AOE-II DE Until when these things will remain without nerfs?! (Part 1)

[MAE_JO]

Aztecs is top 5 and Chinese top 10 in the high elo ladder.
And yeah, they get picked often in tournaments, and pros rate them S tier or A tier.

But, which pro rates Sicilians S tier or A tier? If it's as broken as you say it is, surely the pros would pick it more often in tournaments, would rate them highly in their tier system etc. Right?

To use the instant army to full effect, you need 5 TCs and need to happen while enemy is relatively low in army number. Which isn't happening in almost any scenario except in arena or fortress.
And the units that come out of it are mediocre. Almost everyone agrees that sergeants are just plain mediocre.
Not broken. If you disagree, tell me. What percentage of the games do you think were decided by First Crusade? I'll take a wild guess and assume it's less than 5%.

50% bonus damage reduction looks good on paper, but Sicilians otherwise just get cavalier. Sicilians don't get thumb ring, so their arbs also mediocre. Point being, the 50% bonus damage reduction would be OP on a civ which has great units to begin with (say if they had a paladin instead of cavalier)
Sicilian cavalier loses to any paladin, even Byzantine paladin. So, overpowering them with heavy cav is an option. They also lose 1v1 to heavy camels, though they still do much better against them than regular cavalier. They perform nearly the same as a regular paladin against heavy cav archer (a bit worse).
Like I said, their cavaliers are OP only against foot archer civs.

No they are broken and I will show you how because you meassured the things in a wrong way. If someone asked you what is the main thing that keep the balance between the civs what will you answer him? The answer is clear, it is the counter system. Depending on this answer you will know how Sicilians and other broken civs break the counter system or the counter system barely do vs them. Sicilians have 50% less damage, lets take the knight for example. Since the Siclians knight take less 50% damage, this mean the counter system doesn't work vs them, the Sicilians knight kill camel raider in 1v1 fight with 35hp left, pikes do nothing and you ignored this and kept talking about heavy camels and imp battles and you forgot that actually castle age take the biggest part in the game. But now since camels and pikes do nothing what can I do?! The only thing is mirror, which means the Sicilian player go knights then I will do the same, however what if I have bad stables? The solution is the trash counter or camels? But this doesn't work with Sicilians since their 50% bonus less damage kill the counter play!! Did you realise it now or not?! You are forcing other civs to things they are not good at and make the game go as your civ is and kill the normal counter system. Not only 50% less damage is broken, the 100% castle and tc build is broken too, 1st crusade broekn, etc. By applying how the counter system or normal units should work, you will realise how Lithuans, Burgundians, Huns, Sicilians, Eagles, Mesos, Britons, Wagons, Gurjaras, Hindus and many others are broken.

 

[akku]

No they are broken and I will show you how because you meassured the things in a wrong way. If someone asked you what is the main thing that keep the balance between the civs what will you answer him? The answer is clear, it is the counter system. Depending on this answer you will know how Sicilians and other broken civs break the counter system or the counter system barely do vs them. Sicilians have 50% less damage, lets take the knight for example. Since the Siclians knight take less 50% damage, this mean the counter system doesn't work vs them, the Sicilians knight kill camel raider in 1v1 fight with 35hp left, pikes do nothing and you ignored this and kept talking about heavy camels and imp battles and you forgot that actually castle age take the biggest part in the game. But now since camels and pikes do nothing what can I do?! The only thing is mirror, which means the Sicilian player go knights then I will do the same, however what if I have bad stables? The solution is the trash counter or camels? But this doesn't work with Sicilians since their 50% bonus less damage kill the counter play!! Did you realise it now or not?! You are forcing other civs to things they are not good at and make the game go as your civ is and kill the normal counter system. Not only 50% less damage is broken, the 100% castle and tc build is broken too, 1st crusade broekn, etc. By applying how the counter system or normal units should work, you will realise how Lithuans, Burgundians, Huns, Sicilians, Eagles, Mesos, Britons, Wagons, Gurjaras, Hindus and many others are broken.

Counter unit system is just one aspect of the game.
There are many other aspects, such as: eco bonus, overall power of the units, powerspikes/timing etc. You're just considering one of the aspects, and because Sicilians don't fully get countered (they still die cost effective against halbs), you're saying it's broken.

