Basically nerfing the already weak/trash units
The units aren’t bad if you can produce them early, zhuge nu in particular are pretty good but as soon as you can mass a decent number your oponent is probably making it to castle age. Plus if you could mass (worse)zhuge nu early but upgrade them while attacking it would be a lot better.
I don’t think it’s a good idea to nerf ZGN that early. China has no answer to heavy units and unlike Delhi, Abbasid and mongol they have no early advantages that can make up, so it would make feudal play a lot harder for Chinese, which is counter intuitive given their win rate is extremely low early
And they are pretty good only in number, but then anything in number can be pretty good. They are decent for a feudal unit, but not that “good” given horsemen and MAA counter them very hard. I think they need an upgrade that cause bleeding damage to heavy units since MAA kills the whole Chinese feudal army and ZGN in real life actually shoot poison arrows
The 2.5 faster military production and faster building are good bonuses. But let me be clear, i agree that China is at its weakest in the early game (it is an actual fact verified by the stats) and i hope the devs buff China in some form or another. My proposal also considers lowering the dynasty prices which would be more beneficial in my opinion.
As i said in my first post in the thread i really hope they buff China but if they were to make dynasties stronger it would result in allegedly broken units and then desproportionate nerfs like we have seen with fire lancers and now grenadiers. If they were to buff Song dynasty in any shape or form i can already imagine the endless posts in this forum about how zhuge nu is broken and should be nerfed.
ZGN is no where near broken as some people hype them to be. The answer to this mass is pretty simple, +1 ranged armor and horsemen, sprinkle some archers if there are spears, so MAA instead of horsemen is even better, and you can delete the entire Chinese army. On the other hand a Chinese player spend way too much $$ just to unlock this unit while having no other bonuses in early game.
4 Likes
I absolutely agree, they are countered very easily and pretty much lose their utility from age 3 onwards. It is also a FACT that China has a terrible win rate but people still complain about it being overpowered. That problem is because the civ design is weird and the devs are actively trying to change it.
5 Likes
And I know exactly who those people are: Aussie Drongo’s fans
1 Like
I think a decent buff early game would be -25% cost of Song’s 2nd landmark, -50% cost of other dynasty landmarks, and add 1 starting villager would be just right.
I had asked for this idea in an earlier thread that zhuge nu get either a song dynasty costly upgrade or a castle cheap upgrade that made comparable to the standard crossbow. And the idea would be to give early china the sole moderate answer to early maa (if they allowed itcto be a song dynasty upgrade).
Im talking a 200w 250g upgrade (which is pricy for feudal) that would grant the zhuge +2 vs heavy (or heavy melee if they want to make it specializied and not completely displace crossbows).
This would mean zhuge nu would slap a maa for 3 x (6 - 3) = 9 dmg per 1.75s. So with 14 ! Volleys as oppose to the 40 volleys it takes now?? you’d have a viable feudal answer vs maa. If we’re comparing cost vs cost, 10 crossbows kill 1 maa that’s 1200 res. Compare that to 14 zhuge nu’s kill 1 maa that’s 1120 res!! I mean come on? That’s highly efficient and NOT broken if zhuge nu gets the early bonus vs maa only. AND maybe in Imperial they get an upgrade that makes zhuge nu a full xbow replacement the way they make tower elephants into xbows?? Or better yet to incentive yuan dynasty attach the ability to get the heavy bonus there. This would marry well with the idea of dynasty units being always unlocked in proper ages but having the cost and train times become more efficient per proper dynasty unlock .
Also making the tech a song dynasty tech would incentives unlocking song vs English vs Hre vs delhi fast castle, vs mongol fast castle rather than having to fast castle yourself.
In summary
You always have access to dynasty units given the proper age. The units cost more and take longer to train until you unlock the respective dynasty. Once the proper dynasty is unlock you also gain access to specialized upgrades to dynasty units.
- Song dynasty upgrade grants +2 bonus dmg vs heavy melee for zhuge nu.
- A Yuan dynasty upgrade grants +1 bonus dmg vs heavy and changes the " vs heavy melee" tag into “vs heavy”.
