Aztecs Discussion Thread
Re: Aztec Discussion Thread
you have to build noble hut slowly before you train age 3 units. that's quite annoying.
Re: Aztec Discussion Thread
Oh, absolutely! Let's remove TEAM Schooners instead, though.schiegfried wrote:Just asking, but is there a possibility to make mace somewhat decent vs light inv? They should be the scirm unit, but you loose every scirm war with them. Thoughts?
I would probably just do the following:
– "Temple of Centeotl Support" home-city shipment now also increases Macehualtin range by 2; description updated accordingly.
Re: Aztec Discussion Thread
Speed is 3.75 and the AK is a Fortress Age, Culverin—Mortar hybrid without limber mode. I don't see the problem. I do with decreasing population cost, however. Here's an idea:Garja wrote:Main problem woth AK is the speed which makes no sense since they are slower than most artillery while supposed to be more mobile. Speed should definetely be 4.
Also pop space is quite annoying especially when you need many of them becauase then it is impossible to also have other units.
1 pop and +5g cost would be a good change imo.
– Arrow Knight cost increased from 50f, 75c to 50f 110c (bounties recalculated accordingly); ranged and siege attack increased from 8 and 30 to 12 and 45 respectively.
– "Temple of Coatlicue Support" home-city shipment increased from +20% to +25% Arrow Knight attack; description updated accordingly.
Re: Aztec Discussion Thread
rsy wrote:Maybe we should try to boost the fortress age shipments to make an aztec semi more viable, maybe make 11 maces 13 maces and 13 maces 15
Why?
Re: Aztec Discussion Thread
zoom wrote:Speed is 3.75 and the AK is a Fortress Age, Culverin—Mortar hybrid without limber mode. I don't see the problem. I do with decreasing population cost, however. Here's an idea:Garja wrote:Main problem woth AK is the speed which makes no sense since they are slower than most artillery while supposed to be more mobile. Speed should definetely be 4.
Also pop space is quite annoying especially when you need many of them becauase then it is impossible to also have other units.
1 pop and +5g cost would be a good change imo.
– Arrow Knight cost increased from 50f, 75c to 50f 110c (bounties recalculated accordingly); ranged and siege attack increased from 8 and 30 to 12 and 45 respectively.
– "Temple of Coatlicue Support" home-city shipment increased from +20% to +25% Arrow Knight attack; description updated accordingly.
They don't need more attack, that's decent already considering ROF and range. And cost is roughly balanced for the current stats. Your recalculation seems a bit overpriced even considering the pop cost discount. It incorporates the stat boost which, again, is not needed as for the unit to be viable it is much better to be cheaper and weaker than super expensive and too powerful.
The speed is needed because their perk over artillery is being infantry and to act as such they should have infantry speed: 4. Together with the pop cost is the only thing that lacks and makes them not a unit you want to produce.
Honestly the whole AK thing is one of those arguments that is better understood if you actually play it and not just theorycraft on paper. I'd much rather used AKs in actual games if they werent such a liability because of speed and pop cost. They only come in handy against artillery mostly because that's where the opponent comes to you and not viceversa.
Hazza54321 wrote:Garja wrote:They have 1.5 rof so 20dmg without upgrades.
With 30 range they are basically super lbows and dont cost that more than skirms currently.
They dont have negative bonus vs cav and have more rr than skirms.
They are a cool unit just need one pop and speed to be more viable.
They do not kill buildings and art for their pop and cost unless after a long time
They kinda do except for their pop, ye. I never had problems vs cannons with Aztecs honestly. You just need enough of them to one shot kill artillery, then it's all about micro.
Re: Aztec Discussion Thread
Jerom wrote:rsy wrote:Maybe we should try to boost the fortress age shipments to make an aztec semi more viable, maybe make 11 maces 13 maces and 13 maces 15
Why?
Aztecs in fortress feel pretty underwhelming. Maybe giving them better shipments will help out a bit?
Re: Aztec Discussion Thread
the explorer makes up for it
Re: Aztec Discussion Thread
tedere12 wrote:the explorer makes up for it
well he is nerfed now, so azzy is pretty underwhelming in fortress ye.
Re: Aztec Discussion Thread
if aztecs reach fortress with good eco they are actually one of the strongest civs
-
- Pro Player
- Posts: 8050
- Joined: May 4, 2015
- ESO: PrinceofBabu
Re: Aztec Discussion Thread
umeu wrote:#Hazztags
#haztechype
Re: Aztec Discussion Thread
Absolute truth right here, bois!Garja wrote:if aztecs reach fortress with good eco they are actually one of the strongest civs
Re: Aztec Discussion Thread
azzy weird civ. pls leave them alone
somppukunkku wrote:This is not a fucking discogame.
Re: Aztec Discussion Thread
Don't puma's have to much siege?
They are more expensive then pike (142vs-127vs) and also better(+15HP, +10%melee resistance,+4 damage and *2extra multiplier vs cav), but 48 siege vs 32 seems a bit to big discrepancy, no?
Stats: 12% more expensive, HP in line with this, +50% base damage, more multiplier, but then another +50% more siege...
Edit: multiplier is same, my bad.
They are more expensive then pike (142vs-127vs) and also better(+15HP, +10%melee resistance,+4 damage and *2extra multiplier vs cav), but 48 siege vs 32 seems a bit to big discrepancy, no?