How about we consider the entire picture, and then call a civ broken?
I think most pros would just put Sicilians in B tier or C tier.

It's not like I didn't include the castle age at all, while making my point.
I just didn't mention it because it wasn't worth it IMO. In castle age, sicilian knights can be matched by enemy knights or crossbows or cav archer. There exists no civ which sucks in ALL of these units, all civs at least have one of these options as their strength.

Why I compare with Gold units? It's because, vast majority of the 1v1s revolve around gold units until mid-late imperial age, when gold starts running out. At which point, Sicilians cavalier shouldn't even be an issue really, because they wouldn't have gold to spam either.
And pretty much all the TGs revolve around gold units too.

The problem arise only in imperial age, for foot archer civs in the mid imp (which I acknowledged). All other civs have the gold units sufficient to deal fine with the Sicilian Cavalier.

 

[MAE_JO]

Counter unit system is just one aspect of the game.
There are many other aspects, such as: eco bonus, overall power of the units, powerspikes/timing etc. You're just considering one of the aspects, and because Sicilians don't fully get countered (they still die cost effective against halbs), you're saying it's broken.

How about we consider the entire picture, and then call a civ broken?
I think most pros would just put Sicilians in B tier or C tier.

It's not like I didn't include the castle age at all, while making my point.
I just didn't mention it because it wasn't worth it IMO. In castle age, sicilian knights can be matched by enemy knights or crossbows or cav archer. There exists no civ which sucks in ALL of these units, all civs at least have one of these options as their strength.

Why I compare with Gold units? It's because, vast majority of the 1v1s revolve around gold units until mid-late imperial age, when gold starts running out. At which point, Sicilians cavalier shouldn't even be an issue really, because they wouldn't have gold to spam either.
And pretty much all the TGs revolve around gold units too.

The problem arise only in imperial age, for foot archer civs in the mid imp (which I acknowledged). All other civs have the gold units sufficient to deal fine with the Sicilian Cavalier.

I didn't ignore eco factors and bonuses and this is why I said Burgundians for example have broken eo bonus. However, what you mentioned will never change how the Sicilians are broken, the only way to counter Sicilians knights is mirror them in the castle age or having better knights or camels with better stats than Sicilians 50% less damage. Cav archers counter them if you have a very big death ball of CA and for only limited time because Hauberk still broken too. Xbows do nothing and 1 mangonel or 1 scorp can make them nothing and knights can overwhelming them and kill them ez or surround them. Not all civs have that options you mentioned becasue already 2 options are dead, which they are pikes and camels. You can deal with xbows super easy and Sicilians feudal is insane with their scout rush and their farms in feudal have 375F like having heavy plaw and 300 stone so they are actually not bad. It is hard to counter Sicilians except if the other player is just bad. 1st crusade is an option to make a mess in the game, the broken 50% less damage, 100% build castles, all these factors make them a cancer civ and toxic civ with toxic design like Burger-ians and broken cheap mesos eagle line and many many others.

Counter unit system is just one aspect of the game.
There are many other aspects, such as: eco bonus, overall power of the units, powerspikes/timing etc. You're just considering one of the aspects, and because Sicilians don't fully get countered (they still die cost effective against halbs), you're saying it's broken.

How about we consider the entire picture, and then call a civ broken?
I think most pros would just put Sicilians in B tier or C tier.

It's not like I didn't include the castle age at all, while making my point.
I just didn't mention it because it wasn't worth it IMO. In castle age, sicilian knights can be matched by enemy knights or crossbows or cav archer. There exists no civ which sucks in ALL of these units, all civs at least have one of these options as their strength.

Why I compare with Gold units? It's because, vast majority of the 1v1s revolve around gold units until mid-late imperial age, when gold starts running out. At which point, Sicilians cavalier shouldn't even be an issue really, because they wouldn't have gold to spam either.
And pretty much all the TGs revolve around gold units too.

The problem arise only in imperial age, for foot archer civs in the mid imp (which I acknowledged). All other civs have the gold units sufficient to deal fine with the Sicilian Cavalier.

 

[ChristheCo]

"the civ has 42% winrate in 165+, nearly never gets picked in top tier games, but man are they TOTALLY BROKEN!"