- Another Yuan dynasty upgrade grants +3 dmg vs villagers for fire lancers.
- Ming dynasty upgrade grants grenadiers +2 range
- Another ming dynasty upgrade grants fire lancers bounty!! 50f 50g
The Age III Imperial Palace Landmark should unlock the Age IV tech for +30 HP on Palace Guards for free. Just like Mongols get early access to YAM Network with their Age II Landmark.
This provides multiple bonuses. First, more Landmark diversity. Chinese has never ever not build the Clocktower first, because the Imperial Palace provides nothing useful. But if it adds the +30 HP tech for Palace Guards 1 Age earlier, then you can play a much more aggressive Age 3, but you give up the Clocktower for some time.
It also provides an incentive to invest into Yuan Dynasty. Firelancers suck. They are not worth using. Especially next patch when Horsemen get up to +2 additional ranged armor.
Pagodas also need a buff to provide more gold income to be worth investing into. And they need to benefit from Tithe Barns.
This will also help with the great cost of 1800 ressources if you go for the Dynasty, since you save yourself the ressources needed to upgrade the 30 HP for Palace Guards.
Chinese in the PUP has been nerfed into the ground. Their lategame is nonexistent anymore with the triple nerfed Grenadiers, nerfed Bombards and nerfed NoB. They won’t be able to stand up against English lategame or the new Delhi lategame (which wasn’t even a thing). They need some strength earlier on. And the entire civilisation which used to be about gunpowder units got quadruple nerfed several patches in a row. First no more supervision on clocktower. Then supervision nerfs. Then bombard range nerf, NoB range nerf, Grenadier range nerf from 4.8 to 3.0, and most importantly the repair rate nerfs which made their siege survive multiple attacks.
2 Likes
I took face value from other players who were playing more with recent patch which lead me believe it was bugged. I tested it and it give correct amounts. Should have done it earlier thanks for pointing it out.
If their price was as they’re now but get x% discount from dynasties then it would be alright but if they’re more expensive as they’re now then no bad idea. Zhuge nu is waste of resources and death trap unless you play TG’s and got armored units protecting them, but even then archers are better when it comes kiting war.
FL is still useless raiding unit too expensive and too useless what it offers and the torch > charge change in pup is indirect nerf to FL, because FL can’t just run to siege and not get instantly blown apart, but in pup if you make 10 spears which is complete counter to even 10FL and you won’t be massing them. 10 lancers do better job than 10FL
This is much interesting idea now.
When it comes to techs they should give china exploding arrow tech in imperial instead of inci arrows which would also line up with history because china was using explosive arrows and would make sense. This could turn archers / zhuge nu to decent against armored units but not full counter to them.
1 Like
I don’t think there is any more evidence I can present to better inform your opinion on this unit?? Yes we’ve have OVER-ESTABLISHED the idea that Yuan dyansty currently (and in PUP) IS NOOOT worth unlocking… The the whole point of THIS thread was to suppose HOW we could make Yuan Dynasty WORTH unlocking at the current cost of double castle? So ASSUMING we figured out how to make Yuan dynasty worth it OR if Fire lancers were always unlocked like I suggested but at a higher cost/que time until Yuan dynasty gets unlocked… how is the units “BAD”??
I showed you screenshots of JUST 4 Fire Lancers units vs 9 villagers bunched up around sheep carcasses; and in just 2 seconds all 9 villagers lost a mode of 42+ hp? With the 2 original villager targets having lost 73 hp and 52.5 hp respectively. Now it would be UNUSUAL to have 9 targets still eating sheep this late into the game UNLESS its mongols. HOWEVER the more COMMON OCCURENCE would be WOODLINES, where 6+ villagers will all be chopping from the same fell tree, or gold/stone mines where easily 4-5 villagers sit in 1 tile AND if you attack the mines from one of the corners you can hit 2 tiles of villagers (8-10+ villagers) in the same fashion I did with the 9 villagers on sheep carcasses.
