Great wall is a very underwhelming UT it’s too expensive. for walling it is much better to just build more walls and it is not powerful enough to justify the use of towers, by making it a team bonus not only make it more viable but also allows for towers to be more competitively viable in imperial age. also it should give stone walls to civs like Cumans. if this is to powerful then we could decrease it to 25-20% it would even more useless in 1v1 but at least it has a niche in team games
6 Likes
30% is very meh indeed.
They get same/less (castle/imperial) HP for walls than Byzantines and Byzantines get them for free.
It should be at least 50% since it’s locked behind a UT, or at least increase the wall armor as well, like +3/+3, even though it would make no difference for siege weapons since they mostly rely on bonus damage.
2 Likes
Maybe walls can be applied as whole team that some maps team walls are built and it make sense to applies to all team.
But team UT for towers can be combined with civ like Turks/Koreans etc and it would be too strong. Tower one can only for Chinese and effect can be increased like 40-50%.
1 Like
Yes but Byzantines lack masonry and architecture.
I believe they do nothing for walls, don’t they?
For towers, obviously they work.
1 Like
Both of which don’t affect walls.
1 Like
The Great Wall wasn’t that hard to cross, it was mostly to force raiders to leave their loot behind actually, but it was huge.
How about making it turn walls into “trash” : remove the stone cost and replace with 10 wood per piece ?
That would be just illogical and broken beyond levels (on arena and BF will lead to do abusive walling).
1 Like
First off “stone walls” should cost stone and secondly that might become exploitable unless they somewhat weakened their walls.
2 Likes
Just give it +50% hp. I don’t think 50% hp on bombard towers would be op, they drop like flies to trebs and rams.
But if it was op, then do like 30% for towers, 50% for walls. Horrible (different % I mean) but doable I think.
Right now it’s pathetic that Chinese walls are weaker than Byzantines without the need of any UT.
2 Likes
I understand that it would be op combined with Fortified Wall but very counterintuitive that masonry doesn’t affect walls
I would like it if walls were used for able to garrison units to shoot from inside while also being used for protection (either damage reduction on enemy projectiles, or they can “miss”). Although I admit this would be very tricky to balance, and the first obvious shenanigan to have is that with this you would be enabling towers that cost 5 stone.
Lol how much stronger do towers need to be to use them on an archer civ? More than half the time you have the garrison potential already avaiable.
I mean 4 chinese keeps + UT costs 700 stone and collectively has around 14,000 HP. Not to mention the repair cost of chinese keeps is 30% of what it is for their castles.
And still I don’t think Chinese keeps are used at all.
Not when their castles can create Chu-ko-nus and they have Bombard towers with discounted upgrade.
To be honest I don’t see anyone except Japanese/Koreans using keeps on non-water maps.
Guard tower dropping as an archer civ is way cheaper than castle dropping for similar return on investment because the tower is so cheap. A castle people usually will just ignore and leaves you with a downside of losing 525 extra stone.
Keep provide a 50% increase to HP which is massive. Half the HP of a chinese castle for 1/5th the stone.
If youre worried about saving stone and keeping castles alive to produce chu ko nu, why wouldnt you be using keeps on the front line and castles on the back line?