 

[Instinctz]

You guys aren't going to be abls to talk sense into equalizer. He doesn't care what it takes for something to be broken, if something is "op" (but balanced by obvious trade offs, like sicilian heavy cavalry requiring heavy investment into various techs, or Burgundians eco requiring heavy up front investment to have actual payoff), he wants it nerfed.

Like just look at his proposed eagle nerfs. If you made that unit 40 food and 50 gold it would hardly see use. But far be it for the great equalizer to actually give a crap about balance.

 

[MAE_JO]

You guys aren't going to be abls to talk sense into equalizer. He doesn't care what it takes for something to be broken, if something is "op" (but balanced by obvious trade offs, like sicilian heavy cavalry requiring heavy investment into various techs, or Burgundians eco requiring heavy up front investment to have actual payoff), he wants it nerfed.

Like just look at his proposed eagle nerfs. If you made that unit 40 food and 50 gold it would hardly see use. But far be it for the great equalizer to actually give a crap about balance.

Hey Mat! How are you man! Miss you so much my old friend, I may back to forums who knows! Anyway, about Eagles I didn't say exactly how much should they increase their cost, I said it should be between 30 and 40, and 35 would be good, and they will still cheap even with 35 but still better than 20 considering how their role is insane. In general my suggestions won't remove those civs idintity nor make them weak, but they will be Balanced which is not the case currently.

 

[Instinctz]

Hey Mat! How are you man! Miss you so much my old friend, I may back to forums who knows! Anyway, about Eagles I didn't say exactly how should they increase their cost, I said it should be between 30 and 40, and 35 would be good, and they will still cheap even with 35 but still better than 20 considering how their role is insane. In general my suggestions won't remove those civs idintity nor make them weak, but they will be Balanced which is not the case currently.

If you understand balance explain why you're nerfing lithuanians and sicilians? Two civs that are balanced. Oh wait. Because you dont have a clue. Sicilian cavaliers can be very resilient but requite a huge investment to do so. On par with paladin. As for 35 food cost eagles, don't forget to drop rgeir gold cost. Oh wait. You didn't. Bscausw you don't care about balance.

If you care about balance how are you going to compensate Koreans and portuguese


The fact tou don't even touch on these shows you don't care about balance. You Nerf things you consider problematic but you FAIL at considering the big picture.

If you understand balance please explain why you nerf bad civs without any form of compensation? It's simple. You don't know what you're doing. And you have no concept of balance.

 

[MAE_JO]

If you understand balance explain why you're nerfing lithuanians and sicilians? Two civs that are balanced. Oh wait. Because you dont have a clue.

Because both have broken bonuses. For Sicilians they are waaay more broken than anyone. The Sicilians are just pain, the civ with their 50% bonus less damage literally have no counter to their knights, the Sicilians knight kill camel raider in 1v1 fight with 35hp left, and pikes do nothing, so you either have better knignts or just resign. On the other hand xbows barely counter them and knights can overwhelm them and kill them and 1 mangonel more than enough, with Hauberk UT in imp too arbs do nothing. On the other hand their 100% build for castles and TCs is just broken by numbers, that castle can't be deny and their 1st crusade still a problem, so how this civ is not broken?! Lithuanians start from +150f give them insane early advantage early and make them take the control early with cheese and they almost have no weaknesses, nerfing their 150F to 100 and remove thumb ring would be enough some how, however, their relic bonus still super strong.

 

[Lokalo]

Well such topics are quite hard, because many of such stuff works very differently in different situations. Like you said @akku , for foot archer civs is hard to deal with Sicilians and they need to finish them quick. Yeah, but that's quite hard to finish them quickly due fast tc and castle building, they can defend early aggression and castle drop quite easily. And their winrate is bad due they have pretty much nothing early game and are quite strange to play. However if they do get into hauberk cavalier it is completely broken against half of civs as you yourself agreed. Also I remember Viper winning game due first crusade, well his approach would be different too if it would be removed or different. But sicilians were picked in kotd not that rarely I believe. But yes, that civ overall is very average and only starts shining hard in early imp after hauberk, but again, half of civs still have good answers, although if you play with arbalest civ often it feels awful to play against it.