Keep in mind that was only 4 Fire lancers?? What if instead of 4 I used 5 Fire Lancers 800 resources dynasty price ( or 950 non dynasty price); this would DELETE all villagers inside the impact zone on contact? IFF they didn’t have textile researched (which most ppl forget to research…). Compare this result with the comparative 800 (3.33 we’ll round up to 4) resource lancers or even the 950 (3.94 we’ll run up to 4) resource Lancers? 4 castle Lancers would charge and hit for 36 per Lancer. For optimal charging using Lancers you’d have to micro each Lancers unto a unique villager… NOT HAPPENING…STOP THE BS…but at minimum you could probably split the 4 knights into 2 charges. This would cause 2 villagers to be deleted on impact (if textiles are not researched). How does killing 2 villagers instantly on impact (WITH SOME MICRO) compare to killing on impact as many villagers that can fit inside a 1 tile radius 150 degrees wide (WITH NO MICRO) ??
Do I really have to post 1/4 freeze frame shots of Fire Lancers hitting a wood line or gold mine or berry bushes (dehli/abbasid)?? I mean come on guys… come on!!
If you increase the cost of firelancers without going yuan for what they can do is bad. Its simple as that. Firelancers as of currently costs 160 resources. Its way too much for raiding unit that has niche role and hardly pays of. You need to start understanding how unit is as of rn before suggesting price increase.
Raiding needs cheap, mobile + something unit to make it worth. For example the aoe of FL can kill groups of villagers but whats the point of if they just die to any TC / tower fire that has villagers in it? You lose more you gain. This is why increasing their price to get them earlier out is completely out of question.
IF they could be used with main army as fighting force then sure idea is not bad. But their melee does nothing, they don’t counter any unit and they only can kill villagers and try burning buildings that are not range of any arrow fire.
Also on pup speed is changed to equal as lancers which again lancers fill every role well. They can fight with main army, they can raid, they can take hits and survive there is no point of even considering FL if both are available at castle age. Even tho lancer is 80 resources more expensive it just has way more usage over FL
This is why I said following “if the price stays same without going yuan 160 resources and with yuan player gets like 20% reduction then it could be decent” but any price increase to 160 makes them even worse choice
And I asked how many of u did kill? Im not sure if you responded. With 4 lancers you can kill anywhere from 2-4 depending how well charges connect and how fast opponent reacts and get away with 4 lancers, meanwhile if opponent reacts in the situation you demonstrated you lose 1-2 firelancers and potentially kill 450 resources worth of villagers and because its castle age unit the dmg to economy is not as great as it would be in feudal so you would either invest 1800 resources to yuan or paid similar amount of get FL out that has that usage only and nothing else. So they’re not worth the cost.
Why don’t you post a clip where opponent is top of game and pulls villagers away and you lose some of your FL? You still don’t understand at all what kind of unit is needed for raiding and what FL is. You live in situation where you might be able to pull good connection and make it worth but thats not case at all majority of time and the investment won’t pay off.
Lets put some numbers for you to understand.
TC: 10 villagers = 60 dmg. 20 villagers = 120dmg without counting TC fire itself
Tower: 5 villagers = 30dmg
Firelancers : 155hp, no armor
So each time you go under TC or tower you will either lose huge junk of the hp or get few of your FL killed. You cant live in assumption that you get good connection everytime against low elo players its more likely but higher you go faster they pull villagers. For me example its rare to lose even 1 villager to french feudal aggression and I get anywhere from 2-3 knights killed by baiting them to try and knights even at feudal are more tankier than FL. And I rarely if ever do any spears. Sometimes it backfires tho.
More you can use your unit for raiding more value you get out of it. Basic concept. If FL is only to raid then they need to be best raiding unit in game and superior to lancers / horsemen if china has to invest +castle age.
You don’t really have to micro them. While I agree if you want to each charge to hit 1 villager then yes you have to micro, but you can just double charge villagers and they instantly dies. This is tactic that I use for raiding constantly with lancers. I stay in opponents base for 5-10mins with 10 lancers running around getting 1-3 villager kills and wasting opponents time. FL cant do this and top of that if you try to stay under any tower / TC to melee the FL does absolutely nothing and just dies(11dmg per melee).
