Do walls and defence gameplay need to be buffed?

Defensive and turtle gameplay is boring af and need to be nerfed to the ground. This is why red bull chose the Empire Wars to host because it avoid such boring long term strategies.

1 Like

Question fore everyone. If walling is so OP why is flushing meta? You have plenty of time to gets your base fully walled and even then, you say you can just quick wall, so walling is OP. If that was so, wouldn’t common sense tell you not to flush? It is pointless since walling is OP. But yet, Flushing is meta.

4 Likes

We’ve done that a lot already. I don’t think we need to argue it needs to be made harder again.

Arabia is an aggressive map, and it’s massively overrepresented in play. As such, defensive civilizations should be underwhelming. If the defensive civs did well on the most aggressive maps we’d have a problem.

Been there, said that, got ignored, sad day.

Aggression oftentimes is used to buy yourself enough time to get the walls up safely. That’s actually the point of drush FC, to keep the aggression off your base until the walls are up.

The best way to nerf walling is not to make it even more expensive and to cater even more to the crowd who just want to play fast and get in 20 minute games every time, there’s a massive section of the playerbase that is not about that life that the aggro players are disregarding for their own preferences. Just push more bonus damage against buildings to the Man-at-arms, since it’s the only anti-building option in the feudal age and it’ll incentivize more use of it against turtles.

Agree with that. But then walls need a general buff, too. As they really underperform atm in buying time. It would be ok if maa could outperform a single repair vill - but if there is such an effective sieging tool in feudal, they must hold at least as long as it takes to set up any other form of defense.

No, because if you go M@A with archers, you spend a lot of time not going Castle age. If you don’t go archers with it, M@A just gets walled out behind unless you go for towers or something like that. Further, it’s not like increasing the bonus damage is going to stop it from getting killed by defensive archers and/or towers behind that wall.

It’ll just make it easier to punish very greedy walls without any proactive defenses. Extra anti-building damage increases the overall cost of walling behind, and makes it more possible to kill important buildings that are used as part of the wall. Increasing the bonus damage can also be a defensive buff, making it easier to push back a feudal trush with feudal units. I think it just makes sense generally.

don’t really agree with that.
Palisade Walls are already heavily nerfed. The Idea is also not necessary to make the curren maa + archer meta even stronger. It’s about making maa scout possible, too. If maa can threaten to push in, you can force defensive actions equally to maa archer play.

if it the exchange walls aren’t buffed, there is high risk maa archer will completely terrorize at that time, as the pairing of tearing down walls fast and talking control of the area behind it can possibly make it a unstoppable force, as the only way to theoretically deal with it would be towering behind which takes too long for a single palsiade wall to execute.

Therefor it would be needed to improve wall hp to make it possible to set up a defence against that. And don’t forget, setting up a defence costs ressources and time - and you just can chose a new angle and force the same.

Flushing isnt the meta anymore. It is all about walling and reaching castle age asap in almost all games. People make as few military in feudal age to reach castle age asap. Strats like drush FC are much more common. Feudal age is mostly skipped asap. So the all in feudal wars are long gone from the game.

1 Like

walls in general, starting with a standard stone wall - should be buffed against arrow fire while keeping melee around where it is now aside from the earlier suggestion to buff gates.

that can be done by increasing HP and at the same time increasing bonus dmg done by melee units by a scaled amount to keep them near the same. siege units should do the same dmg as they do now for most constructs.

Maybe for a Drush but if someone is flushing, generally the objective is to damage your opponent’s economy. If walling were so strong there would be no point in this, yet it is still the meta.

That is why most games finish in feudal-early castle age.

Interesting, why do we not see more FC than flush then?

You obviously don’t wach pro games

1 Like

Hell no. Walling and turtling is effective even in super open and (in Theory aggressive) maps like valley, Serengeti and arabia.

Any buff to walls and we might just delete feudal age from the game

2 Likes

Not, palizade wall need cost more and a bit more longer time to build, is easy play wall but is more harder for a agressive player.

1 Like

unpopolar opinion: nerf quickwaling but in turn give stone wall moee time before their destroyed. this will bemore realistic to

You seem to be interested in different game settings. As you get better in the game, attacks start earlier and earlier and it has nothing to do with walls. If you want to see hundreds of war elephants you want 30+ minutes of peace and quiet to build the eco to support that.
Even on Arena you will be under siege and facing a monk/spear push by minute 18, with 3-4 units on the field only, if you are playing at a decent level… If you sit behind walls you lose all relics too.
The walls do not matter (that much). Better players will attack you faster and faster because when under pressure players make mistakes, over/under react, gain map control, etc.
Also important to note that when both players prepare behind walls to have that “ONE BIG BATTLE” its often a let down as one show up with 50 battle elephants and the other with 50 halberdiers (or 50 arbalesters for opposite effect) and game is over after half hour preparations for 2 minutes of action.

Addressing the suggestion, I think the game is in good shape now. Walls are doable but not OP. We have a nice mix of strategies being played in every map archtype.

Taking Arabia as example, drush FC is as doable as playing m@a archers or even scouts skirms… And I would say the decision on what to play relies on civ and map gen. If walls got stronger, Arabia would become Arena-lite or Hideout… In fact, Vikings / Mayans playing drush>FC>Xbow&Siege defense>Imp>Arbs is super common, and its a very defensive strategy for the first 25 minutes… But you need to start defending yourself from minute 10, instead of relying on super strong walls to do it for you.

Even if you double HP of walls for Arena for example, its just +2 petards to break them and your (false) security is gone.

Another argument to add here is that average game length is about 24 minutes, which should be early to mid Castle Age. Bear in mind that there are a lot of factors that reduce the game length such as crashes, DCs, early resigns (lost a boar gg)…

That’s why I make scenarios where resources last forever. I love Europe Diplomacy, and Michi.