Franks should be slightly nerfed, maybe castle cost decrease removed or like -5% on berries boost. They are clearly super easy and super smooth civ with strongest paladins. They are usually super easy to guess what they will do, but they still very good at what they do. And winrate shows that, they are super simple to play and even if you know what they will do they still do great. Around 56% for years kind of asks for SLIGHT nerf.

As for wagons, well war wagons might be bit too OP, but at same time koreans barely have anything apart that, so maybe slight nerf could happen, but not much.
As for hussite wagons, well I kind of hate that advice, just go mangonels. Well that works only until bohemian player gets redemtion, then that mangonels plan is completely screwed. After their reduction on monastery that takes bit longer, but it's far from perfect to go mangonels, that usually helps only for early stage.

Mayans. I think eldorado should be nerfed and give like +25-30 hp, is bit dumb that mayans currently has best archer play and best eagles. Without as good EW switch, they are quite fine I think(not sure about TG).

Lithuanians... Well they are for sure quite good civ, but don't think they are OP, unless you let them get relics super easy without a fight, then sure, can be super though, but you should at least fight for it.

However all of those civs are far far from Hindustanis and Gurjaras. Yesterday I literally won only due I had gurjaras, they are just so easy, you can counter xbow/hc or knights with stable units, meaning you dont even need separate upgrades to counter different type units, which is huge benefit, not to mention their early eco is nice too. I don't really understand what to do against gurjaras, as even if you go halbs, then throwers shows up and kill all. Not to mention raiding with shriwamsha riders is just a blast.

Honestly I really feel bit confused about how Hindustanis and Gurjaras are super good civs and they both have BBC too, while other 2 civs are quite bad on new DLC and have no BBC. I mean they not neccesary bad, especially dravidians, their early game is good, but feels quite weird with light cavalry not even having bloodlines, feel like bloodlines and maybe BBC would make them quite good civ.
And Bengalis are very good late game, but feels super akward due pretty much everything gets countered by skirms early, so without getting game late into rathas they dont really have much going for them.

P.S. longswordsmen do counter EW nowadays quite hard, how that's "laughable"? Everytime I went longswordsmen against EW I have won quite easily, sure is more tricky due adding xbow with EW, but if you are walled, EW spam nowadays is way less scary than it was before longswordsmen buffs.

 

[Instinctz]

The Sicilians are just pain, the civ with their 50% bonus less damage literally have no counter to their knights

Meanwhile winrates say otherwise. Not only that but pros consider them b or c tier at best.
Nvm that for their knights to get as good as you state requires two very expensive unique techs.

the Sicilians knight kill camel raider in 1v1 fight with 35hp left

Camel RIDER. And? So what. You can still fight them with pikes and win cost effectively.

and pikes do nothing, so you either have better knignts or just resign

Still cost effective against knights, but facts were never your strong suit. If what you say is SO TRUE, WHY DO WINRATES NOT REFLECT THIS?

the other hand xbows barely counter them

Xbows vs knights is unchanged in castle age for Sicilians. More proof you don't care about facts.

with Hauberk UT in imp too arbs do nothing

You mean the tech that costs almost as much as Paladin?

On the other hand their 100% build for castles and TCs is just broken by numbers, that castle can't be deny and their 1st crusade still a problem, so how this civ is not broken?!

Inferior economy leading to a slow start? Bad options outside of knights?

Lithuanians start from +150f give them insane early advantage early

With zero long term economy bonuses, meaning a clear weakness. Don't see you nerfing mongols early economy bonus despite giving them the same advantage.

nerfing their 150F to 100 and remove thumb ring would be enough some how, however, their relic bonus still super strong

Show me the stats showing they are op? Tournaments don't reflect, nor do ladder stats and winrates.


As for the relic bonus.
1) has to be worked for.
2) can be lost.
3) lack blast furnace.

About the only areas where lithuanians are top 5 now is hybrid maps. Don't see you nerfing persians or Japanese.

 

[MAE_JO]

If you understand balance explain why you're nerfing lithuanians and sicilians? Two civs that are balanced. Oh wait. Because you dont have a clue. Sicilian cavaliers can be very resilient but requite a huge investment to do so. On par with paladin. As for 35 food cost eagles, don't forget to drop rgeir gold cost. Oh wait. You didn't. Bscausw you don't care about balance.