If they had something over horsemen / lancers then I would agree that they could be used but they don’t. (Not everything listed in here ofc but some ideas)
-Give them extra vision, not as much as scouts but lets say 50% of scouts vision
-Give them bonus dmg to villagers with melee
-Make them cheaper / cheaper to unlock
-Revert the stupid changes now that TG victory conditions are getting changes
-Make them faster than horsemen or same speed without yuan dynasty
-Make them slower but more tankier
-Have them replace lancers from china as main port army if player goes for Yuan
Literally anything that makes them worth to get over lancers / horsemen
Gonna take example from SC2 because I feel this is perfect example. Protoss (race) can go to dark templar (invisible melee unit that 1 shots workers) 1 dark templar can kill all workers within seconds but if its detected it dies fast. They’re not cheap unit to make or get tech for it. Something that protoss gets eventually but if you rush to them then its quite expensive, but here is the kicker they have additional usage. If player fails to do anything with them and saves them then they can morph them into Archons. 2 Dark templars = archon which is one of the core units of protoss on each match up. Thats how raiding unit is done. Risky investment but not completely useless for their niche role.
1 Like
this is proof why its a waste to attempt to explain something to you. Because you are either UNABLE to understand what I said? or you’re ignoring what I said to make a strawman argumentation???
point 1 I said it’s unusual in all caps to have the enemy harvesting sheep food that late into the game.
point 2 I suggest what is a more likely occurrence is raiding woodlines and gold/stone mines which by the time of castle will LIKELY NOT be under the TC? At worse case scenario will be guraded by 1-3 towers for villagers to escape into.
point 3 I stated in the scenario the enemy DOES NOT RESEARCH TEXTILES (the 25 hp bonus to villager tech), which most ppl forget or blatantly do NOT research; 5 lancers on charge splash dmg ALONE would clear the impact zone of all villagers presently fitting inside that hit radius ( 1 tile long and 150 degrees wide).
You’re attempting to convince me that at the highest level the reaction time of pros is so superb that if 15 villagers were on a gold mine guarded by a few towers, that the pro would pull all 15 villagers into the towers BEFORE any charge dmg made impact??? DAMN that’s impressive…but untrue since we have several tournament examples where pros lose tons of villagers to raids. Heck there is a ML vs Beastyqt finals where Beasty lost 15 villagers on 1 gold mine in the middle of the stealth forest on High View?
Further proof that you’re simply not engaging with the complete idea I’m presenting on this thread.
For your 4 lancers (which cost 960 resources by the way with a 35s que time each) to kill 2-4 villagers that close to garrison point would require impeccable splits and/or reasonably slow reaction time by the enemy. Because if the villagers had 50 hp each and you happen to double split your group such 2 Lancer groups each hit 1 unique villager; 2 villagers would die on impact. THEN you’d need at least 3 lancers to target the same villager in order to kill the villager in one strike. So at impact (timeline 0 for reference) 2 villagers die, then 0.4s later another villager dies, then 1.38s later a 3rd villager dies THEN another 1.38s later a 4th dies; LASTLY the enemy reacts…
In that same exact scenario! Under the TC, 9 villagers, NO TEXTILE, 5 Fire Lancers 800 res dynasty price (950 non dynasty price), SAME REACTION TIME FROM ENEMY. If you charged the group of 9 villagers with a 2 group split ( 1 to 4 split or a 2 to 3 split ) the whole BUNCH would be DELETED on IMPACT; which leaves no time to react to ANYTHING… the villagers are dead therefore can’t enter into the TC to kill ANY Fire Lancer??
Even in the scenario YOU mentioned if you lost 2 Fire lancers for the trade of 9 villagers? You don’t consider that an amazing trade?? The enemy losing 9 villagers in Castle vs your losing 2 fire lancers is not an impactful trade?? Esp if the Fire lancers are in then out of there and recharging into another exposed area?
