Was pleasantly surprised to find that Burmese LS in a head to head fight beat knights if there’s atleast a ratio of 7 LS to 4 knights. Meaning they win cost effectively (unless you’re trying to age)
Of course knights are still the superior unit with their mobility and PA. But maybe something to consider the next time a knight player tries to go head on vs infantry.
and this is why i’m against giving LS +1 attack, 1 MA/PA and 5 extra health.
because as is, Burmese already win cost effectively, Japanese do as well with their extra attack speed, Malian ones chase archers, etc.
imagine if those burmese LS had all those extra stats everyone wants.
It will actuallty be harder for the Knight player to Age Up due to Knights costing more.
Still not smart to engage Knight with Longswords unless you really have to, since Burmese Pikes already have +2 attack from base Pikes, and are even better counter to Knights, completely countering both Cavalry Armour upgrades the Knights can have by the Castle Age.
No, food is way more important than gold in Castle Age, hence Knights are more cost and pop effective.
not if you’re factoring the total cost of both units. the knight is using gold which can be gathered faster and also doesnt directly impact the food needed for the age up, as opposed to the higher proportion of food needed for militia (which is also gathered slower, requires wood before each rate increase)
exactly 
im also against giving them all of that, either 1 of those but not all 3. but on top of that naturally civ bonuses can be tweaked if a unit is buffed
in his test, pre buff, what would cost 315 food and 140 gold beat 240 food and 300 gold.
160 gold is worth more then 75 food. and that’s BEFORE you give LS the additional 1 attack, 1 M/P armor, and 5 health.
but is 75 food worth 160 gold? no.
so now we have to make further changes to justify the initial changes. thus the problem. you act like these changes are small, but if the changes are so small, why do we have to go and adjust civilizations bonuses just to justify the initial changes? clearly that “Small” change has far reaching consequences.
and you may not be for all 3 of those, but i’ve seen people who are all for it.
30 villagers and extra Town Centres are more worth than any Longswords 11
75 extra food doesn’t equate to 30 villagers and extra town centers. sorry you have bad logic and math there.
shift some of those gold miners to farming. or cutting wood.
this info is like knowing that petards are good against siege. are you going to do it every single game? most certainly not. but will there be cases where its useful knowing it? most likely
eg. burma vs franks. the likelihood of going all in LS is better and you can safely know that you dont even need to add pikes, (an expensive tech) since the LS by themselves can handle frank knights. you would still add spears to be safe anyway, but its surprisingly not necessary, as opposed to playing ANY other civ you would lose if you didnt add pikes
You have bad logic, because have no clue how it works. You can never produce double the amount of Longswords, simply because it hurts your economy much more.
he didn’t produce double the amount. and in the time you produce 4 knights from 2 stables (1 minute) you can basically produce 6 longswords from 2 barracks (21 seconds each, 1 minute 3 seconds total). couple that with producing longswords earlier, and the fact that 2 stables also means you need a barracks on top of that, as opposed to 2 barracks just needing 2 barracks, means that your argument is bunk.
7:4 as Burmese=8:4 as any other civ
Longswords are more expensive on food=much harder too boom, add extra TCs and villagers. Period. Not to mention 2 Scorpions behind the Knights help to destroy all the LS
No, you produce Longswords later than Knights, because you need the upgrade and Supplies.
before the buffs that people want so bad.
not that much more expensive with supplies, 7 longswords cost 315 food, 4 knights cost 240 food. and you can easily shift some of your workers from gold to farming.
wow so now youve got a barracks, 2 stables, a siege work shop, extra tc and villagers, and enough extra resources to throw in 2 scorpions and yet somehow the longsword player can’t afford to boom? how did you afford all that while he can’t afford to go 2 barracks + 75 extra food worth of units (and 160 less gold none the less).
your so slanting this equation in favor of the knight civ that your clearly throwing them an extra thousand or more resources.
so you can somehow afford an extra production building, bloodlines, the more expensive knight armor techs, a couple tcs, a siege workshop and 2 scorps but i can’t afford M@A, LS and Supplies?
man you really are biased as hell.
lets look at his initial claim and go from there.
if i have longswords + blacksmith + blacksmith armor techs + supplies + 2 barracks that is
500 wood for the blacksmith + barracks
300 food and 100 gold for the blacksmith armor techs
150 food and 100 gold for supplies
300 food and 105 gold for m@a and LS
315 food and 140 gold for the units.
total is 500 wood, 1065 food, and 455 gold
for the knight player
blacksmith + barracks + 2 stables + armor techs + bloodlines + 4 knights
675 wood for the buildings
400 food and 150 gold for the armor techs
150 food and 100 gold for bloodlines
240 food and 300 gold for the knights
675 wood, 790 food, and 550 gold.
so 175 wood and 100 gold more expensive on the knights player, and 275 more food on the LS player side.
and this is before the buffs where people want the following +1 attack, +1 melee/pierce armor, +5 health, cheaper supplies and LS, and faster too.
and yet you somehow equate that to 30 villagers, an extra couple town centers, a siege workshop, and 2 scorpions. so again. BIASED.
First of all I’m not biased. Longswords are not cost effective against Knights because they cost more food at 8:4 or 7:4 ratio so you can’t produce Villagers from 3TCs. I’m sad you can’t understand the game. 
You don’t even need scorpions. We never see Burmese Longswords vs Knight civs.
You don’t understand or play the game. Simple is that. For the extra food you need more farms=no new tc, less villagers.
i literally just showed you the math. one side spends 275 more food, the other side spends 175 more wood and 100 more gold. all the LS player has to do is shift eco from wood and gold and he’s fine. and with the buffs people want you wouldn’t even need 7 to 4.
so you can afford 3 tc production (we will conservatively say 2 a minute so 100 food a minute, per tc) for 300 food per minute for villagers + 2 stable knight at 120 food per minute per stable (so 240 total food) for a total of 540 food per minute.
but i can’t afford 2 barracks production of 135 food per minute (so 270 total food per minute) and 3 tc production for a grand total of 570 food per minute? oh also i’m eating up only 120 gold per minute in units (20*6) and you’re eating up 150. so the difference is 30 food for 30 gold. all i have to do is shift 1 villager form gold to food and i’m pretty much golden. not to mention you’re dropping more production buildings then i am.
math > your logic. your logic equates that whole extra 275 food (at the expensive of 100 gold and 175 wood on the knight side) with extra tcs, extra villagers, a siege workshop, and another 150 wood and gold in scorpions.
that is literally the definition of biased.
=The guy who spends more gold and wood is in the better position, because food is way more important than gold or wood
Yes, it is called a Scout-Knight build order. Ooops 950 elo players don’t even know a basic build order 11
except the guy who spent more food won the fight. and that’s PRE BUFF. imnagine what happens when LS have 1 more attack, 5 more health, and 1 more armor.
so now you’re mixing in scouts even before you go up, which means that food advantage you were just talking about? gone. where you getting all these extra resources from? they don’t just come out of thin air. now you’ve farmed just as much food, and extra wood and gold all by early castle age. me thinks your math stinks.
???
I hope you realise that Feudal age exists
You don’t even need to fight if you don’t want because you have mobility. xD
i hope you realize you’re literally giving one side an extra thousand extra resources and assume the other side literally does nothing the entire time. that’s literally what your argument is right now.
if my longswords are crashing into your base and you choose not to fight the longswords can just wreck your base. tear down your production buildings. all the eco in the world means nothing if you cant produce.