If you care about balance how are you going to compensate Koreans and portuguese


The fact tou don't even touch on these shows you don't care about balance. You Nerf things you consider problematic but you FAIL at considering the big picture.

If you understand balance please explain why you nerf bad civs without any form of compensation? It's simple. You don't know what you're doing. And you have no concept of balance.

The fact I didn't put a compensate becasue they clearly don't need. I mean the main idea of nerfing the Eagles cost becasue they are so so cheap, so what I suggest is make their cost normal and make sense but not cheap dirt as they are now! 30F, 50G or even 35F, 50G still a good cost, maybe 35F, 45G but still the unit in general is cheap. For Koreans maybe bring their wood discount to their siege units as a compensate? Portuguese need nothing even if we nerf their guns becasue their insane 20% gold discount with their wide tech tree is super strong and make them so flexible.

 

[MAE_JO]

Meanwhile winrates say otherwise. Not only that but pros consider them b or c tier at best.
Nvm that for their knights to get as good as you state requires two very expensive unique techs.


Camel RIDER. And? So what. You can still fight them with pikes and win cost effectively.



Still cost effective against knights, but facts were never your strong suit. If what you say is SO TRUE, WHY DO WINRATES NOT REFLECT THIS?


Xbows vs knights is unchanged in castle age for Sicilians. More proof you don't care about facts.



You mean the tech that costs almost as much as Paladin?


Inferior economy leading to a slow start? Bad options outside of knights?



With zero long term economy bonuses, meaning a clear weakness. Don't see you nerfing mongols early economy bonus despite giving them the same advantage.

Show me the stats showing they are op? Tournaments don't reflect, nor do ladder stats and winrates.


As for the relic bonus.
1) has to be worked for.
2) can be lost.
3) lack blast furnace.

About the only areas where lithuanians are top 5 now is hybrid maps. Don't see you nerfing persians or Japanese.

Winrates are not enough factor to judge with, the truth that the counter system doesn't work vs Sicilians 50% less damage is more than enough to show how broken they are, this is regardless how their first crusade and 100% build is broken. Lithuanians even with 100F in the start will remain strong and my suggestion to nerf their thumb ring because the civ actually have 0 weaknesses. Their Halbs and skirms have great armor and move faster, their monasteries are great, relic bonus with free attack, winged hussars, BBC, insane UU that ignore armor, even their CA are playable and only lack parthian tactic and in arena they are hard to deal with too.

 

[Xellos]

You're wrong.

 

[Instinctz]

so what I suggest is make their cost normal and make sense but not cheap dirt as they are now! 30F, 50G or even 35F, 50G still a good cost, maybe 35F, 45G but still the unit in general is cheap

The fact you think 35 food and 50g is reasonable is absolutely hilarious. Archers are still a better unit then eagles and cheaper then that.

Portuguese need nothing even if we nerf their guns becasue their insane 20% gold discount with their wide tech tree is super strong and make them so flexible

Winrates, tournament usage, and PURE STATISTICS DISAGREE.

Winrates are not enough factor to judge with, the truth that the counter system doesn't work vs Sicilians 50% less damage is more than enough to show how broken they are, this is regardless how their first crusade and 100% build is broken.

Meanwhile pros don't consider them nerf worthy. Because dezpire your allegations, the spear line is STILL COST EFFECTIVE.

Lithuanians even with 100F in the start will remain strong and my suggestion to nerf their thumb ring because the civ actually have 0 weaknesses

Really? Zero weaknesses? If so, why aren't they s tier? Why aren't they the best civ in the game? How abiut the lacking long term eco, and bad siege?

You literally don't hace a clue what you're talking about.

If youre so right about everything, why does literally everything disagree with you? Even hera only considers lithuanians b tier.

 

[malamadre]

You don't lose because those things are OP. You lose because you are a bad amateur player. Stop complaining and watch your recordings.

 

[Kellar]

If you nerf everything, everything will still be broken, no?

 

[MAE_JO]

You don't lose because those things are OP. You lose because you are a bad amateur player. Stop complaining and watch your recordings.

Ok Boomer

 

[MAE_JO]

If you nerf everything, everything will still be broken, no?

