Castle heavy units are too strong compared to feudal units

Unless you’re french Rus delhi or abbasid feudal age mass army CANNOT hang with early castle mass. Imo this puts a premium on fast castle play over feudal boom.

Imo giving each civ a decent way to counter heavy units in feudal will lesson the power creep in a healthy way. Or lowering the castle armor and hp by 1/1 less armors and 15 less hp and reduce crossbow base by 1 less damage.

In a semi related topic I’d also like to see early knights and early maa lose 15hp.

Imo anything that can be done to encourage earlier meaningful engagements between players is healthy for the game.

1 Like

This is quite wrong. All civs can deal with it and even more now that the TC bug was fixed and it shoots the 20 arrows as intended.

English longbows can perfectly deal with any maa push specially when under network of castles influence as long as you kite properly.

Chinese have been staying feudal for very long time and the repeater xbow do actually quite decent vs maa, and even knights if you have a good mass of them. Plus handcanon slits on towers and bbq are pretty good at deffending from armored unit raids. Also chinese can alwasy bbq rush to preevent any fast castle and just go song dinasty behind that.

Abbassid camel archers are actually quite good at fending off armored units since they have very high attack and mobility.

Mongols are fine too, they are usually the aggressor and will either fc themselves or tower rush early so the oponent cant just go castle.

You can definitely make an argument for delhi, i think they have the hardest time dealing with maa. And as hre you can even maa rush them age2 and its very hard for them to deal with it.

1 Like

the strongest unit, heavy cavalry is countered by lancers in cost/damage ratio, man-at-arms can’t against archer’s micro, camels have higher damage to man-at-arms (arrow) armor

1 Like

How can feudal age mass from abbasid deal with castle heavy units?

You only have spears, archers, and horsemen, equal to all other civs, and camel archers are too expensive to mass them on feudal age, plus they are countered by massing archers that you can access in feudal.

If you are on 2 TC with abbasid and your oponent is spending 2k reources into going castle you definitely have the time to get a few camel archers out before the maa timing hits and then you can use them to buy time to boom and get yourself up to castle.
A very common composition from abbassid which is seen a lot in tournaments is horseman+camel archer. It’s a pretty solid composition and can definitely help dealing with any archers

Also main TCs now shoot the intended 20 arrows instead of only 5 or 6 so maa take a lot more damage from tcs too.

I actually think that if you spot your rival getting fast to castle the best you can do as abbasid (appart from rushing) is getting into castle fast also.

Played a lot as abbasid, camels are too expensive to mass in the first 10 minutes of game, and you usually don’t mass them thinking in a defensive feudal way.

I can’t think a situation where as abbasid in feudal you can mass camels just to defend from castle heavy units.
It’s a more clever just use these amount of resources every camel cost to get into castle, build some archery ranges and do crossbowmen to defend from men at arms.

Appart from the wood every camel is 180 food, 10 camels costs 1800 food (more than 2k resources adding the wood), and I don’t think 8~9 camels could be a significant mass to defend from nothing from castle age.

So, I don’t think that you can defend in feudal against castle heavy units as abbasid.

Abbasid can go castle pretty quick to be fair, even if on 2tc

Yes, that’s what I am saying. Building camels instead getting into castle to defend from castle heavy units id nonsense to me.

You telling us that a 4.5 range 1.75s attack speed, effectively 3 dmg vs feudal heavy units, and 1.125 walk speed is “actually quite decent vs maa and even knights if you have a good mass of them.” ??

Do you want to suggest to us the number of zhuge you need to perform this task you’ve described? First off zhuge nu dont micro well; heck they dont micro at all if you want to guarantee the 3 burst shots.

Secondly let’s not isolate 1 unit but instead consider the heavy units in composition (lb/maa archer/maa archer/knights). I pretty confident China feudal mass for mass 15min into game WILL not favor China victory. The good news is most other civs do have a decent to semi decent way to deal with heavy units AND I said this in my OP.

I think MMA is decent spot.
Or it will repeat aoe2 scenario, there MAA unplayable.

You can fight against 3-5 maa with huge army.

But yes. you forced to go castle. And it’s totally okay, cause game have design, that you go up through ages.

PS may be reduce maa ranged armor (but compensate it as research).
So archers with +1 will make 2 dmg, but if you researched tech it will be 1dmg again.
(could be totally wrong i do not remember stats).

In the first rework of the Abasis, in the competitions they abused the camels and that is why they later nerfed them, I don’t think they will return to the same

But in feudal? They are so expensive, and not very good for raiding at the first minutes of game. Just put a tower and archers and that’s all.

I actually find using MAA problematic. Consider that 90% of games (at least in teamgames) always faces French, HRE or English. or even all of them.

Maa doesn’t have much strength to play with.
HRE MAA counters yours.
English longbow can easily micro kite / their MAA are stronger.
French got knights that counter MAA naturally.

so when to use MAA becomes questionable. And by the time the opponent gets to castle, usually not to long after, they hardcounter your MAA with crossbows.

I actually find it more effective to keep pushing hard in feudal with trasharmy, than trying to quickcastle and counterattack.
With a trash army, you don’t need to much vills on gold, and you can replace and produce your units faster than the opponent.
Its only when opponent starts countering with mangonels that I take the hint and decide to boom into castle to counter it with springalds.

Well at least from mongol/abbasid perspective.

There’s literally nothing happening in Dark age and barely anything except for TR and a few minor skirmishes in Feudal age now.

I come from a game where going through the ages was a thing and you had plenty of options in every age. Aoe4 in its current state is pretty much the opposite of it. What’s the point in going up through the ages with barely anything happening because you can’t make a difference in Age1-2 anymore? We could add another 4 ages prior to Dark age with nothing happening. It would go along with your argumentation of going up through ages but how exactly does the gameplay benefit from it? Why do we need two ages with pretty much nothing happening? What’s the benefit from it apart from treaty time that ppl can as well have anywhere else before starting the actual game?

Just to make myself clear: I do not want to remove ages but have more options in Dark and especially Feudal age.

I think there are a lot of options for specifi ncivs in fuedal, and I think only have certain civs that way keeps the civs asymmetrical. If I’m playing China, I predetermined that I’m forgoing ending in Fuedal, but if I’m French, I can absolutely create a game ending position in fuedal.

Now the opponent may not “GG” in fuedal after some vil loss or being boxed in, so you may go Castle before they truely give up, but for all intents and purposes, they are done in feudal.

I strongly disagree that all civs should have answers to it, and be able to do it as well. This state if the game creates dynamics you must learn, and in tournaments, makes drafting civs and maps MUCH more important.

Again, you may not get the Victory screen in feudal very often via landmark snipes or what-have-you, but you can most certainly have ‘won’ by the time you are uping to castle with SOME civs, not all of them.

What you describe is NOT balanced. You can be asymmetrical in the ways you go about doing something, but the moment you do NOT have an answer to something, you have a balance issue. I’m not suggesting having the same answer, but you need to have AN answer to all problems.

Well even if you manage to land some crucial hits in feudal age you need to book another 5-10 minutes to end the game in castle age. Taking into consideration you land those hits within the 5-10 minutes mark it means you need to book +100% game time which is way too much for a game that’s de facto already decided. Apart from that, yes you certainly do have options in feudal age but it usually does not have major consequences and as a result we see people mainly going for two TC’s or fast castle even with civs that are meant to be strong in the early to mid game.

Again this means less and less options. Due to powerful defensive buildings this game barely had any all in options anyways. With rams being nerfed and the starting TC being even stronger we now also get to see less and less regular feudal pushes.