Are the Aztecs over powered?

[Bryan317]

Sorry to open such big and vauge discussion, but i feel the Aztecs are slightly overpowered. I find myself unstoppable using them. If i was going to make a simple suggestion i would say the fact that they generate gold from killing units is the most overpowering feature they have. I'll usually start my campaign against barbarians obviously, move on to killing the closest city state units, then attack the closest major civ. The game pretty much falls likes dominos from there as i generate gold, faith, culture, science and heal with each kill. (with God of War and Authority) . Earning massive promotions and golden ages constantly basically. Just a honest gamers opinion. Cheers!

 

[Dawnpromise]

I have seen the Aztecs rushing 1-2 policies ahead of everyone else this patch. They're certainly over-performing of late.

Of course I've pulled the exact same strategy off playing as Celts and I assume Denmark can do the same.

Not sure if it's the Aztecs or Authority's military advantage snowballing so hard.

 

[Gazebo]

Probably should have opened this in the Aztec leader discussion. In any case, _everything_ the Aztecs do relies on war. All of it. The floating garden is fine, but it can't carry the civ. If the Aztecs don't capitalize on early war, they're really going to hurt. That alone makes them very hit-or-miss. The problem is that the other AIs can sometimes have a hard time dealing with early Aztec aggression.

G

 

[Funak]

The Aztec AI, from my experience is completely dependent on starting next to an easy target. If they can't make use of their unique unit in an early rush, they are pretty much playing the rest of the game from behind, and if they start next to a better military civ, like the Zulu or a civ with a better UU like greeks, Persians, Iroquois or even celts they tend to just get stomped.

 

[Starrynite120]

Granted I haven't played a new patch since 2-15, but they didn't seem overpowered to me then. They actually seem to be in a pretty good place to me. An insanely good early game, but bonuses get pretty weak mid-late game. They're almost dependant on an early successful war and snowballing.

 

[Bryan317]

I suppose after thinking about these comments i would say in terms of the AI, they are pretty well engineered. And honestly from my experience I've never seen them had good luck. But alot of that WAS luck. Maybe I'm just shocked that my "best" civilization ended up being the Aztecs using Authority. I was always a fan of going progress in the vanilla version. Most definitely tradition on this mod. But I've been dominating with the Aztecs. I guess I'm ready for diety lol.

 

[emdash]

I don't notice the gold as much as the faith. I think they are very good at getting a religion + enhance.

They are good on heavy land maps. Especially forested/jungley. Their bonus in that is really strong. I assume if you play Aztec you build a jag first, then buy jags, end up with like 5 or so exploring the map, killing barbs, leveling up, and keep those guys if you can. If you can and upgrade them, they can still be strong. Floating gardens is kind of an early game buff, too, imo. I do find you have to keep fighting, though, but it's just so fun. Moving around with regular warriors really feels sluggish. Their movement and bonus in early game is huge for barb farming. They aren't a unique spearman, but I'd say they make pretty strong spearmen. It's kind of a long wait after that, though.

I'm not overly great at Civ, so I'm sure there are other, better Civs. I do try to give myself some credit for my world barb farm initiative, but maybe anyone could do it.

I find I really enjoy Shoshone as well. Early game is something I get most intrigued by so I am probably biased.

Conclusion: I'd say Aztec is probably a top tier civ or at least second tier. I don't know if the gains are well balanced for epic speed or not, but it seems the kill gains really add up for them.

And yea, haha, I'm straight on ever playing Deity, but I feel I could do what I do to Emps just as easily w/ Monte on Immortal. I prefer to pick a Civ I'm not as good with and stay on Emp tho. I only pick Monte after I have a couple fail test games.

 

[Bryan317]

Yes good comments. I have to say I think I've found them to be the best. I can seriously start making trouble on my neighboring rival civs with 3 or even 2 jags. And remember all they need is a favorable peace treaty to start the Golden Ages rolling. I basically attack my neighbors in a rotation and attack again when i the peace treaty ends lol. The Celts, Mayans and Greece have given me trouble because the jags can be out classed early on. But stay in the jungles, retreat and earn promotions. I've taken over the ancient world on Immortal quite easily.

 

[ElliotS]

The Aztecs are balanced. All war based civs are pretty feast-or-famine, so combined with confirmation bias it skews results. People tend to develop an opinion on a civ and consider data that matches their opinion more heavily. Anyone that thinks Aztecs are OP likely doesn't pay much attention when they get stopped, but will when they're stomping.