I nerf what it needs to be really nerfed.

 

[MAE_JO]

The fact you think 35 food and 50g is reasonable is absolutely hilarious. Archers are still a better unit then eagles and cheaper then that.


Winrates, tournament usage, and PURE STATISTICS DISAGREE.


Meanwhile pros don't consider them nerf worthy. Because dezpire your allegations, the spear line is STILL COST EFFECTIVE.



Really? Zero weaknesses? If so, why aren't they s tier? Why aren't they the best civ in the game? How abiut the lacking long term eco, and bad siege?

You literally don't hace a clue what you're talking about.

If youre so right about everything, why does literally everything disagree with you? Even hera only considers lithuanians b tier.

No, actually even the pros said that Sicilians 50% less damage and Hauberk are broken, even the 100% build for tcs and castles. About Eagles their food cost for sure need a nerf, their flood with their cheap cost can't be stoppable early castle. I literally when I get meso civ always go full eagle warriors castle age with like 5 barracks and whatever the other guy do he will die. The unit food cost is sooo cheap, 30F 50G, and even 35F, 50G will still fine. The unit have no trash counter, insane scouting and attack in dark, cheap, have high PA, good at raiding, monks don't work either, high attack, etc. The unit have a very stupid cost according to what it does.

 

[Instinctz]

No, actually even the pros said that Sicilians 50% less damage and Hauberk are broken, even the 100% build for tcs and castles.

Funny I haven't heard any complaints about them in a long time. And if you're gonna nerf their knights you're absolutely going to have to provide compensation elsewhere to maintain the balance you do desperately say you want. But then again you never cared about balance.

I literally when I get meso civ always go full eagle warriors castle age with like 5 barracks and whatever the other guy do he will die. The unit food cost is sooo cheap, 30F 50G, and even 35F, 50G will still fine.

If you increased their cost that mych no one would use them.

If you're increasing their food cost more then 5 you're going to have to compensate by reducing the gold cost. Even you said it yourself. The food cost is the problem. But again. You clearly don't care about balance.

The unit have no trash counter, insane scouting and attack in dark, cheap, have high PA, good at raiding, monks don't work either, high attack, etc. The unit have a very stupid cost according to what it does

And the pros agree it coulr use a cost adjustment. But a flat 15 food increase with no reduction in gold cost? This is why no one takes you seriously. Because you say want balance but YOUR ACTIONS SCREAM OTHERWISE.

by equalizer. You've clearly not learned from being banned from the main forums or reddit. So I'm putting you on ignore.

 

[Lokalo]

No, actually even the pros said that Sicilians 50% less damage and Hauberk are broken, even the 100% build for tcs and castles. About Eagles their food cost for sure need a nerf, their flood with their cheap cost can't be stoppable early castle. I literally when I get meso civ always go full eagle warriors castle age with like 5 barracks and whatever the other guy do he will die. The unit food cost is sooo cheap, 30F 50G, and even 35F, 50G will still fine. The unit have no trash counter, insane scouting and attack in dark, cheap, have high PA, good at raiding, monks don't work either, high attack, etc. The unit have a very stupid cost according to what it does.

Well Hauberk with 50% reduction is indeed dumb, but Sicilians overall seems decent due is hard to get to that point, so many might say it is balanced, which in my opinion should be changed somehow, just to have that counter system more in tact, but they would need to get something for earlier, but lose some counter damage maybe. I mean, I agree being amazing against archers and being 50% better against halbs than normal cavalier/paladins doesnt seem to be nice idea, but looking into their win rate, they need some buff in return to nerf this or they will be terrible.

However, I don't want to be mean, but you should try to stick less emotionally to be taken more seriously. Most people probably would agree eagles could get like +5 food cost, but when you bring something like this "insane scouting and attack in dark" into eagle nerf topic is just hard to take you seriously.

 

[MAE_JO]

Funny I haven't heard any complaints about them in a long time. And if you're gonna nerf their knights you're absolutely going to have to provide compensation elsewhere to maintain the balance you do desperately say you want. But then again you never cared about balance.


If you increased their cost that mych no one would use them.

If you're increasing their food cost more then 5 you're going to have to compensate by reducing the gold cost. Even you said it yourself. The food cost is the problem. But again. You clearly don't care about balance.