Clearly you have not watched any of high level players. Go look for SC2 for example. There is plenty of situations and units that are similar to FL and players dodge them insanely fast. OBVIOUSLY anything can happen and players are human and do mistake, but general rule is that opponent is going to react on time and the investment cant be so much that it backfires unless its some sort of all in and in that case it has to be something that can actually end the game.
But seems like AOE4 players are supposed to have grandpa reflexes.
You can try justify as much as you want their AOE dmg to villagers which I have said CAN potentially get you a kills but you’re not clearly understanding concept of cost efficiency.
Lets take your example of increasing the price without Yuan to 190 and assume you do that 9 villager hit like you demonstrated. 190x 4 = 760 resources and lets assume FL killed all 9 villagers and not leave them with 10HP so you killed 9 villagers which are worth of 450 resources even with 160 price tag they would cost 640 resources. Then the fact that you have to invest to stables so if you’re not already going for cavalry based army then its 150 extra cost. Also killing 9 villagers when player is at 100 villagers vs players is at 30 villagers is insanely different. At higher villager counts you need more kills while economy is much smaller even 1 kill impacts a lot more
How EXACTLY is that worth? To get positive value out of it you would have to kill 15,2 villagers or 15 resources buildings and so on. You’re free to do math of everything and try to justify your idea. Point is even if you can make them its ridiculously hard or close to impossible to get such connection that they pay off.
That 760 resources could’ve been spent on 2ndTC resulting higher economic position or army that can end the game.
Then the fact that opponent sees you spent 760 resources to “raiding” unit that cant fight. So this might trigger counter attack that you cant defend.
Do you now understand why it isn’t worth especially if prices are just increased and no value added to unit how it works. It needs to bring something on the table that makes it worth making and raiding is not worth at all with that price. Then if you happen to lose even one of them they lose 25% of their effectiveness in this scenario and yet again I repeat this they’re squishy with 155hp no armor, they cant generate HP so more you raid more likely is that they gonna die to random TC arrows or Towers.
You’re still not understanding at all. Even if I kill 1 villager and pull out lancer will maintain higher HP and CAN BE UTILIZED AS ARMY. Lancers are more expensive than FL but they’re useful EVERYWAY meanwhile FL is useful only in RAIDING. Thats the difference. FL has no value and no use. If you get away getting into FL or making them then you’re most likely playing in low elo where anything works. Go with 200 villagers and you can win a game.
1 Like
There is a very simple answer I can give you. You could have just build Horsemen or Knights with those 1800 ressources you spend on Yuan Dynasty. Both of these units are just better than Fire Lancers and don’t cost 1800 ressources to unlock.
Fire Lancers are not worth investing 1800 ressources into. They are worse than Horsemen in direct combat. Next PUP patch they will be even worse when Horsemen get +1 ranged armor in Age III and +2 armor in Age IV.
The Pagoda is also not good enough since it was nerfed and doesn’t benefit from tithe barns. And the Imperial Palace isn’t worth building either.
We wouldn’t be having this conversation if Yuan would be worth using. Which is why changes need to be done, for example making Imperial Palace unlock +30 HP tech for Palace Guards from Age IV. That way you’re not spending 1800 ressources on stuff thats not worth investing into. You are getting a good upgrade thats worth investing in.
3 Likes
Why did you go to SC2??? Why did you sidestep my ML vs Beastyqt pro tournament FINALS example of the 15 villager raid that swung the momentumof the game in favor of ML??? Or my indirect reference to the multitude of AOE4 pro tournament Golden League, N4C and Winter champion games where raids occurs extremely frequently??? Most of which can be rewatched on EGCTV on twitch.tv or youtube???
Why did you use 4 FL when my latest examples of an impact you couldn’t respond to would require 5 FL and NO textiles on enemy villagers??? It’s almost like you’re atrempting to build a strawman argumentation for you to debunk??
I’m sorry? Where did i compare killing 9 villagers on the back drop of 100 vil vs killing X number of villagers on the back drop of 30 vils?? Do I see another strawman being created???
The original example that started your rebuttal was the idea of losing 2 FLs for 9 enemy villagers. NOW you also inserted how this would occur on the backdrop of the enemy having 100 villagers to start with in this scenario? FINE!!
