Fixing infantry line without touching infantry line

Age of Empires II: DE II - Discussion
1

If you are following KOTD so far, you probably have noticed that not a single player uses infantry despite the recent “buffs”, unless the ocassional two or three militia rush or some very specific situations. Infantry civs virtually don’t exist in AOE2. In the end all civs are cavalry civs or archer civs, so lets remove the “infantry civ” description in some civs from the game and that’s it, right? Well, there’s a second option.

How would I do it?
1- Make skirmishers and pikemen cheaper, like 20f, 25w (Remember: bizantines have even cheaper trash units and it’s not broken).
2- Shorter training time for pikemen and skirmishers. Let’s say from the current 22s. to 18s.
3- (Optional?) Give infantry an attack bonus against pikemen and skirmishers, let’s say +3, so you kill a skirmisher in 3-4 hits depending on upgrades. A spearman in 4-5 hits.

Why would it work?
You go full archers, your oponent adds cheap skirms. You add too many skirms, your oponent goes mma+skirms or scauts+skirms. If he adds scauts, spearmen could get into the mix, but now you are vulnerable to full maa. But if you go full maa, then archers and scauts become powerful again, and the circle is closed.

Power units will become kind of special forces to kill infantry (which is what they were actually). You will have to mass them and protect them with other units and use them wisely in the right moment (like some unique units), instead of just spam them and throw them to the enemy.

8 Likes
2

Interesting ideas you got there!

Although, I’m afraid that overbuffing defensive units in Feudal has the risk of promoting defensive play instead of infantry. At the highest levels of skilled play, MAA can be kited and walled for longer than Scouts/Archers, meaning the defending player can often stall until they reach Castle and then use Siege or Knights to counter the infantry. The attacking player invested a lot on infantry and likely won’t be able to keep up with the age time, either.

Perhaps we could buff infantry attack vs buildings even further? Like, say moving Arson to Feudal and seeing what happens.

Overall I’d say that the big problem with making infantry viable in Feudal and Castle is that they’re the least skill-expressive of the Gold units; you can’t do much besides patrolling them towards the nearest thing and hoping their numbers are enough, whereas cavalry, archers, siege and monks all have significant rewards for mastering their micro.

And how to we address this lack of skill expression? That’s the million-dollar question, if you ask me.

8 Likes
3

I would like a tech like infantry cost 2/3 pop, so you can mass them and overwhelm with numbers. Something like Logistic in AoE1

But to be fair you need a rework for the militia line, not just a balance update or a new tech.

Right now you need to reaseach 4 upgrades and 3 techs to FU a generic champion.
It is just to expensive in resources and time,. Specially if you considerer that you have to make them all together since militia “shines” in trash wars in very late game.

They need to simplify infantry… remove supplies and give them a cost reduction, remove squires and give the speed bonus for free… maybe even halve the gold cost from upgrades

1 Like
4

Byzs have cheaper trash but they dont have an eco bonus so it does not seems like broken but if you give cheaper trash units to other civs it will be broken. Also kotd5 arabia is different from arabia in map pool. Mp arabia has thicker wood lines, close res etc;so, archers and scouts are not as effective as kotd5. That is why fast castle into knight+ siege+ monk is more comman strategy then staying longer in feudal for agression nowdays so infantries need something againts knights like increase cost of arson but add +2 bonus damage vs cavs. That way LS and other units can get cost effective fights against cav.

1 Like
5

No need to anything to counter units at all, and infantry line is fine.
You also said that Byzantines discount for counter units is fine or not broken, but actually Byzantines were one of the most banned/picked civ and also have a very high winrate in the tournaments and ladder especially high ELO and all thanks to the imbalanced discount bonus for both imp upgrade and the counter units.

My friend, honetly Byz need a nerf.

1 Like
6

Is that really true? I think militia is only really used vs specific civs like goths. Out of that, not even in trash war scenario players switch to militia line to counter trash units. It is trash wars because gold is saved for siege. You always would prefer other units over militia-line.

I wonder if matches’ statistics from sites like aoe2insights could give us an idea of what are the more trained units along matches, per civ, per age, etc…
I could gess that militia line would barely be trained beyond the feudal age, contrary to this idea of trash post imperial killer .

