The current state of the pikemen relies in the french/german xbow/pike rush, and that’s it. You can see pikemen on spanish armies, but they generally come from their ageup since their Xbow/pike FI was nerfed. Brits and sweden can also be seen with some pikemen but generally this unit doesn’t pass beyond age2.
That’s when I came up with a decent buff for them in the form of an arsenal tech that would encourage their production past age2, also making them significantly different from Halberdiers. And to be honest, pikemen on age3 lose to any cavalry in front of them, since the unique cavalry units usually have a higher pool of hitpoints/atk which the pikemen can’t compete with, since their stats are very low, so are the buff/techs on them.
Picas(100w, 200c): Pikemen get 15% attack and +2/1 range.
There’s also a good point to consider that European pikes, specially spanish ones, could reach a length of 5,5 meters or 18 feet.
I think pikemen from all factions should have greater range by default. It would give them a more unique and useful role.
It would greatly increase their melee capacity in large groups by letting them attack from ranks further back
It would allow them to more easily catch cavalry by hitting and snaring them from further away
If their range is long enough, it could actually make them weaker to ranged infantry since they would be far enough away to avoid being forced into melee without microing them closer
It would differentiate them from other heavy infantry with shorter range weapons
Pikemen and Crossbowmen usually play the important roles in the early game.
A lot of games are over in the commerce age and sometimes the fortress age, when they are just in time.
If it needs to change, maybe make them more useful in the early game, rather than strengthening them in the late game when they basically shouldn’t have such an advantage. But I think they’re in good enough shape right now that there’s nothing that has to be strengthened.
If I may, I must disagree. Archaic infantry (pikes, crossbows) play their role well in the 2nd age, and are still reasonable in the 3rd age.
The age of fortress is the period in the game that represents the transition from the 17th to the 18th century, and this is where bayonet use retires pikemen, so I personally don’t like the idea of archaic infantry getting buffed in the late game, in this period they were simply supposed to be a cheaper and weaker alternative to their modern counterparts.
But of course, since not all Europeans have a full roster of modern infantry, for these civilizations in particular there should be a bonus compensation.
Most civs that lack certain units have something to make up for it though, swede for example lack a skirmisher but get leather cannons which help them deal with masses of infantry. The 2 civs that stand out are probably germany and dutch both lacking musketeers but they’re far from weak, germanys free uhlans lets you apply constant pressure raiding and is great value, the war wagon in age 3 is 1 of the strongest anti-cav units especially vs things like cuirassiers, dutch also can triple card their skirmishers and get access to the best dragoon in the game.
I think you missed the point, generally some civs get the advantage of going fortress while their enemy can’t afford spending all those resource for an age up. Giving pikemen a bit more range would balance things out in a game where you are an age behind, considering that most civs get light cav in fortress, which are more versatile when dealing with cav, a +1 range pikemen would even things out in a minimal form.
I like the concept of modern age, modern units, archaic units get overwhelmed. But still the game doesn’t really represent the huge impact pikemen had in the european wars until the 18 century. Now, the difference between a pikemen and a halberdier it’s just the stats and costs, when in reallity, pikemen performed a huge and specialized anti cav role with their excessively long pikes.
The idea of “archaic and modern units” only worked within the 8 European civs but collapses with more non-European (aka not-so-modern civs in this period) introduced. In TWC you get a tomahawk that functions like a bayonet. In TAD you have a bow that functions like a rifle. Now you have a javelinman that deals more damage than any other musketeer.
So buffing those archaic units should not be a problem. I like how DE made guard/imperial crossbows and pikes available for all.
Since Spain is destined to be an archaic civ, I think it would be interesting for her to get the 10% improvement from the royal guard until the 3rd age.
Well, that’s the point of aging up. You spend so many resources to unlock stronger units and techs which renders the units of previous age obsolete in some way. Can’t argue other way around. This was always the intended design.
Xbows and pikes were originally meant to be age 1 units (like militias in aoe 2 and clubmen in aoe 1), considering the existence of an age 1 European barracks model in the game but as we all know, this design was changed at some point of the development. I suppose it supports the reason why xbows and pikes didn’t even have guard and imperial upgrades back on legacy with only exceptions like Spanish pikes and the Besterios tech that Ports get. However, DE actually changed it by introducing the Papal Guard politician, which is more than enough recognition that they could get imo.
It’s not like pikes are completely unloved or not given any consideration, it exists somewhere in the game, like Swiss pikes for example. Also, I would be fine with how they’re right now. They serve their purpose well.
IMO pikemen = specialized, long range anticav, good to chase cav. Low hp, low armor.
Halberdier = strong melee inf, good vs everything, high HP and decent armor.