Do you really think this is OP?


Their performance is terrible. They’re obviously designed as artillery, but they’re seriously vulnerable to Light infantry because they have heavy infantry tags.

Anyway, they’re artillery, so they’re vulnerable to cavalry too. We need to fundamentally reestablish their design. Are these artillery or heavy infantry?

Cavalry Archer

Their performance is definitely stronger than Dragoons, but the Russians and Ottomans who can have this unit are known to be vulnerable to Melee cavalry.

Even if they had lower HP then dragoon, it would be better, If they have a long range like Abusame


In the AOE series, heavy melee infantry are always in a weak position. The same is true of Halberdiers, and they’re harder to see than pikemen.

Their design is slow but powerful. But there’s no reason to use them because they don’t stand out Advantages.

We’ll have to give them a really strong damage so they can be more chosen.


Nice post.

I agree that cav archers should have a better range or at least speed. Maybe guard and imperial upgrades should grant them +1 or +2 range, if that even means increasing their cost 100 f 60 c to 100 f 80 c (180 resources like Dragoons).

I think halbs already have a really strong damage or it seems so for their cost, only thing they need is better speed. They should be able to chase off cavs instead of being kited so hard by skirms or goons. I’ve already mentioned this, a separate speed upgrade for halbs for 10 or 15% in arsenal would be nice, so along with Military Drummers (which requires Adv arsenal) the speed becomes closer to 5 which seems good. This makes Dutch halbs very strong and a potential late game unit with all cards invested.


This unit is available in Age 2, although China’s strength is not in Age 2. They are especially bad in late Age 2 because of how their banner armies work. 99% of the time China wants to FF. China doesn’t even have an Age 2 shipment of 2 Flamethrowers, which would still be less than 700 ressources (2x 170 wood, 170 coin and 8 supply). However, for some reason the devs gave Sweden a 2 Leather cannon shipment worth 800 ressources (600 food and 200 wood) for only 6 supply, in Age 2! The later stage Flamethrower shipments are terrible value aswell.

In Age III, there is no reason to build Flamethrowers. They are insanely overpriced, 170 wood + 170 gold aswell as 4 supply. Compare this to Swedish leather cannons, 300 food, 100 wood but only 3 supply. Or compare this to a Curassier, which is 3 supply, less ressources and scales so much better than Flamethrowers.

You can’t use Flamethrowers in Age III and above because your opponent will use artillery, kill your Flamethrowers from range and you suddenly lost tons of ressources. Its better to just make Skirms and Cavalry, both can attack Falconetts and then focus on killing Infantry.

Flamethrowers need a reduction in cost and supply, aswell as upgrades to their range and speed in later ages, since they are so vulnerable to long range artillery. They only have 4.25 speed, which means all infantry can run away from them with 4.40 speed after arsenal upgrade. They don’t snare either.

Again, all you need is an arsenal upgrade to make a unit useless, because movement speed is one of the most powerful stats in RTS. This needs to be fixed by adding more range/speed to the unit with age 3 and age 4 upgrades.