So rather than offering anecdotes consider making a factual argument. The Aztec UA isn't the best UA, the Aztec UU is pretty meh, and the Aztec UB isn't even close to the best UB. (Jelling Stones) I don't think that any other factors make them OP either.

 

[Bryan317]

I disagree with all your statements. And you were rude for no reason bud

 

[Dawnpromise]

The Aztecs are balanced. All war based civs are pretty feast-or-famine, so combined with confirmation bias it skews results. People tend to develop an opinion on a civ and consider data that matches their opinion more heavily. Anyone that thinks Aztecs are OP likely doesn't pay much attention when they get stopped, but will when they're stomping.

So rather than offering anecdotes consider making a factual argument. The Aztec UA isn't the best UA, the Aztec UU is pretty meh, and the Aztec UB isn't even close to the best UB. (Jelling Stones) I don't think that any other factors make them OP either.

Yeah I can see that. I've despite the recent rash of rampaging Jaguars I have had many games where Monty goes down and never really recovers.

He ALWAYS at least gets a religion before going down though.

 

[CrazyG]

Do Jaguars really need the +33% in forest or jungle? Because in my experience all that bonus does
-let me brainlessly charge into barbarians unlucky enough to be in forest
-give me an instant snowball if my an AI starts in jungle
-make me start a new game if they attack me and I started in jungle/forest.
It isn't fun to play 30 turns then meet Montezuma, see your capital which is 90% forest. I've tried defending the rush a thousand times and unless you have a spearmen UU its not possible on heavy forest. You can hope he attacks someone else, otherwise GG I guess I reroll?

He usually gets banned in my multiplayer game, not because he is too strong, he is pretty balanced and fun to play. But if he gets to rush someone in jungle it ruins the game for that player. I'd be fine to see him get a compensating buff on his UB, but I feel like this promotion just makes the game less fun.

 

[ElliotS]

If we're going to talk about the Jaguar that then why is a unit from an empire that was founded in 1428 AD the earliest UU in the game?

It's already got the downside of being a warrior replacement, so even if you think it's lopsided power is a problem, it can't just be nerfed without being the worst UU in the game.

 

[CrazyG]

If we're going to talk about the Jaguar that then why is a unit from an empire that was founded in 1428 AD the earliest UU in the game?

It's already got the downside of being a warrior replacement, so even if you think it's lopsided power is a problem, it can't just be nerfed without being the worst UU in the game.

Well the Aztec would have had pretty bad tech if they waited till 1428 to found their capital. You can't exactly make real life comparisons here

I think Jaguars are pretty good. Standalone its a weak unit, sure. But great synergy with the UA, woodsman is so important to finding the barb camp quickly, the healing and extra CS mean they can operate by themselves, while most other civs need to send spearmen in pairs to clear camps. The Aztec UA would be much slower to impact the game if you had to use regular warriors. I do think its wrong that you just instantly win ancient wars in jungle.

Maybe the bonus attack could stay but the bonus defense go? The attack basically offsets the terrain bonus for your enemy which seems fine. The defense just means that enemy arrows bounce off and even spearmen can't really attack.

 

[Dawnpromise]

If we're going to talk about the Jaguar that then why is a unit from an empire that was founded in 1428 AD the earliest UU in the game?

It's already got the downside of being a warrior replacement, so even if you think it's lopsided power is a problem, it can't just be nerfed without being the worst UU in the game.

Would it be better if we turned the jaguar into a spearman unit and moved the floating garden down the well?

Personally my biggest complaint fighting the Aztecs isn't the jungle movement, but rather the heal on kill which combined with Authority leads to ridiculous healing on kill.

 

[ElliotS]

Well the Aztec would have had pretty bad tech if they waited till 1428 to found their capital. You can't exactly make real life comparisons here

I think Jaguars are pretty good. Standalone its a weak unit, sure. But great synergy with the UA, woodsman is so important to finding the barb camp quickly, the healing and extra CS mean they can operate by themselves, while most other civs need to send spearmen in pairs to clear camps. The Aztec UA would be much slower to impact the game if you had to use regular warriors. I do think its wrong that you just instantly win ancient wars in jungle.

Maybe the bonus attack could stay but the bonus defense go? The attack basically offsets the terrain bonus for your enemy which seems fine. The defense just means that enemy arrows bounce off and even spearmen can't really attack.