- create stable some point early feudal for the purpose of raiding after opening up either BBQ rush or TR. Cost 150 wood.
- Some point in castle you supervise your stable to field 4 FL which takes 35.2s of IO time and 760 res (non dynasty cost).
- You go for the specific 9 villager raid mentioned and kill 9 villagers and lose 2 FL in the process. That’s 150w + 36s IO supervision + 760 res + losing 380 of the 760 res after 1 raid vs 450 res vils lost + 360 res/min generation lost and ASSUMING the enemy re invest in replacing those villagers that another 450 effective lost from being used to make something else. By your estimation this is a BAD trade for the FL team?
Huh??? You’re just now making your second TC as china in CLEARLY a mid castle game???
Final thoughts why can’t you send a mix group of LANCER plus FL to raid? Not at home so i cant check but i want to know which of the 2 units now leads the charge in the PUP …bc if it turns out to be the lancer!!! YOU automatically get auto meatshield of the lancer while keeping the explosive impact of the FL. A simple 1 lancer to 4 FL ratio raid party would rake thru villager gathering left and right and right and left and effectively losing none of your units.
I don’t know if I should facepalm or laugh. Anyhow because you’ve been living under the rock. SC2 has the best RTS players in the world by large margin. Even in AOE4 we see ex SC2 pros that were not even top tier pros during their era in SC2 to dominate AOE4 scene. That alone tells how high quality players we have in AOE4. Do you understand now why I brought SC2? SC2 is much more fast paced game than AOE4 and there are players that react to things that are much faster and much deadlier than FL and they take no dmg or trade effectively to gain advantage over similar units as FL.
You can insert any number of FL if you want. What ever its 4 or 5. More you make more dmg they have to cause to be justified which you don’t understand. If you make 15FL your investment with your expensive suggestion would be 2850 resources (190) each with (160) 2400 resources and if they don’t pay off you’re giving advantage to your opponent by having units that cannot be used with army which gives your opponent massive opening to just attack and win the game.
Did I say you compared it somewhere? -.- Literally. It depends completely on which stage raiding happens. If you manage to kill 9 villagers early it will hurt economy much more than it would hurt in later game which again you seem not to understand. FL is unit that comes late in Castle age with huge investment. At that point both sides have steady economy and those 9 villager kills or any relatively low number won’t matter as much as it would if the dmg happened earlier. Plus later the game goes more likely opponent will have tech and ways to deal with FL. Another thing that you don’t seem to understand. You can’t seem to put anything in perspective and think making FL more expensive and available right of the bat when entering castle is right direction then sry no. The investment is still too big for unit that has 1 single purpose.
I don’t even know what to say at this point… I told you that its much bigger deal to get 9 kills or any number when game has low economy stage than later stages when opponent has massive economy and bank that they can rely on. Getting 9 kills or 10 kills with 4 or 5 FL at later stages of game is not going to be game changing yet you invest far more to get raiding unit out to kill 450 food or 500 food worth of resources. You still don’t understand the concept of cost efficiency. You have to be way too efficient with FL them to justified investment even if they’re available at start of castle age.
Production time is completely irrelevant unless you need to use stables for something else. The production time can be 1 minute but if you dont have any other use for stables then it won’t matter. So unless you plan to mass lancers or horsemen don’t count it unless you got VERY specific timing you have to hit which we don’t really see yet in AOE4. Again taking SC2 example there are certain build orders and timings. Everything lines up perfectly. Every resource amount is counted and aggression starts exactly in specific time as long as opponent doesn’t do anything to throw it off and at that point the timing attack is much weaker.
Once again. It all depends on which stages of game we’re in. If economy is steady and opponent has massive amount of villagers then that is bad trade. If its low eco game then the dmg is much worthwhile, but you will never get the FL at such stage that the eco would be so low unless you have done some critical dmg in feudal which makes making FL useless, because you could just go kill your opponent.
