Cavalry aren’t intended to beat archers straight up despite your ideas otherwise so its NOT A BUG. Its balance.
2 Likes
What??? Cavalry is designed to counter archers! Thats why they are mobile, have high hp and pierce armor
What are you talking about?
1 Like
And archers are cheaper, faster to mass, can attack at range, and can stack and micro. You know how often I watch archers players beat cav?
3 Likes
So want to say that cavalries not having a 0.5 range is a bug that exists since the game release?
Not only that we may need to add a new trash counter to infantry that will suck against everything but infantry. And we don’t even know what type of unit that can be - infantry/archer/cavalry.
2 Likes
This is actually not intended, it’s just unavoidable to make them able to micro. And because it allows mangonels to kill a huge chunk of them it is still somehow balanced, but it isn’t intentional.
1 Like
Source? From a dev? Not your own opinion. If archers weren’t intended to stack their collision radius would be higher, you can still micro without stacking. Go look at marines in sc2
1 Like
Don’t try to turn my words in my mouth, this is really bm.
You know what I talked about and just made a proposal for a workaround if the devs can’t solve the pathing + stacking problem.
1 Like
It is completely intentional. Every single ranged unit has less collision radius with a few exception of WW and EA. Same for all the new ranged unit coming into the game todays. Even after the December 2019 nerf, SL still has less collision radius than other cavalries.
2 Likes
Going to need a source for you to back up this claim about stacking being a problem and not intended
1 Like
It is intentional to make it possible to escape and poke enemy melee units, otherwise ranged units wouldn’t stand a chance in theses situations.
Not intentional is that they can stack in one tile and the melee units can’t damage them.
1 Like
Knights vs xbows is fine, is kind of balanced.
But devs should find a way to make infantry more competitive, that would give the Game more options more strategies and more fun.
I don’t know if barracks need a new unit, a BL kind of tech, a general buff but they do need something
3 Likes
Its not that easy though to make infantry competitive due to a combination of its slower speed, and cheaper cost.
And how good do you make it? Especially when you cause balance ripples just by making it a competitive unit.
1 Like
Of course infantry on it’s own can never be competitive.
It gets is power out of the combos you can make with it. You can use it as Frontline to protect your vulnerable backline units. In addition to this it gives utility to more easily break in bases than other non-siege units.
Like you see with the TK/mango combo. That’s how heavy infantry can work. But TK are a bit too specialised to fill that role, they are too vulnerable to archer fire for a frontline and too hard-counter cav + infantry and also in a unfathful way, because the high melee armor isn’t that important. Cav doesn’t want to engage them anyway.
1 Like
It won’t be easy, but imo is a must…
If i got ti choose, i would like a new pikemen that cost gold and with a decent melee attack in castle age, the elite versión could be similar to flemish militia, maybe a little bit less damage and a little more Anti cav bonus.
And it could be counter by champions the same way that eagles…
But i would like that options mainly for euro factions that don’t get camels or fu HCA
2 Likes
Bloodline is strong but cheap. I am afraid nerf bloodline may favor crossbow meta, which will be a smoother transition.
Generic militia tech that exclude a few civs may be a good way to buff militia-line. It seems that swordsman can never compete with archers or knights in terms of raw power. Perhaps a tech that enhance the role of infantry (cheap and fast) may work, such as reduce swordsman training time to make use of quantity to compete with archer/knight’s quality.
Or a tech that allow double garrison space for swordsman in rams without changing the original max ram speed. Or allow monks to heal swordsman faster.
Skirmisher may also receive speed buff so that it is faster than swordsman with squires to better cover militia. (can be implemented together with bloodline nerf to nerf both knight and archer?)
Though I agree to buff militia-line a bit, I am a bit worried of any buff of militia-line being an indirect nerf to Goths/Mesoamerican playstyle.
2 Likes
But again thst means cavalry have to worry about your new pike. The old pike. And archers.
Meanwhile archers have to worry about skirms and cavalry.
Meanwhile the new pike has to worry about archers and militia.
This is a huge imbalance.
2 Likes
And cavs Will worried about camels
And archers about onagers and eagles
And pikes about HC and cav archers
Not to mention lots of UU with bonus
I really don’t get your point is not like this new unit wouldnt have a counter
2 Likes
Its creating more of an imbalance on the counters. You add one new unit into a balanced matchup between knights and archers and it counters one but not thd other, causing an imbalance.
Youre literally tipping balance in favor of archer civs by giving them another tool against cavalry. Furthermore youre tipping balance Further in infantry civs favor against cav civs.
What are you gonna give cav civs to fight against those new tools? That is thd imbalance you have created.
Cav civs don’t necessarily have good militia line (look at lithuanians, tatars and Persians).
1 Like
I fail to see why would they fail to counter a new pike.
Lithuanian have faster skirmishers with bonus vs spearmen armor
Tatars have HCA,
And persian have trash xbows
And it could be a good reason to make HC
1 Like
So your new pike has the spear armor class? Whats the point of making it over pike and halbs?
1 Like