Burmese Longswords beat Frank Knights at a ratio of 7:4

Do you even have the game purchased? You have to make Feudal army if you want to survive in a decent game. That means: Scouts, Militia, M@A, Archers, Skirmisher and Spearman.

No, that time I have massed Knights and TC protection.

and i’m going infantry anyway, and my infantry have extra attack, so i’m probably gonna make a couple cheap spears to mix in with my man at arms i’m already going and laugh at your scouts. and since oyu love to talk about the value of food, 35 food > 80 food.

so you somehow magically make it to castle age and already have knights massed and double tc expansion already down? wow. do you even know how the game plays?


We speak about Infantry line in general, not just Burmese. U wanna go M@a urself or drush vs Burmese and you never engage vs spearman with scouts. You just run away.

What are you talking about? xD

and my point is that buffing them is not easy because of civs like burmese and japanese. you all act like buffing the longsword with extra attack and armor and health is so easy and won’t require a ton of reworking other civ bonuses just to justify a big boost to one unit that a lot are asking for.
you want to reduce the cost of supplies and longsword tech? i’m fine with that.
you want to increase its speed? i’m fine with that.
extra attack? armor? health? no thanks, too many far reaching consequences.

i’m talking about the fact that i’m rushing your base with the newly buffed longswords right when i hit castle age. you won’t have time to mass up knights. you won’t have time to get your tcs already down and up and running.


Its so funny how the “food is harder to get than gold” argument apparently justifies just pretty much anything.

If food cost is such a big deal WHY ARE KTS SO DOMINANT OVER XBOW?

Ill give you the answer: Because yes, food is harder to get - but not all that much.


actually this is kind of down to the situation. yes if you have roughly the same number of knights as xbow then the knights win, but with micro and a numbers advantage xbow can win.


To be fair, the knights player will have +275 food over the LS player. That is either +5 villagers or double bit axe and heavy plow. This again shows that it is a terrible idea to open with LS. The only civ that could justify doing that would be Bulgarians, since they eliminate most of the drawbacks cost wise and also in regards to timing.

1 Like

I still think slight reduction in upgrade cost, and research cost would be the best route to go.
Just little tweaks. Long sword upgrade being more expensive than Crossbow is a bit ridiculous imo.

Long sword: from 200f 65g and 45 seconds research time to 180f 60g and 30 seconds.
2Hs from 300f 100g 75 seconds down to 250f 100g and 50 seconds.
Champion cost can remain, as being the extra upgrade not available to everyone but reduce research time from 100s to 80s.


and that can easily be offset by pulling some villagers from wood and gold since the LS player is spending a combined 275 wood and gold less then the knight player.

but again, if (some of) these forums got there way LS and Supplies upgrades would be cheaper and LS would have extra attack, armor and health. is it a bad opener then?

and i’m fine with that. i’m just not a fan of the “lets give them extra attack, armor, pierce armor, health, and speed” so they can compete with knights and archers, because it has too much far reaching consequences.


Yes and no. Depending on what point in time we are talking about. I’m talking about the transition from Feudal to Castle. You will never have more than 10 vills on wood, because all you need is farms. So no one to pull from wood. Yes maybe you can pull vills from gold (only 4 needed to sustain double barracks militia), that you previously needed to age up.
However you will not be able to afford eco upgrades, MAA,LS, both armor upgrades and economy upgrades. It just doesn’t work.
Yes you can produce MAA earlier but then you will have even less res for upgrades once you hit Castle. Going for infantry is just a bad Castle strat (except maybe Bulgarians).
I’m pretty sure the devs have tested various things for the militia line, I mean this topic exsists for 20 years really. At this point I’m pretty sure they have their reasons why the militia line is how it is, other than “knights and crossbow are the only thing in Castle Age”

1 Like

Why are you still talking about those 175 food?

175 food is litteraly 1 farm. Yes, that IS 60 wood investment, but if we are on that level, we could also start to argue about the cost of pop space because houses are 25 wood and HOW ARE YOU GONNA AFFORD THEM???

The LS surely has problems, mainly beeing extremly easy to counter, unable to raid and extremly slow, but the fact that their cost is mainly food is really just a minor one and would not have an impact, was the unit overall stronger.

Are you talking about my post?

  1. Mat mentioned it was 275 food, thats a big difference.
  2. I’m not advocating for major buffs to LS, just pointing out that opening LS in Castle makes little sense
  3. The fact that it mainly costs food is the main argument for Castle Age. The unit itself is super cheap and it also has really good stats, it’s the upgrades that hold it back
1 Like

as it stands? agreed with you. if they got the buffs some on these forums are asking for? not only would it be a solid opening but it would have potential to snowball and overwhelm your opponent.
to recap
LS and Supplies would be cheaper
LS would have +1 attack, melee armor, pierce armor, 5 health, and extra speed.

Well I too disagree with these change ideas.
A lot of forum members don’t fully understand the impact armor has, that’s why we see armor change proposals so often.
If LS and Supplies was cheaper than at least it would be an option to open with infantry, while not crippling your economy too much behind it. As it stands you are committing to a 1 TC push in Castle if you are planning to open LS. I don’t think the stats should be changed (maybe the 0.9->0.95 speed increase for LS only) because the unit is already really good. It should still be easy to counter LS with other common Castle Age units. I just personally would enjoy the option to open LS :slight_smile:

1 Like

and i agree with most of what you said, but we literally got people who want the Militia line to compete with archers and knight lines.

1 Like

oops, missread - all the pointless numbers got in my head a bit.

However, its still NOT a big difference. You save 175 wood on the stable alone, just slap down two farms and you’re fine. I am not saying its nothing, but its not the big deal you guys make it to be. IF (big if) LS were an overall strong unit in early castle, people would adjust their builds and create them anyways. But they arn’t.

Also note that one of the most common openings in castle - the Kts - costs FOOD. As opposed to xbow, who doesn’t. If food were as precious as you pretend, nobody would ever go kts. The fact that they do anyway proves that food vs wood/gold cost might be a small issue, but is certainly not prohibitive.

To be fair, it is confusing that the barracks is the only military building without a proper gold unit. So naturally people wonder why that is and want the closest looking thing (the militia) to be THAT gold unit.
I just get the impression that a lot of the arguments are based on feelings or how often they see them in tournaments.
Trying to play them yourself in ranked is another story (and you will notice their weak spots pretty quickly).


No-one is actually suggesting, or has ever suggested, that all these changes should be implemented At the same time.

If to you it appears that they are advocating that, I’d put it down to a misunderstanding.

1 Like

The difference is that knights do not need the 300f 105g in advance to be effective. And yes, in early Castle Age 275 or even 175 food for that matter does make a big difference. In late Castle sure, it’s no big deal. But when you are trying to improve your eco while producing units, good luck with 5 less vills or no eco upgrades over your opponent.

1 Like