While I don't think it's really a problem here's my solution. We replace the 33% in forests/jungles with a promotion called "Bloody Elite" that gives "+5 XP per unit killed, +6% CS per level" or "+1% CS per kill, capping at +100%." which would tweak their roll to a unit that you're supposed to make survive the ages and get super fat while still being good early. (But no longer immortal in forest/jungle early.)

If that's not possible through code, then maybe something else that scales as the game goes on like that. The Jaguars come in so early that either they need to scale really well as the game goes on (and therefore being a really cool, irreplaceable asset) or be crazy OP early. (Which is where they are.)

Also the Ottoman Empire's UU came at around the same time IRL, but is among the later UUs. Portugal was around before the Aztec Empire, and has a much later UU. France and England both pre-dated the Aztecs and have a MUCH later UU. (Though to be fair, France in game is revolutionary France.)

I mean hell, Assyria existed literally thousands of years before the Aztecs and have a later UU. Babylon existed thousands of years before the Aztecs and have a UU a whole Era later than them. The Celts and Romans both existed over a thousand years before the Aztecs and have a later UU.

I'm not asking for that to be changed, I just want to point it out.

 

[CrazyG]

Also the Ottoman Empire's UU came at around the same time IRL, but is among the later UUs. Portugal was around before the Aztec Empire, and has a much later UU. France and England both pre-dated the Aztecs and have a MUCH later UU. (Though to be fair, France in game is revolutionary France.)

I mean hell, Assyria existed literally thousands of years before the Aztecs and have a later UU. Babylon existed thousands of years before the Aztecs and have a UU a whole Era later than them. The Celts and Romans both existed over a thousand years before the Aztecs and have a later UU.

I'm not asking for that to be changed, I just want to point it out.

Same time does not equal same level of technology. Jaguars use wooden swords with obsidian blades, very primitive technology. Roman Legions required an understanding of iron working, which the Aztec didn't have, even in the 1400's.

On actual balance, I think the attacking into jungle bonus is fine. It mostly just offsets the terrain benefit of being in a jungle or forest, effectively my enemy is just in -8% terrain. Its a nice boost, but not unbalanced, it lets Aztec attack into forest which is normally a pain for ancient era combat. Its when you defend that it gets out of hand, it addition to the 25% you get from jungle, you get 10% for woodsmen, and another 33% on top of that is just too much in my opinion. It can't be attacked by anything that isn't massively ahead in tech. Based on the combat window I think the boosts are done seperately and 1 could be removed. Given that a thread about the Aztec being OP pops up like once a month I think the change would be alright

 

[ElliotS]

Same time does not equal same level of technology. Jaguars use wooden swords with obsidian blades, very primitive technology. Roman Legions required an understanding of iron working, which the Aztec didn't have, even in the 1400's.

Pretty sure it had more to do with their religious belief of fashion souls.If you look up pictures of their sacrificial alters you'll see phases like 'git gud' and 'i rolled, it's a bug!' painted in blood.

On a serious note: Then why are Mohawk Warriors longswordsmen?

On actual balance, I think the attacking into jungle bonus is fine. It mostly just offsets the terrain benefit of being in a jungle or forest, effectively my enemy is just in -8% terrain. Its a nice boost, but not unbalanced, it lets Aztec attack into forest which is normally a pain for ancient era combat. Its when you defend that it gets out of hand, it addition to the 25% you get from jungle, you get 10% for woodsmen, and another 33% on top of that is just too much in my opinion. It can't be attacked by anything that isn't massively ahead in tech. Based on the combat window I think the boosts are done seperately and 1 could be removed. Given that a thread about the Aztec being OP pops up like once a month I think the change would be alright

I don't like the idea of dropping the defensive bonus with no compensation one bit. I can see replacing the whole thing, but I don't think they deserve an outright nerf.

 

[CrazyG]

Then why are Mohawk Warriors longswordsmen?

They aren't.

I don't understand the opposition to changes because its a nerf. You can give them a compensation somewhere I guess, but a lot of the recent changes were pretty favorable to them anyways

 

[Strigvir]

Given that a thread about the Aztec being OP pops up like once a month I think the change would be alright

It's mostly a shock from vanilla mindset where waging an early war and having a warrior UU replacement are two big no-noes, let alone on higher difficulties. I'd say Celts going through border blob opening blow the fudge out Aztecs in terms of rush potential: they don't have to farm enemies beyond required for pantheon, pictish warriors are better spearmen while available after 1 tech unlock and the celts themselves are quite flexible outside of border-blob rush. But yes, pls nerf Aztecs because I feel they are OP.