2 Likes
7

So I ran some light tests with your idea and found out some interesting information…

10 Full Castle Age Upgrades Briton Longswords (650 total Res) vs. 5 Full Castle Age Upgrades Chinese Knights (675 total Res) is usually a win for the Longswords. It’s close to 50-50 with 9 Longswords right now, making them technically 5% effective in resources;

On the other side, a stable can Field 2 Knights/minute whereas a Barracks can only field ~2.85 Militias/minute, meaning on average you’ll only have 7 Longswords for every 5 Knights, given equal production buildings. It’s easier to build 2 barracks at the start of Castle Age but if the fights get long then the militia player can be overrun by the knights.

Applying your idea through some Editor Triggers, the Longswords now win comfortably at 9 vs 5 and are about tied at 8 vs 5, meaning they’re now 20% cost-effective but would still marginally lose in a spamming war.

That’s about as much testing as I’m willing to do for now, but I’d say that +2 vs Cavarly on Arson could be a good call based on these results.

8

Well thats why I wrote “shines” with “”, militia is good in trash wars, but you have to research too many techs and upgrades so most of the time you use something else

1 Like
9

I did not test it but from your result: Ls do well againts knights if we talk about gold cost. 450 food 200 gold cost 10 Ls can have a close win vs 300 food 375 gold. 175 gold really good value compare to 150 food. Knights will still be better then Ls since they have mobility adventage and do well in low numbers but Ls can take down buildings; force knights to fight and use their cost effectiveness.

1 Like
10

improve infantry move speed to1.1，or decrease xbow attack speed

11

I would propose this for militia line, remove 2HS and make infantry more tanky, just tanky… you can even reduce their attack a bit ### let them take a heavy beating.

HP 35/50/65/80
dmg 4/6/8/10
PA 0/1/2/2
MA 1/1/1/2

Gamesons–> +1/+1 in castle age for ALL infantry units.

13

You have a point but if trash units become too powerful, it can be fixed with a greater anti trash bonus for infantry. I really like the idea of getting arson into feudal too, that will punish defensive play and infantry could be the siege unit of feudal age.

Regarding infantry being the less skill based unit, I agree just in part. Infantry is very vulnerable to the other power units and if your oponent is smart enough, he will easily force you into bad fights so you will have to rely on good decission making, maybe less about micro. Lastly, I would say that it wouldn’t be crazy if archers and cavalry receive a small bonus against infantry line, just in case infantry gets too dominant. That would create a clear predator and prey for every main unit in the game.

1 Like
14

The big problem with Militia is that you have to spend wayyy more time and effort to even unlock and then upgrade in exchange for less power when you compare the same equivalent effort to KTs and Archers. Here is a quick comparison.

CA Time and Resources to just unlock Units:
LS: 250F 105G/80 Seconds
Crossbows: 175F 125G/40 Seconds
Knights: Free

CA Resources to fully upgrade Units (sans unlocking upgrades):
Militia: 425F/225G (Barracks) + 370F/120G (Attack Upgrades) + 300F/100G (Armor Upgrades)= 1095F/445G total
Knights: 250F/100G (Stables) + 370F/120G (Attack Upgrades) + 400F/150G (Armor Upgrades) = 1020F/370G total
Archers: 475F/125G/250W (Ranges) + 300F/150G (Attack Upgrades) + 250F/150G (Armor Upgrades) + 300W/175G (University) = 1025F/550G/550W

IMP Time and Resources to unlock Units:
Champs: 1050G/450G/145 Seconds
Arbalests: 450F/400G//50 Seconds
Cavaliers: 300F/300G/100 Seconds
Paladin: 1600F/1050G/270 Seconds

This would all be fine if the Militia-line was intrinsically strong, but it gets Hard Countered by the Archer-Line and only barely cost-effective against KTs, the KTs themselves are also under no obligation to fight the Militia when the Militia want to and can easily use their mobility to raid defensive weakpoints or take good fights. The only Militia line also doesn’t excel in many situations that another more cost-efficient (both to upgrade and to train) unit doesn’t. Could go in more detail, but I think most people are aware of how meh LSs are in practice

I’m of the view that Militia are too similar to KTs and too unrewarding to micro to be that fun were they of equal power to KTs and Archers. I think it would be better if they were designed as being a situationally strong unit, but not general powerhouse similar to Pikes and Skirms.

TL;DR
Militia Line way more expensive and time-consuming to upgrade for what they’re worth, compared to KTs, Archers and really most Units in the game.

3 Likes
15

I greatly agree. Plus, they directly slow down the aging up process since producing and upgrading them cost food and gold.

