Yes.Without testing Im guessing they perform better against ranged units now and in theory shouldn't be that powerful fighting the cavalry.
Probably worse in low numbers, better in high (the infamous double castle arambai is better than ever)
Yes.Without testing Im guessing they perform better against ranged units now and in theory shouldn't be that powerful fighting the cavalry.
Magyars get a power spike. Burgundians get a medieval nuke.honestly i don't think the new civs are completely busted.
yeah the Burgundians get a couple nice power spikes but they lack bloodlines and if they research their two unique techs too early they don't really do anything for them really.
their unique unit will without a doubt get nerfed. Flemish Revolution should be watched for early Imp timings and Vineyards should be watched for using it in late imperial, and they can be adjusted if problematic.
Sicilians my only concern with them is their Unique Tech spawning 50 units at once, which also should get nerfed. but you can slow them down by tower rushing them (which forces them to basically build a donjon, eating all their stone), and slowing their boom down.
they literally get Lithuanian knights in castle age with +2 relics. that's literally it. and it comes at the cost of two knights basically. so you have to ask yourself if you want 2 extra knights or cavalier when you research it. ergo its not a good upgrade to get the second you hit castle age. timing is everything.Magyars get a power spike. Burgundians get a medieval nuke.
they literally get Lithuanian knights in castle age with +2 relics. that's literally it. and it comes at the cost of two knights basically. so you have to ask yourself if you want 2 extra knights or cavalier when you research it. ergo its not a good upgrade to get the second you hit castle age. timing is everything.
the paladin bump is a bit more substantial but they fall off compared to other civs paladins and their unique techs have to be used wisely.
200 wood monastery + build time, 200 gold to produce monks that take a lifetime, plus the work and time to get the relics, not to mention the risk of monks getting killed.they literally get Lithuanian knights in castle age with +2 relics. that's literally it. and it comes at the cost of two knights basically. so you have to ask yourself if you want 2 extra knights or cavalier when you research it. ergo its not a good upgrade to get the second you hit castle age. timing is everything.
the paladin bump is a bit more substantial but they fall off compared to other civs paladins and their unique techs have to be used wisely.
cavalier without bloodlines is 120 hp. guess what tech Burgundians lack?You need to fight to get the relics, you might get them or not. And that's not literally it, as cav and paladin have more HP than a knight or cav.
Since ranked will be unplayable and we will only see 1-2 civs picked in top level play for a while now, i was wondering if the community could actively work together to show Microsoft one big finger that we will not tolerate an utter destruction of balance for their financial benefit ...
We all expected it, but these civs will have 65% till the next hotfix and we don't even know if it will go beyond this.
It would be really nice if we would pull streamers, who are not yet part of the Microsoft Monopol, to speak up against this way of DLCs.
If they only nerf the UU unit, they will still be the best civ in the game. How can you compete with the eco techs and early cav. I am interested to hear your thoughts. The obvious thing to do would be to make maa/arch/towers vs them. (On Open maps)
That's part of the criticism, you know. Which is the civs are OP on purpose at first to coax people into buying the DLC, but then are made nothing special at best to useless at worse, pulling a "bait and switch." What you say will happen. Though what you say will happen also feeds the critics' narrative, to be fair.The 2 new civs will be just average/mediocre as soon as the devs remove or nerf the obvious dumb things like spamming 150 military units in 1 second or an unique unit with +44 damage among a few other things.
They are not broken at all.
This is a great idea. It would also allow players to catch the gamebreaking bugs that seem to get regularly introduced with new updates.They should implement some kind of live beta testing period with new civs before they get nerfed and they shouldn't be allowed in ranking games during that period.
Arbalest is Castle Age. Obviously. But, no thumbring.I'm more worried about the silly nature of these bonusses rather than if they are balanced or not. That on top of the fact that this game really does not need any more civs to dillute the game. Cysion you really dissapoint me. I already fear what civs the next DLC will bring.
The bonuses are just copied from AoE3 and AoM. That's why it is so silly. It might fit those games but there is no place for these civs here.I'm more worried about the silly nature of these bonusses rather than if they are balanced or not. That on top of the fact that this game really does not need any more civs to dillute the game. Cysion you really dissapoint me. I already fear what civs the next DLC will bring.
Yup, imagine destroying a building by throwing a few darts at the walls. If that were at all realistic then every pub in Britain would have burned down and collapsed long ago.I tried the "new Arambai" they are inded reasonable against kts and xbow, but they lost a lot of their punch against buildings. Killing a TC with 20 Arambai was no problem, now the damage per volley is 5 instead of 10. I think is is a good change.