And the pros agree it coulr use a cost adjustment. But a flat 15 food increase with no reduction in gold cost? This is why no one takes you seriously. Because you say want balance but YOUR ACTIONS SCREAM OTHERWISE.

by equalizer. You've clearly not learned from being banned from the main forums or reddit. So I'm putting you on ignore.

If the Eagle food cost became 35F, 50G it will still cheap and fine and more than fine, becasue total cost is just 85 resources, the knight cost 135 resources, are people don't use knights?! Yes they do and too much. People now too talk about Ghulam being OP or something meanwhile Eagled have the same role and you can make them in normal barracks with cheap dirt cost. Sicilians are broken whatever anyone say and whatever their winrates are. A civ that have no counter to their knights and even their skirms and archers hard to deal with, have instant army from crusade and another broken UT that give their broken knights +1/+2 and 100% build castle and tcs all this stuff doesn't need Albert Einstein to explain how this is broken, even their 300 stone is broken.

 

[zShades]

pro: the game is the most balanced it has ever been!
random: EVERYTHING IS BROKEN, PLS TRUST ME

 

[MAE_JO]

Well Hauberk with 50% reduction is indeed dumb, but Sicilians overall seems decent due is hard to get to that point, so many might say it is balanced, which in my opinion should be changed somehow, just to have that counter system more in tact, but they would need to get something for earlier, but lose some counter damage maybe. I mean, I agree being amazing against archers and being 50% better against halbs than normal cavalier/paladins doesnt seem to be nice idea, but looking into their win rate, they need some buff in return to nerf this or they will be terrible.

However, I don't want to be mean, but you should try to stick less emotionally to be taken more seriously. Most people probably would agree eagles could get like +5 food cost, but when you bring something like this "insane scouting and attack in dark" into eagle nerf topic is just hard to take you seriously.

The problem with Sicilians not only Hauberk is strong, the 50% less damage is hard to deal with start from feudal from their scout rush and castle age with their broken knights. On the other hand the 100% build for TCs and castles give them super easy game to control and spam castles and tcs whenever they want regardless the first crusade that they will bring later. The civ is just a toxic thing in the game, you can say the same for Burgundians, mesos, Franks, Huns, Gurjaras, Hindus, Lithuans, even Cumans with their 2nd TC and at the same time have cheap dirt military buildings are a problem too. The devs just keep ignoring the fact how the game balance is bad from new civs and old civs. Eagle +5 food cost will change nothing, 25F, 50G is still so cheap. At least it should be 30F if not even 35F, all Mesos in general have good eco and good tech tree (Incas best tech tree and their eco not even that bad) so they will be fine.

 

[Salawen]

I will list here some insane bonuses and units about some civs that have, that make the balance so bad and hard to deal with, and I will put the reasons why these things need a nerf ASAP? So lets start

1-Wagons and Guns

The Koreans WW, Bohemians Wagons and Organ guns, are one of the most stupid units especially in arena, they are so broken and hard to deal with, they have tons of hp and high output damage, what I want to suggest here is not directly nerfing them but give the counter play a chance and how is that?

Mangonels have a good damage vs Bohemia's Wagons, but for example scorpions don't, give scorpions more damage vs Bohemia Wagons, and give them too a bonus vs Korean Wagons and vs Organ guns, add a bonus damage too for mangonels against Koreans wagons and organs, however, I think Bohemia's wagons hp need to be reduced becasue they are so high and Koreans too not only have high hp, but they have free armor and good mobility and good bonus vs buildings, I think Organ guns need a speed nerf a little bit.

