most expensive melee infantry elite upgrade in the game after serjeants.
Other changes can come from indirect buffs like buffs to infantry or scorpions.
Chinese:
Aside from some minor stuff like elite cho ku nu needing a small compensation for the fairly expensive unique upgrade and loss of rate of fire because of the extra arrows and the castle age unique tech (great wall) not being too great and costing stone wheter or not this civ needs changes really comes down to if you think it’s fine to have a civ thats great at top levels but much weaker at lower elos or not.
If the conclusion is that it isn’t fine: Weaken the start by reducing the number of starting villagers and give them extra starting food and give them BBC in imp.
Cumans:
A nightmare to get the balance on this civ right because of the 2 TCs in feudal wich is like 90% of the problems with this civs balance and design.
The remaining 10% is the elite steppe lancer wich has no niche in the game and kipchaks sucking in post imp.
For elite steppe lancer a good start would be to cut the cost of the elite upgrade in half and for kipchaks just add +1 attack and +5hp to the elite upgrade.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
