Whenever I see the next game on stream will be regicide fortress, I fear the worst: it's going to be a Maya war. That means one thing: plumed archers all day, and that's sodding boring. However, that is not my biggest grievance. In my opinion, when the developers designed the plumed archer, they made a massive balancing mistake; the decision to give one civilisation a ridiculously cheap and elusive unit which they can spam all game and win through sheer cost efficiency. The consequence is that the Maya are a horribly one-dimensional civilisation that exhibit very little variation. Maya wars become less about narrow edges of strategic depth, but rather about who can mass more plumed archers and rams. Wars against Maya require them to be hard-countered. I will propose a few minor changes that will make the plumed archer a more well-rounded unit, and the Maya a more well-rounded civilisation. This is not an exhaustive discussion, as proper civilisation balancing is a complex issue; however, one thing of which I am fully certain is that the current way the Maya are played is broken.
The central principle of all units in Age of Empires is that they have mutual strengths and weaknesses. This is to encourage balanced unit compositions that play to their strengths and cover each others' weaknesses. I will explain how the plumed archer undermines this basic principle. The plumed archer is cheap, robust, mobile and difficult to kill with archers (extra projectile armour). I can accept that, as these features differentiate the plumed archer from the other archers in the game. However, the plumed archer also has a hidden bonus which makes them deal two extra damage to infantry. This means they deal more damage to infantry than arbalests do. From a balance point of view, this is a problem, because this is in addition to them having higher mobility and a lot of hit points. This means if you catch up with a formation of champions, they will all die before they can kill many plumed archers. When not even eagle warriors successfully counter an archer unit, that's crazy.
Cavalry do competently counter plumed archers, but even here, we run into a few problems. First, the plumed archer fire rate. They fire faster than other archers, so their damage output is higher than advertised. While this is not an issue against heavy cavalry, it is an issue against hussars. Hussars can close the gap easily, but once again, they all die because while they are hacking against high hit points, they are absorbing an obscene number of arrows. On top of that, there are so many plumed archers because they are obscenely easy to mass. If a unit counters many others, they ought to be very expensive (such as janissaries or cataphracts). If they are cheap, then their abilities should be much more limited. Of course, that is not to say Maya can't be countered (they can), but when one civilisation has an obnoxiously easy trick that most units die to, it's clear that there is a problem.
I will leave aside my dislike of the Maya as they appear in Age of Empires, as my grievance that they are exceedingly historically inaccurate (much more so than any other civilisation) is a matter of personal preference. However, I believe a few tweaks would make the Maya a much more balanced civilisation. Increasing the plumed archer's cost has been done in two different balance versions; In Age of Empires: The Forgotten, plumed archers' base cost is 50 wood and 50 gold. In Carlos Ferdinand's balance patch, he reduces the Maya archer discount to 15% in castle age and 20% in imperial. These lead to a cost of 35 wood/gold and 37 wood/gold respectively. I welcome this, as this places their price on the same footing as that of an archer for any other civilisation. I think Forgotten Empires increases their recruitment time, so they are no longer so easy to mass; however, I stand open to correction on that fact.
In addition, I believe a few further changes would remedy the issues I mentioned above. First, abolish the attack bonus against infantry. Plumed archers counter archers and can even take a fair bit of punishment from skirmishers (even if the skirmishers eventually will win), so they should not be allowed to counter infantry so easily as well. Their infantry "counter" should be their dexterity and their increased hit points. Second, Maya should not receive thumb ring. This is in keeping with precedent, as British archers would be a collosal pain in the arse if the developers had not deprived them of thumb ring. If you're going to be able to spam archers on the cheap, you shouldn't have full upgrades, as the Goths do not have the last infantry armour upgrade. Also, as plumed archers have the physique and speed of faster infantry, that should be reflected in their being inferior marksmen, but that is the cost of being faster and able to withstand more punishment. Medieval archers who spent all day with a bow and arrow did not have the bodily strength of rank-and-file infantry. I also think Maya should get champion, not just to protect plumed archers from eagle warriors, but also because plumed archers have a serious weak spot to huskarls and samurai. Even with their attack bonus, Maya otherwise have very little to respond to a Gothic or Japanese player with a well-developed infrastructure. Losing that bonus is compensated by champions, which form a very competent meat shield.
