AOE-II Conquistador nerf?

GermanyAthasos

Longswordman
Jul 8, 2017
553
785
108
Hessen, Germany
#27
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.
Because conqs themselfs are OP, but spanish as a civilization aren't.
If you go 1 TC conqs it can work really well but it's not guaranteed to work.
You need good micro, hope your opponent hasn't walled. You need safe stone to even get to a castle.
While you are building your castle, yor opponent can either rush ballistics or some monasteries.
You are not supposed to face conqs out in the open, you'll have o turtle up until you either have 6-8 monks or 20-30 croosbows.
Conqs are also quite expensive.
Spanish aren't a top tier civilisation on most maps and I haven't seen any tournaent where spanish was a top 3 civilization pick.
 
Likes: wAkKo

Unknownmogers87

Active Member
Feb 26, 2017
134
211
43
#28
I agree with nerfing their melee armor, but otherwise Conqs are fine. They're nowhere near as broken as Arambai were. As others mentioned, we need to look to Spanish as a civ. Spanish are not a top tier 1v1 civ and the big reason to pick them in team games is the trade bonus.

I think there are many other things the game should address, e.g. Mameluks and Organ Guns.
 

GermanyFaultier321

Well Known Pikeman
Dec 28, 2016
259
270
78
Voobly
Faultier321
View profile
Ladder
RM - 1v1
Rating
1718
Wins
575
Losses
615
Streak
1
#29
Yeah, Conqs are fine the way they are. And yes, you only need a decent amount of crossbows with ballistics (thumb ring helps aswell) and you can one-shot them; they might have the same armour as a knight but only have 55 / 75 HP in castle age, so 20-25 xbows can kill them with one shot. In my opininion they are a much better unit to fight them than skirms, because of much higher firering speed. This is an amount you should be able to get to until your opponent has a castle up. Cav archers can work aswell for many civs.
Of course, conqs are deadly when combined with mangonels, but that takes away all their mobility, making it basically the same as an arambai/ mango, jani/mango or cho ku nu/mango push.
Also they are expensive and they start to suck in imperial age, where they can easily be killed by arbalest or get overrun by infantry, because they are quite hard to mass, have a low firering speed, no bonus vs infantry like HC, and Elite Upgrade most times not even worth it....
 

United Nationsaoewc

Active Member
Jul 6, 2018
60
99
33
#31
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
Agreed. Balance can be fine and nice and all, but we don't need to change everything just because we might have too much time to ponder.

1 unit will always be the strongest anyway, no matter what you nerf/buff
 
Likes: Tocaraca

ChilewAkKo

Longswordman
Bronze Supporter
May 19, 2008
1,067
463
108
35
Chile
Voobly
wAkKo
View profile
Ladder
RM - 1v1
Rating
2073
Wins
637
Losses
620
Streak
-1
#32
People use to compare conqs with arambais, but there are big differences between those civs that make arambais a nerf target unlike conqs:

1.- Burmese have a big eco boost, whereas spanish one is not that important (farms can be built faster)
2.- Burmese have a much better early feudal for army fights (infantery bonus plus free lumbercamp ups). Spanish have a strong trush but its about to be nerfed.
3.- Burmese have xbow, which is great for flanks in TG and also for 1v1. If burmese stone is denied, they can still have more options than spanish.
4.- Burmese have strong monks and cheaper technologies. Spanish have decent monks but they need the castle upgrade to make them unique.
5.- Arambais don't cost food, so its much easier to do a 3 tc boom while making constant arambais. With spanish you need to sacrifice some boom to mass conqs.
 
Last edited:

CanadaNuclearPasta

Known Member
Jun 24, 2017
143
188
58
Canada
Voobly
NuclearPasta
View profile
Ladder
RM - Team Games
Rating
1687
Wins
115
Losses
121
Streak
1
#33
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.
 

United StatesInfluenza

Two handed swordman
Jul 7, 2011
2,116
1,072
118
#34
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. 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)
 
Mar 14, 2018
94
75
23
#35
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.
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.
 
Likes: Tocaraca

United StatesInfluenza

Two handed swordman
Jul 7, 2011
2,116
1,072
118
#36
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.
Arambai and CA similarities: ballistics+cost (cost has little to do with how the unit interacts with other units)
Arambai and conq similarities: everything else
 
Likes: Deathcounter

SpainMembTV

Two handed swordman
Bronze Supporter
Aug 17, 2011
846
1,499
118
www.twitch.tv
#38
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.
 

CanadaNuclearPasta

Known Member
Jun 24, 2017
143
188
58
Canada
Voobly
NuclearPasta
View profile
Ladder
RM - Team Games
Rating
1687
Wins
115
Losses
121
Streak
1
#39
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)
Armour, armour class, rate of fire, frame delay, los, projectile speed, resources needed to train, and even being affected by ballistics all make Arambai far more similar to Cav Archers. The only reason Arambai aren't affected by Fletching line of blacksmith upgrades is because of their already high attack they need to offset how low their accuracy is (realistically they would be affected by Fletching at the very least). It'd make no sense having them be affected by thumb ring any more than having it affect Skirmishers.
(Yeah, I did mean HC, sorry my bad)

I get why they're often compared. In game it makes a lot of sense, but this is a balance discussion. When you consider all their stats it's pretty easy to say they're more comparable to other units than each other. Comparing them solely because they're mounted range units from a castle is silly. You wouldn't compare camels and knights like this despite them both being mounted, affected by the same upgrades, and produced by the same building. I honestly don't think we'd compare Conqs and Arambai anymore than Conqs and Camel Archers, or Arambai and Mangudai if it weren't for the high attack.
 

