Onager to SO is probable one of the best upgrades in game. +25 attack + splash damage is everything but insignificant.
Its better to revoke the ability to cut trees from onagers. Its too easy to break into enemy's territory.
Aofe is kinda forcing all players to adapt aggressive play style which is not fair for those who rely on strategy than speed & micro
It's true though the cost should be a bit higher for the upgrade, as I see this as a major turning point for michi wars.
Example of closed maps that brings new strategies and lets all civilizations playable
Forest Nothing
Michi
Black Forest
You cannot have perfect balance.
2/23 having a disadvantage is far better than 6/18 having an advantage.
More balanced imo.
So personally do I prefer the current solution. It makes maps like michi and BF more exciting and fair imo, turks well makes up for the lack of onager upgrade it only leaves huns with a disadvantage.
So personally do I prefer the current solution. It makes maps like michi and BF more exciting and fair imo, turks well makes up for the lack of onager upgrade it only leaves huns with a disadvantage.
The problem is that post-imp civs don't get a bonus on open maps!
Post imp civs are still post imp civs, they are better in post imp on all maps. SO is still way better then regular onager, all that has changed is that closed map are not completely one sided.
^^ I guess that making all the civs equally playable on all the maps is just impossible In order for it to be unique in a way, a civ needs to have a "preferred" style of play, otherwise all the civs would be the same.Very true what you said, but on most maps the post-imp civs won't reach the last stages of the game because they either have no eco bonuses or they cannot produce units at a fast speed. So the effect will be that on BF we will see more and more civs which is a good thing (I love BF map!) but on Arabia we still won't be able to see Teutons, Koreans, Turks, Saracens because Huns, Mayans, Mongols, Aztecs and so on will still rule.Post imp civs are still post imp civs, they are better in post imp on all maps. SO is still way better then regular onager, all that has changed is that closed map are not completely one sided.
You seem to be assuming that the ONLY use for siege onagers is in knocking down trees; that no one would ever get siege onager on a map without the cutting ability. While it is true that most maps will be over before siege onager gets a chance to be researched, there are records from The Tribal Wars, a LN map, with siege onager getting researched. That's not just for cutting, as the map is open enough.
So if cutting isn't the only thing, then the buff to onagers you mention isn't always applicable, which means that while there may be slightly less of a gap between the two than before, the gap is still large enough to warrant the cost of the upgrade.
Seriously, 25 extra attack for an upgrade, along with significantly more area damage.