With these changes, the Maya can take on a more balanced semblance of a civilisation with a diverse set of strengths and weaknesses. The strategic depth of Age of Empires is why I still play this game, but certain civilisation features have led to a stale meta-game. That is why I support the current discussions of balance in the community.
The central principle of all units in Age of Empires is that they have mutual strengths and weaknesses. This is to encourage balanced unit compositions that play to their strengths and cover each others' weaknesses. I will explain how the plumed archer undermines this basic principle. The plumed archer is cheap, robust, mobile and difficult to kill with archers (extra projectile armour). I can accept that, as these features differentiate the plumed archer from the other archers in the game. However, the plumed archer also has a hidden bonus which makes them deal two extra damage to infantry. This means they deal more damage to infantry than arbalests do. From a balance point of view, this is a problem, because this is in addition to them having higher mobility and a lot of hit points. This means if you catch up with a formation of champions, they will all die before they can kill many plumed archers. When not even eagle warriors successfully counter an archer unit, that's crazy.
Cavalry do competently counter plumed archers, but even here, we run into a few problems. First, the plumed archer fire rate. They fire faster than other archers, so their damage output is higher than advertised. While this is not an issue against heavy cavalry, it is an issue against hussars. Hussars can close the gap easily, but once again, they all die because while they are hacking against high hit points, they are absorbing an obscene number of arrows. On top of that, there are so many plumed archers because they are obscenely easy to mass. If a unit counters many others, they ought to be very expensive (such as janissaries or cataphracts). If they are cheap, then their abilities should be much more limited. Of course, that is not to say Maya can't be countered (they can), but when one civilisation has an obnoxiously easy trick that most units die to, it's clear that there is a problem.
I will leave aside my dislike of the Maya as they appear in Age of Empires, as my grievance that they are exceedingly historically inaccurate (much more so than any other civilisation) is a matter of personal preference. However, I believe a few tweaks would make the Maya a much more balanced civilisation. Increasing the plumed archer's cost has been done in two different balance versions; In Age of Empires: The Forgotten, plumed archers' base cost is 50 wood and 50 gold. In Carlos Ferdinand's balance patch, he reduces the Maya archer discount to 15% in castle age and 20% in imperial. These lead to a cost of 35 wood/gold and 37 wood/gold respectively. I welcome this, as this places their price on the same footing as that of an archer for any other civilisation. I think Forgotten Empires increases their recruitment time, so they are no longer so easy to mass; however, I stand open to correction on that fact.
In addition, I believe a few further changes would remedy the issues I mentioned above. First, abolish the attack bonus against infantry. Plumed archers counter archers and can even take a fair bit of punishment from skirmishers (even if the skirmishers eventually will win), so they should not be allowed to counter infantry so easily as well. Their infantry "counter" should be their dexterity and their increased hit points. Second, Maya should not receive thumb ring. This is in keeping with precedent, as British archers would be a collosal pain in the arse if the developers had not deprived them of thumb ring. If you're going to be able to spam archers on the cheap, you shouldn't have full upgrades, as the Goths do not have the last infantry armour upgrade. Also, as plumed archers have the physique and speed of faster infantry, that should be reflected in their being inferior marksmen, but that is the cost of being faster and able to withstand more punishment. Medieval archers who spent all day with a bow and arrow did not have the bodily strength of rank-and-file infantry. I also think Maya should get champion, not just to protect plumed archers from eagle warriors, but also because plumed archers have a serious weak spot to huskarls and samurai. Even with their attack bonus, Maya otherwise have very little to respond to a Gothic or Japanese player with a well-developed infrastructure. Losing that bonus is compensated by champions, which form a very competent meat shield.
With these changes, the Maya can take on a more balanced semblance of a civilisation with a diverse set of strengths and weaknesses. The strategic depth of Age of Empires is why I still play this game, but certain civilisation features have led to a stale meta-game. That is why I support the current discussions of balance in the community.