United StatesInfluenza

Two handed swordman
Jul 7, 2011
2,116
1,072
118
#41
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.
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.
 
Likes: TriRem

GermanyKing_Marv

Longswordman
May 27, 2016
561
595
108
27
Germany
#44
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.
 

GermanyFaultier321

Well Known Pikeman
Dec 28, 2016
259
270
78
Voobly
Faultier321
View profile
Ladder
RM - 1v1
Rating
1718
Wins
575
Losses
615
Streak
1
#45
I totally agree with memb, it makes more sense to buff weak units then to nerf the strong ones, at least in many cases - personally i think that the cost increase for karambits aswell as the increase on Couriers is going to far.


Conqs are fine the way they are; of course they are strong in castle age, thats what their time-window is. I recently played ethiops vs brits, had big advantage in early game and then just died to briton range from castle age on; still I dont cry about Britons having to be nerved. I just had to kill that guy in Feudal or survive to imp and get ethiopian siege going, and thats the same how you fight spanish: accept you will have the weaker unit in the time-window of castle age, so turtle up in castle and try to take the decisive fights before or after that.
 

United StatesInfluenza

Two handed swordman
Jul 7, 2011
2,116
1,072
118
#46
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.
Of course Franks have an op scout rush, tho I really wouldn't expect an arena player to figure that out.

People do create feudal age eagles too, but I wouldn't expect someone who goes fc every single game to know that either.

My point was never "ALL of those changes are bad and get rid of them!" And I have no idea how you misunderstood me. I'm saying that "the game has been this way for 20 years" is a completely ridiculous argument given the changes that have been made so far.

Conqs currently are the best unit in the castle age. Spanish are currently the easiest civ to play defensively with as long as they have a stone mine. We see conqs in every setting on every map, with pure water maps being the only exception.

If you don't think their melee armor should be reduced, you are not at all serious about balancing the game. The mere existence of another civ that also needs a nerf is not a good argument. Watch spanish 1v1 games, whatever the map. 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.
 

GermanyFaultier321

Well Known Pikeman
Dec 28, 2016
259
270
78
Voobly
Faultier321
View profile
Ladder
RM - 1v1
Rating
1718
Wins
575
Losses
615
Streak
1
#48
. 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.
and whats so bad about that? Sure they are a bit of a one-sided civ during one out of four ages, but many civs have their go-to strategy, like you will very often see early imperial ups and BBC with turks, and you will almost always see xbows in Castle age as Brits or Ethiops. Especially since you are forced to do something else later in the game, i dont see a problem with the Conquistador time-window.

I do understand you might take away their melee armour, since it should be punished when you dont take care of them. Not a huge fan of that change, but i see the point. Besides that, please, please just let conqs be conqs.
 
Likes: Tocaraca

FinlandRuubenstock

Active Member
Aug 5, 2011
125
92
33
Suomi
#49
Thing with conqs is that there is not really many counter units for it in castle age. In this modern micro era conqs have unlimited micro potential making them able to kill cost effectively every unit that castle age can offer. It comes to the point when best counter to them is to wall yourself and mass monks which leads to rather monotone games. 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.

There can be argument made about Spanish lack of xbows that justifies strong UU for them. It is also true that setting up conqs requires huge eco investments. But as long as we have Burmese with somewhat better eco than spanish, better man at arms, option to go xbows and UU that works similar way as Spanish but is easier to mass, I don't see reason why conqs should be the first on the nerf list.

Maybe 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.
 

AustriaDeathcounter

Longswordman
Oct 15, 2017
522
599
108
18
docs.google.com
#50
Maybe 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.
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 same
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.
Elite Battle Elephant aswell no?
 
Last edited:
Likes: Tocaraca

Time

Your time
G M T
Your zone

Upcoming Events

ECL SE Asia 1v1 JorDan vs Tim
Friday 12:00 (GMT +01:00)
ECL SE Asia 1v1 JorDan vs Tim
Improvement Cup 4v4 WB Final
Saturday 11:30 (GMT +01:00)
new Chapter vs Australia
ECL SE Asia 1v1 Villese vs St4rk
Saturday 13:00 (GMT +01:00)
ECL SE Asia 1v1 Villese vs St4rk
ECL South East Asia 1v1 Ro16
Saturday 15:00 (GMT +01:00)
ECL South East Asia 1v1 Ro16
Improvement Cup 3v3 WB Final
Sunday 02:00 (GMT +01:00)
CSPD vs Australia D
ECL South East Asia 1v1 Ro16
Sunday 15:00 (GMT +01:00)
ECL South East Asia 1v1 Ro16
ECL SE Asia 1v1 TaToH vs ReallyDiao
Tuesday 14:00 (GMT +01:00)
ECL SE Asia 1v1 TaToH vs ReallyDiao
ECL SE Asia 1v1 MbL vs yinghua
Wednesday 15:00 (GMT +01:00)
ECL SE Asia 1v1 MbL vs yinghua
King of the Plebs 2
March 7th 17:00 (GMT +01:00)
RO16 1400-1700 ELO Tournament

Age Of Empires On Twitch

There are in total 16 streamers online
Click here for details
Age of Empires II 143 viewers
Age of Empires II 57 viewers
Age of Empires II 38 viewers
Age of Empires II 36 viewers
Age of Empires II 24 viewers

Whats new?

Top