Maybe if their upgrades were less food heavy, it could improve their situation slightly.

16

Without the BS upgrades, this is the cost to fully upgrade a generic militia, archer or knight

MILITIA

555G to upgrade from militia to champion
225G for barracks upgrades (arson, supplies, gamesons)
Total 780G

ARCHER

525G to get arbalester
375G from the university (chemestry n balistic)
Total 900G

KNIGHT

100G for BL
300G for cavalier, the most realistic fully upgrades unit in 1v1
750G to get paladin
Total 1150G

Right now, for how little the militia line offer, the total cost should not be over 500G

17

I really don’t know why people keep saying this, this is just not true.

The skill with infantry is about deciding where to pick your battles. Infantry are slow. Meaning, you can’t run away when outnumbered. They are also highly vulnerable to siege like scorpions and mangonels. This means you need far more insight into the game to use them effectively. You can’t just run away like you can with cavalry.

You also need to micro infantry in battles for good results. That’s because they can’t pick their next targets as well as cavalry can. They also need more time to move to their next target.

Knights, on the other hand, require next to no skill. That’s why they are so dominant at the lower ELOs. They can withstand arrows from TC, they take down buildings quickly enough, they are resistant to siege, and they can run away. Okay, I’m being a bit hyperbolic here in saying that knights require no skill. The point still stands, though. Knights are the least-skill unit by far, out of any mainline units.

In terms of skill, the list is archers > cav archers >> infantry >>> cavalry(specifically horse and camels)

4 Likes
18

When I say skill, I mean specifically micro skill. My statement about “just patrolling” is a bit reductive, it’s true. Every unit in the game requires significant decision-making skills, and I’d even argue that which decisions are easier depends a lot on the matchup, the map and even the playstyle.

The skill with infantry is about deciding where to pick your battles. Infantry are slow. Meaning, you can’t run away when outnumbered. They are also highly vulnerable to siege like scorpions and mangonels. This means you need far more insight into the game to use them effectively. You can’t just run away like you can with cavalry.

Okay, I’m being a bit hyperbolic here in saying that knights require no skill. The point still stands, though. Knights are the least-skill unit by far, out of any mainline units.

I mean, the way I see it, you’re underselling half of the story here. If infantry can’t flee, that means your decisions have steeper consequences, but it also means you make less of them; conversely, if you’re controlling cavalry, you need to be constantly aware of the fight they’re in because you usually have the option to flee and attack elsewhere. Hit and run is incredibly skill intensive at the highest level, both in terms of micro and decision-making - every move you make with the units needs to weight the damage you’re taking vs the damage you’re doing to keep momentum and apply pressure, and it needs to be done quickly to beat out the opponent’s reactions. Knights are just dominant in low ELO because opponent’s reactions are pitiful, causing bad knight play to go unpunished.

You also need to micro infantry in battles for good results. That’s because they can’t pick their next targets as well as cavalry can. They also need more time to move to their next target.

What kind of micro are we talking here, exactly? I can’t remember any examples of that in serious games in recent memory, I’d like to test that out in the simulator and see the numbers before replying to this.

I really don’t know why people keep saying this, this is just not true.

I don’t think it’s controversial to say that a top level player should excel in both macro and micro skills to really claim they’ve mastered AoE II and to provide the plays that keep the audience coming back to watch them. Since they’re melee and on the slower side, infantry mainly checks for half of that (the same way pikes or skirms mostly check game knowledge), whereas other gold units clearly demand both skills to shine; because of that, it’s not uncommon that players prefer to see them as a counter unit themselves as opposed to the main part of an army, and no amount of stat buffs is going to change that. Hopefully that explains the opinion better now.

19

in Aoe1 ,there is a tech that cut infantry pop space by half, I think if they port that tech into aoe2, it will make infantry more viable with overwhelming number.

20

I support the pop space reduction for militia lin, but I think this doesn’t fix the issue with its low viability in early game

1 Like
21

The problem is not the pop space, and it would be an indirect nerf to Karambit (that already use 1/2 pop space).

The problem is that Infantry alone does not survive to Castle Age. And their force should be the possibility to be massed.

They need more armor and speed, maybe the solution could be switching the effect of Scale Mail Armor (+1/+1) with Plate Mail Armor (+1/+2). And make Squires avaible from the Feudal Age.

This way Infantry could me more viable in late Feudal, without being OP in the late game.