2-The Broken Sicilians

This civ literally have like 3 broken bonuses at once, the 50% less damage bonus is ridiculously OP and insane. The Sicilian knight can kill a camel raider in 1v1 with more than 30hp left for the kngiht! Their scout rush is stupid too wuth this bonus and even their archers take less damage from skirms, this b9nus remove the skill factor, you just send your broken knights or archers with 0 brain and micro and you will win because nothing kill your units, not only that, the devs give the Sicilians another broken UT which is the Hauberk, that make the Sicilians knight way too much OP and harder to deal with, this UT need a nerf too like instead of +1/+2 make it +1/+1 and the 50% less damage bonus should down to 25% instead of 50%.
The 2nd broken bonus is the 100% build faster for castle and TCs. This bonus need a nerf because it is just ridiculous and require 0 skill and 0 brain and 0 risk to drop a castle on someone with this insane 100% build faster for castles because this castle will go up for sure and no one can stop that, you can just drop it on your opponent's face and he have nothing to do, not only that, since Sicilians have 300 stone in their bank from the start getting a castle will be way more easier early, or they can sell this insane 300 stone and do some stuff. This ratio need to be down to 50% if not even less for both TCs and castles and even the 300 stone should be removed and back to 200 stone and give them cheaper Donjons.

The 3rd broken thing that the Sicilian have is the first crusade. Instead of 35 from 5 TCs, give them 15 from 3 TCs and make it cheaper.

3-Burgundians

Burgundians eco literally the best eco in the game, not only have cheap dirt eco discount but this eco too is age before, this discount need a nerf and instead of 50% discount it should down to 25% or 30%. This eco remove the real skill about the macro and eco managment, with Burgundians you will always be ahead and require 0 brain and 0 skill to make a decision to make this upgrade or not since it is already too cheap, even if the Burgundians player lost some vills it is more than fine, because his eco is insane. The other thing that the Flemish revolution need more nerfs, make it more expensive and the Cavlier upgrade in the castle age should back to the normal cost and keep other stable's upgrades on their 50% discount.

4-The cheap dirt Eagles

For a long time this unit have a very very very cheap cost and at the same time play a great role. This unit is a tank that raid under TCs, kill archers, mass easily, even knights can't catch up their numbers when they got their death ball and they actually do well vs knights even cost effectively and the milita line is a laughable counter and monks do nothing. The major problem with the Eagle line is the cheap dirt food cost, which is 20F from 20 years, this cost should be increased to 30F cost if not even 35 or 40, becasue you can literally spam and flood these eagle warriors once you are in the castle age from like 4 or even 5 barracks and yor eco will still fine!!!


5-The Xbow upgrade and the archers training time

For more than 20 years this upgrade have it's cheap dirt cost despite how strong it is. 125f, 50g is just nothing. The archerd meta play became so annoying and boring, I literally see Franks, Lithuans, Khmer and mostly all civs go archers xbows and skirms beforr their transision to their major units. This upgrade should be more expensive, so instead of 125f, 75g, it should be 200F, 125G at least and more upgrade time. The other point that I want to talk about is the archer line training time (which is way more broken wuth Britons with their insane 20% bonus workrate for their ranges). Anyway archers training time should be more and Britons team bonus should down to 10% work faster fot ranged instead of 20%. The archer meta became so broing and their upgrades are so cheap.



6-Mayans and Aztecs

Mayans have great eco, +1 vill from the start, 15% longer resources and cheap archers. Their start should be -100F instead of -50F and their longer resources down to 12% or 10% and their archers should be more expensive.

Aztecs Monks are still stupid and broken, their +5 hp bonus for each upgrade should down to +3 instead, and their relics bonus should down to 25% instead of 33% more gold. Since we suggested before to increase eagles food cost too it will be a good general nerf for the Mesos.

7-Franks and Lithuanians

I think out of 10 games I play, I see Franks, Mayans, Aztecs, Huns, Britons, Gurjaras snd Lithuand more than 7 times, and this is boring you know, for Franks hp bonus should be divided to 10% feudal, 10% castle and their cheap dirt castle bonus should be completely removed, since their UU already counter pikes which it is the unit that counter their knights, so by giving them cheaper castles you are giving them easy way to bring their UU and mix them with their knights, and in general Franks castle spam is just ridiculous with how their cheap cost is.

About Lithuanians I think they should lose thumb ring and their 150F in the start should down to 100F, actually this civ have no weaknesses.


This was all for part 1, I will back later in part 2 and it will be about nerfing the Gurjaras, Hindus, Britons, Cumans and Huns and why these civs need nerfs.

i also think that cross bow update is too cheap. and yes hauberk is indeed too strong in my opinien. not shore about the other points.

i dont get why com unity is mocking you. this is a forum for deep and intellectual discushions so we shood discuss about the points some one made in a respectful way you now.