Stop nerfing left and right pls!!
Conqs have been OP since the first balance discussion but it was untouched even when overall it was the most OP unit in castle age, we don't know why they didn't touch them they even gave spanish more power with their second UT, the guys in charge sometimes take decisions based not in the actual balance but in their preferences, conqs are deftly fun to play with but nasty to play against them and everybody can agree on that, the unit is broken and it wins most of the time cost effectively vs their supposed counters, if you can't see that then this is not a balance discussion but a topic about preferences and tastes.
The desire for everything to be equal is so boring. Spanish unique unit is strong, so what? Franks have great knights. Vikings great eco. Etc
People use to compare conqs with arambais, but there are big differences between those civs that make arambais a nerf target unlike conqs
I find comparing Conqs and Arambai themselves to be really ridiculous as well. The only real similarites are being a ranged mounted castle unit with high attack. Arambai have more in common with Cav Archers, and Conqs have more in common with HCA. I think it's silly to compare two units to each other just because they look similar at first glance.
dude what in the hell are you even talking about. conqs and arambai are compared with eachother because they are both high-attack, ranged, mounted units produced from a castle, that don't benefit from fletching, bodkin arrow, bracer, and thumb ring.
Arambai and CA similarities: ballistics+cost (cost has little to do with how the unit interacts with other units)To complete the list: Arambai do benefit from ballistics and their accuracy might be worse than the Conqs'. The CA-comparison isn't that far fetched since they also cost wood and gold.
dude what in the hell are you even talking about. conqs and arambai are compared with eachother because they are both high-attack, ranged, mounted units produced from a castle, that don't benefit from fletching, bodkin arrow, bracer, and thumb ring. They have way more in common with each other than they do with cavalry archers and hand cannonneers. (I assume u mean HC as opposed to HCA)
also wolfs will be stronger than unis...
While I can understand where this sentiment comes from, of not wanting to change what's been a certain way for so long... where was this idea when they gave japanese bloodlines, made franks have OP sc, forage bonus, made feudal age eagle warriors, fire galleys, changed base cost of cav archers, etc.? All those things change the game far more than slightly nerfing an incredibly strong unit.why we nerfing every single unit? isn´t more fun to buff others? if we keep nerfing, spanish vills and incas vills will have to be nerf because they will win the games, also wolfs will be stronger than unis... come on, conqs has been 20 years like that and now need to be nerf?
i have same opinion in some other units, because little by little we been destroying civilizations and units, who use condotieros now? and could make some more examples.
Titanic.
Conqs are extremely powerful, and the best argument against them being nerfed is "burmese are stronger!" when everyone thinks they should be nerfed too...
While I can understand where this sentiment comes from, of not wanting to change what's been a certain way for so long... where was this idea when they gave japanese bloodlines, made franks have OP sc, forage bonus, made feudal age eagle warriors, fire galleys, changed base cost of cav archers, etc.? All those things change the game far more than slightly nerfing an incredibly strong unit.
Nobody wants to nerf conqs until they are unusable. I thought the way they nerfed condos was wrong and it wasn't even consistent with a majority of the suggestions. Conqs are extremely powerful, and the best argument against them being nerfed is "burmese are stronger!" when everyone thinks they should be nerfed too...
Conqs should lose their melee armor, 100%. If you **** up microing such an easily microable unit like a conq vs melee units, you deserve to lose your army.
Come on man , calling frank scouts an op unit are you serious? Every civ with bloodlines will win the scout fight in the end and they suck the same way when fighting spears like other scouts.
Feudal age eagle warrior is also fine, after their creation time was changed nobody is doing them anyway.
Change base cost of ca is also fine because nobody was doing them except with huns. Now we see them from time to time with other civs .
These changes were needed. While a change with conq is not needed at all because it will make Spanish weaker and they are already not the best.
A unit/ strategy can only be op when you see it on different maps with different settings and winning in 1v1 2v2 3v3 4v4 most of the time.
For example Korea trush is used even on islands and it wins. So you can say it’s op.
. I bet out of 100 games, you could count the times a conq wasn't produced in the castle age on 1 hand. The point is that playing as the spanish no longer has any strategy whatsover. You will go conqs no matter what, because that is by far the strongest strategy the civ has to offer.
Exactly, and the Elite version of the unit can gain +2 melee armor, +2 cavalry archer armor again. Meaning that elite conqs will stay the sameMaybe skirms could be made more viable counter for conqs making them represent cavalry archer class. It would increase skirms attack by 2 against conqs. Also removing their melee armor wouldn't change things too much. If melee units would be too strong against conqs then, problem wouldn't be in the unit anymore more like in the controller of it.
Elite Battle Elephant aswell no?For me having units that has no proper counter units diminishes strategic dimension of the game. Same goes with karambits and Indian camels for me.