Also you’re not taking into consideration what can you do with 2 FL left over? Your investment to it always 760 resources with your 190 price tag. Even if 2 gets killed your investment is still 760, but you can only use half of it anymore. 1TC without boosts make 3 villagers per minute so the lost gathering time isn’t as high as you put it and not without going extreme complicated it all depends on eco upgrades. So overall maximum that they MIGHT lose is 360 from gathering but its not dead set. If they’re not at the maximum amount of villagers they plan to do then the cost of creating new villagers isn’t something to be taken into consideration. The cost of extra villagers comes only after player reaches specific point with villagers and don’t plan to create anymore of them. So lets assume you go for 120 villagers and lose that 9 earlier
. That 450 to recreate those villagers come only to play after you should’ve reached the maximum amount of villagers and that point its really irrelevant amount.
So only 2 things to consider is. Gathering time lost + killed villagers - Gathering time is hardest to go around because there is lost gathering time from villagers not gathering and the time you got villagers killed and not gathering and economic upgrades affect.
Also in late game if you manage to kill lets say 30 villagers from gold or even 20. It can massively hiccup opponents ability to reinforce specific unit which FL would excel but the issue is that no villagers are exactly clumped up to small amount of FL to get good connection, because AOE radius is not much. Even when they were not nerffed and as someone who used them I still needed lot of splash hits to kill villagers around mining camp.
If you read I said 760 resources which means FL would be available straight at castle age like you suggested with higher price tag which could’ve been used for 2nd TC. Its completely normal to get castle age before adding 2nd tc or even song and it works. Going fast castle gives you better presence on map and map control and do not force you to sit behind walls trying to boom while opponent gets all relics and map control.
Lets you be on drivers seat and if you manage to get control over few relics its well worth.
I can tell you rn I play siegeless, dynastless and boombless china with 1TC. Rarely go for 2nd TC + Song or even 2nd TC. Simple reason is. I get to do what ever I want when I get castle. I get most relics even against HRE and just constantly force opponent playing defensively and btw +65% winrate over 200 games. So yeah.
Ofc you can sent them. You can sent scouts,villagers,horsemen and lancers if you want to. But the question is. Why would you do add FL? They offer nothing over lancers and they can’t be part of your main army other than just be there to die. So even when Lancer is more expensive it has more use every way.
More you mix FL into lancers, weaker your fighting force is. It just gives more openings to your opponent to exploit. Once again at lower elo its no big deal you can do what ever and still win a game, but higher you go more these thing matter.
For example I faced couple of +2k elo players on 2v2. They had so sharp timing attack with rams that I had to start over and rethink my fast castle and find a way to squeeze 10-20 seconds off from my timing to defend against that. So it remains to be seen if I can next time counter it but who knows
1 Like
Okay so its clear to everyone bc the guy Bdell is oblivious.
Starting quote states even pros are susceptible to gettijg raided and potentially losing a signficant number of villagers and i give a specific pro tournament FINALS example to substantiate my point. Buddy attempt to rebuttal by suggesting I’ve not watch any high level players… So I suppose that has to mean ML vs Beastyqt in the Grand Finals of Golden League that i just mentioned wasn’t “high enough”‽‽ gameplay…so now he wants me to scooter over to SC2 a faster pace game where the pros there are the best RTS players in the world?? Okay? And those SC2 players are optimal optimal at reacting to FL-like raids. In the original post he then goes to compare the optimal SC2 player to the aoe4 pros and suggests there should be some parity in the raid dodging department…notice he never address my pro aoe4 examples?? He simply waved his hand and said “hahahaha watch sc2. They dodge FL-like raids and aoe4 pro players can do it too”…
THEN when I attempt to redirect him to engage with my pro aoe4 exampleS of successful raiding…he facepalms and laughs and states again how SC2 has the best players and how ex SC2 pro are currently doninating the aoe4 pro scene…
What an utter waste of time as usual trying to discuss anything with buddy…
@BdelloidBore5 rather than use the quote function you should summarize what the person you’re responding to has said. Merely quoting someone’s remarks word for word using a macro is NO VERIFICATION that you read and understood what that person attempted to convey. You ain’t hit the mark yet on any of our topics. I just summarized what you said in my own words…