You gotta ask yourselves wheter you want to balance the game for a competetive, high level, or for the lower levels. A lot of these proposals I'm reading seem like low level changes that will only make it worse on a competetive level.
If one day AoF will attract some of the great pro players from Voobly, notably the clans from the Medieval Wars <3, I'll just say, very honestly, that the changes in competitive play will be very minor:
All the changes that I propose don't nerf ANY unit, except one minor bonus change for the Eagle Warrior (reduced bonus against rams). It's not like Aztecs and Mayans are bad civs after all? Also a 25 to 20% ROF for Japanese infantry in Imperial Age to offset infantry improvements
I also disagree with Carlos +15% ROF instead of +20% for Mongol Cavalry Archers, as I said no unit does have to be nerfed cause it plainly and simply sucks when it's not needed
All the same techniques can be used in AoF as it was in AoC (Drush, Archer flush, Grush, Knight/Crossbow/Mangonels castle wars, Feudal Sling...), and they will be as useful, maybe except speed walling with palissade is more difficult it takes +1 second to build since AOFE. As Biz and Carlos changes suggested (they are both good players, they know what they are talking about), are not made to butcher the powerful civilizations - Aztecs, Mayans, Huns, Viks, maybe Mongols and Celts - but are meant to catch the other civilizations to make them viable against these six.
I propose my suggestions in the same optic as them. In no moments my proposals were thought to nerf the good civs to make them mid-tier ones, I've done the exact opposite