For elephants to work as they do now, they would either have to be cheaper or cost less population.
as I said, you’re both right. they do have usage but they are very niche units. to be perfectly honest, I don’t see how you could make them less niche without making them OP.
1 Like
I’ve already come up with five options. I think that since they cost more population and resources than samurai, they must be stronger than samurai.
I get people not being happy with a unit they find cool or would like to see be the star of the army. But to take that into calling the unit useless or a minor god an autoloss is quite the leap imo. And as you say, since they are good on their use, just buffing them so they are good anywhere could take them too far the current use.
At the end of the day one is a calv unit that has high pierce armor. Another a hack damage dealing unit that has high hack armor. Its always going to loose the trade based on that.
”This cost X therefore it must be stronger than this thing that costs less” is looking for a flawed design. By that logic a unit like chu ko nu should beat peltast since it costs more, it should also beat hippeus or jarls because it costs more, but it wouldnt be very bad design if that was the case. Theres more to how good a unit X is vs Y than just the cost. Samurai and elephants even as frontlines dont do the same vs the same types of units.
1 Like
These are units that counter ranged units. A very strange choice for comparison. Yes, Chukonu should be compared to Gastraphet. The Gastraphet is slightly more expensive, although its stats are slightly worse, but its range is simply monstrous, making it slightly stronger than the Chukonu. As you can see, everything works.
As for my comparison with the Samurai, it’s because there are no other units in the game besides the mythical ones that cost more than 3 population. (The Elephant also loses to the Scarab, which only costs 4 population, by the way.)
Maybe it’s not customary here, but after 2,000 hours of AoE 3, I’ve gotten used to evaluating all units based on their economic efficiency. And the elephant’s efficiency is on par with autolose.
1 Like
Samurai counter elephants. A unit having a multiplier is not the only thing that makes a unit counter another. Murmillo also counter calv units and they dont have anti cav bonus. Because of how the damage profiles and armor are on the unit. Its the design dynamic you are missing.
This makes no sense to think otherwise. You are ignoring clear aom fundamentals. Myth units are more cost effective than human units, which is why you need heroes to counter them
This is not AOE3
1 Like
Why was the hirdman needed then?)))
Arcus-heroes kill them faster than elephants, but they’re still more effective. The elephant is currently just a very poor siege tower, withstanding fewer hits from Murmillos, lacking immunity to arrows, and performing poorly at destroying buildings.
A very informative answer. So, does economic efficiency not apply to this RTS?))))
I know you dislike the unit so theres no convincing you, but it simply have more options. we have been through this before to know you wont learn about it. Even in high level games in tournaments when explained to you how the unit enables an edge ina match up you are still to blind on how much you dislike the change to see it through.
Sure man, if thats all the use you can see for it, go fo it, its hard to try to show you when the units is strong when you are too keen of when its not and wont learn to use it properly or move over.
Fair, i could have gone into more detail., here i go: AoM has things AOE3 doesnt have. Heroes and myth units. Myth units are always more pop nd cost efficient thatn human units, if they were not there would be literally 0 purpose for making any of them. The counter dynamic to this efficiency is hero units. None of this 2 aspects exist on AoE3 so when you ignore basica fundamentals of AoM to reach conclusions they are gonna be flawed.
You are keen on this economic efficiency idea but also are smart enough to see how it doesnt make sense when i pointed out the chu ko nu example. Is it one of those scenarios where you understood by its a hill you are just willing to die on to not budge?
If all you can ever see for a unit is how good it is in a 1 vs 1 scenario half the unit roster are trash, but thats says more about your current skill as a rts player than the units design flaws. Elephants are not meant to be the unit that carries the army, deals the most damage and wins the game solo. They are great units that enable the dps units to shine.If all you can see is dps then yea theres many jumps you are gonna take and limitations in how you play the game.
An addition as useless as the Khopesh Swordsman from EE. At least they cancelled that. By the way, did you notice that I switched to playing as Egypt, which only has barracks and a castle?
Any Egyptian unit can handle this task better than an elephant. It can’t fight archers because it can’t catch up to them, it can’t fight infantry because it’s too expensive, it can’t fight buildings because any siege weapon is more effective and cheaper. The only thing it can do is protect archers from enemy horses… oh yeah, it can’t, it’s slow and its hitbox is too big. How can you argue with the uselessness of this unit, even in your head?
A substitution of concepts has arrived. I didn’t say that. Quite the opposite, in fact. It’s not about the 1v1 scenario (the elephant would win there, lol). Your stock phrase about player skill won’t work here precisely because I’m not pointing to base stats, but to the fact that elephants can’t fulfill any role in combat. And your so-called “dps units” counters are easy with cavalry or archers. In order to be distracted by elephants in battle, he must be either very strong or very fast, otherwise he will simply be outflanked or ignored.
Thanks Devs for adding aoe damage to elephants, as suggested here.
2 Likes
I guess the champ upgrade giving the aoe damage but with less (0.75 vs 1.0) is a good middle ground. Elephants can no longer be ignored in combat now and you have to actually respond to them. This makes elephants better overall for all 3 gods and also helps the Thoth upgrade scale better.
However, i don’t expect to see them being spammed in every game yet.
We’ll see, overall it’s better than nothing. I didn’t want to make them op, I just wanted them to be buffed in comparison to their population cost.
Seems interesting tying it to an upgrade so its less impactul earlier on. Time will tell how much impact it gives. AoE on attack units usually cause issues
Yea its always nice when a change targets all, thot or not if people wanted them more overall. Ra also has some interesting synergy with his great food eco enablingan easier time massing them.
His AoE damage was only increased to Hetairos level, and that was only in the latest upgrade. Nothing else changed except for Toth.
We shall see. I don’t think they will be OP like heta because they are large, don’t box well, and slso slow.
terrible change, elephants and thoth were already good and now they’re OP
Have you ever played through Toth?
The aoe damage does have a sensible effect on their combat efficiency. The funny part is that it doesn’t show up in the UI
Everything’s broken since the God Pack came out. Golden Apples and Zeus no longer work for favor. The gods change when you log in. It’s terrible.