Stats: 12% more expensive, HP in line with this, +50% base damage, more multiplier, but then another +50% more siege...
Edit: multiplier is same, my bad.
To see a world in a grain of saind, A heaven in a wild flower
Hold infinity in the palm of you hand, And eternity in an hour
- William Blake, Auguries of Innocence
Hold infinity in the palm of you hand, And eternity in an hour
- William Blake, Auguries of Innocence
-
- Ninja
- Posts: 14364
- Joined: Mar 26, 2015
Re: Aztec Discussion Thread
but pikes are a bad unit
-
- Pro Player
- Posts: 8050
- Joined: May 4, 2015
- ESO: PrinceofBabu
Re: Aztec Discussion Thread
leave azzy please, dont ruin the fking haztecs
Re: Aztec Discussion Thread
Hazza54321 wrote:leave azzy please, dont run the fking haztecs
This isnt the treaty forum big boi
mad cuz bad
-
- Pro Player
- Posts: 8050
- Joined: May 4, 2015
- ESO: PrinceofBabu
Re: Aztec Discussion Thread
n0el wrote:Hazza54321 wrote:leave azzy please, dont run the fking haztecs
This isnt the treaty forum big boi
that jokes getting old now
Re: Aztec Discussion Thread
Asateo wrote:Don't puma's have to much siege?
They are more expensive then pike (142vs-127vs) and also better(+15HP, +10%melee resistance,+4 damage and *2extra multiplier vs cav), but 48 siege vs 32 seems a bit to big discrepancy, no?
Stats: 12% more expensive, HP in line with this, +50% base damage, more multiplier, but then another +50% more siege...
You forget an important thing : mm got a bonus vs pumas, which means that they aren't that good as you mention.
Moreveover pikes are a bad unit overall, and aztecs don't have a musk type unit so it's a way to compensate it. Strangely, aztec seems to be one of the most balanced civ on RE, except maybe their water in team.
-
- Ninja
- Posts: 14364
- Joined: Mar 26, 2015
Re: Aztec Discussion Thread
Hazza54321 wrote:n0el wrote:Hazza54321 wrote:leave azzy please, dont run the fking haztecs
This isnt the treaty forum big boi
that jokes getting old now
your joke is getting old too
- aligator92
- Howdah
- Posts: 1519
- Joined: Feb 27, 2015
- ESO: aligator92
Re: Aztec Discussion Thread
Asateo wrote:Don't puma's have to much siege?
They are more expensive then pike (142vs-127vs) and also better(+15HP, +10%melee resistance,+4 damage and *2extra multiplier vs cav), but 48 siege vs 32 seems a bit to big discrepancy, no?
Stats: 12% more expensive, HP in line with this, +50% base damage, more multiplier, but then another +50% more siege...
What multiplier are you talking about?
Pikes do x5 vs cav and x3.5 vs light inf
Puma do x5 vs cav and x3 vs light inf
Re: Aztec Discussion Thread
aligator92 wrote:Asateo wrote:Don't puma's have to much siege?
They are more expensive then pike (142vs-127vs) and also better(+15HP, +10%melee resistance,+4 damage and *2extra multiplier vs cav), but 48 siege vs 32 seems a bit to big discrepancy, no?
Stats: 12% more expensive, HP in line with this, +50% base damage, more multiplier, but then another +50% more siege...
What multiplier are you talking about?
Pikes do x5 vs cav and x3.5 vs light inf
Puma do x5 vs cav and x3 vs light inf
You're right. I must have mixed up cav and light inf multipliers.
To see a world in a grain of saind, A heaven in a wild flower
Hold infinity in the palm of you hand, And eternity in an hour
- William Blake, Auguries of Innocence
Hold infinity in the palm of you hand, And eternity in an hour
- William Blake, Auguries of Innocence
- [Armag] diarouga
- Ninja
- Posts: 12710
- Joined: Feb 26, 2015
- ESO: diarouga
- Location: France
Re: Aztec Discussion Thread
i think garja has the best aztecs however princes aztecs are decent
-
- Ninja
- Posts: 13004
- Joined: Apr 28, 2020
Re: Aztec Discussion Thread
Need buff ASAP. Perhaps mace upgrade fortress?
In my opinion, atleast delete puma siege tag. Only reason it even exists is that PR 10s couldn't defend 100% puma rush.
In my opinion, atleast delete puma siege tag. Only reason it even exists is that PR 10s couldn't defend 100% puma rush.
Re: Aztec Discussion Thread
Giving skirmishers 1.5 vs eagle runners instead of 2 would bring them more in line with other light cav, as it is an ugly abnormality and would help.
Also the hp card for mace is far too expensive for its effects. Adding either 3x vs HI or perhaps 30-35% hp would make it much more viable.
Coyotes could use a multiplier vs artillery and or skirm type infantry, perhaps add that into the elite fortress upgrade- as in colonial it would be too strong
Also the hp card for mace is far too expensive for its effects. Adding either 3x vs HI or perhaps 30-35% hp would make it much more viable.
Coyotes could use a multiplier vs artillery and or skirm type infantry, perhaps add that into the elite fortress upgrade- as in colonial it would be too strong
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests