So most of the culture-based buildings have been nerfed a bit, in terms of numbers, but have also gotten slight increases to their offensive/defensive scores or morale.
The Altaic Horse Breeders was always a personal favorite of mine, as were the Byzantine Cataphracts. But the first required shameless exploits to get, and playing the Byzantines used to feel like a shameless exploit, itself. So, I generally felt the Frankish and English buildings were the strongest "legitimate" buildings, and sometimes let that influence my country/culture selection.
The one building that didn't get much of a nerf was the English archers, so I'm guessing that one, already one of the best, is the likely winner. But I'm wondering if the changes to the combat system might actually be sufficient to make quality and type of troops more important than numbers? If so, could the buildings that give, say, a 1.0 boost to offensive or 1.5 boost to defensive be better, even if they give fewer troops, now?
Or does quantity still rule? Anyone have enough combat experience, post-patch, to weigh in?
The Altaic Horse Breeders was always a personal favorite of mine, as were the Byzantine Cataphracts. But the first required shameless exploits to get, and playing the Byzantines used to feel like a shameless exploit, itself. So, I generally felt the Frankish and English buildings were the strongest "legitimate" buildings, and sometimes let that influence my country/culture selection.
The one building that didn't get much of a nerf was the English archers, so I'm guessing that one, already one of the best, is the likely winner. But I'm wondering if the changes to the combat system might actually be sufficient to make quality and type of troops more important than numbers? If so, could the buildings that give, say, a 1.0 boost to offensive or 1.5 boost to defensive be better, even if they give fewer troops, now?
Or does quantity still rule? Anyone have enough combat experience, post-patch, to weigh in?