Idea: Buffing the Swordsman Line By Improving Survivability

[FearfulSugar350]

the tech tree saying otherwise is an old relic from the past, it is the reason why for over 20 years, no body wants to Invest in Militia line. Yes, I’m talking about a specific infantry unit that costs gold, not infantries as a whole. Instances like Halberdiers, obuch, berserks or eagle warriors are great infantry units, I’m not gonna argue about them. Even the dev know that militia line was so bad, that why we got them buffed recently (tho not quite there yet imo).

How many times do you see players use them to win instead of meme? Even when they are supposed to kill trash units, other trash units can still do the job better for literally no gold cost. You can just remove militia from the game entirely and nothing will change, why there is a borderline irrelevant unit in a game? it’s just bad game design in general. The role they have in the current game even gets out-classed by trash units and that’s my point. I see no problem making militia line or UU infantries as a competitive choice, it makes the game more diverse instead of just predictable knight spam and Xbow spam every single match.

If you look at the dynamic between knight vs Xbow, they are not direct counter to each other, each depends on terrains and timing to win. While militia line got demolished by both knight and Xbow regardless of terrains and timing.

Yes, I understand that if militia line ever can compete against knight and Xbow, they should have an other type of trash unit to counter militia, (maybe a trash siege unit), but that’s another topic

[MatCauthon3]

@FearfulSugar350

the tech tree saying otherwise is an old relic from the past, it is the reason why for over 20 years, no body wants to Invest in Militia line.

A relic of the past? Sorry but to me age 2 should be age 2. Not a completely different game.
Funny I see it used quite a bit. Best opener in the game. I even see lomgswords used against eagles more and more now. Furthermore champs are very common.

@FearfulSugar350

How many times do you see players use them to win instead of meme?

Depends on the civ but I’ve seen pros use them even in tournaments. Not as much as Knights or crossbows but that’s working as intended.

@FearfulSugar350

Even when they are supposed to kill trash units, other trash units can still do the job better for literally no gold cost

When people say rhey are good against trash units they don’t mean that they are better then any individual unit against certain trash. What they mean is that the militia line has no trash weakness and is good against trash units collectively. Yeah. A hussar is great against skirms but gets wrecked by halbs. Meanwhile a militia line unit will hold up exceedingly well against all 3. But go ahead and keep stretching what people say.

@FearfulSugar350

You can just remove militia from the game entirely and nothing will change, why there is a borderline irrelevant unit in a game?

Funny I’d rather use them against eagles then any other unit out there.

@FearfulSugar350

The role they have in the current game even gets out-classed by trash units and that’s my point. I see no problem making militia line or UU infantries as a competitive choice, it makes the game more diverse instead of just predictable knight spam and Xbow spam every single match

Have fun rebalancing every civ bonus and unique tech that affects infantry.

@FearfulSugar350

While militia line got demolished by both knight and Xbow regardless of terrains and timing

False. Teuton long swords beat Knights cost effectively. Don’t even get me started on malian infantry and how effective they can be against archers

@FearfulSugar350

Yes, I understand that if militia line ever can compete against knight and Xbow, they should have an other type of trash unit to counter militia, (maybe a trash siege unit), but that’s another topic

No. It’s not another topic. If you’re buffing the longsword line to compete balance must be maintained and thus you have to discuss proper counters to it. Otherwise you end up with a super unit that has no weaknesses

For example. With the proposed buffs to men at arms how would you beat them as a cavalry civ in feudal? Or heck even archers would be hugely adverse effected, as they go from killing a man at arms in 12 shots to killing them in 17. Especially for a unit that can be started training before archers even hit the field that hurts. Feudal man at arms would be insanely oppressive. Especially malian ones that would have 3 pierce armor and take 25 shots to die.

Furthermore with the proposed changes above malian longswords would have 6 pa and be virtually immune to archers. Makes it a pita for archer civs to fight.

[casusincorrabil]

@Mercy9545

These buffs are way over the top. Let’s see first how the meta settles with the recent buffs.

Agree. The militia line is fine btw. If anything we could discuss adding an infantry power unit (that needs to have a trash counter also).

The low Gold ratio of the militia line combined with having no trash counter just makes the line terrible in balancing with the other power units. It should basically never be done. The unit is a special purpose unit, often extremely snowbally in these situations, and therefore perfectly balanced.

But I would like to see a more tanky heavy infantry unit with accordingly high gold cost.

[Dbuen]

Generic Swordsman barely breaking even against Knights means infantry civs trade better than even vs. Knights, finally making Swordsman a mid-game option for infantry civs vs. cavalry while archer and cavalry civs still prefer archers and cavalry. Which is exactly what I wanted from infantry buffs.

[FourCloud176402]

@MatCauthon3

@FourCloud176402

Massing men-at-arms means that I have to attack into tower/TC fire.

Not really. For one towers would only work until you get under them. One of the most common tactics for fighting towers includes using villagers.

As for town centers. You don’t really have to attack the tc. Wreck production buildings. Idle woodlines and stone and gold by camping them. If your opponent is stuck in their tc then you are winning. Furthermore with your changes a longsword has 4 pa and a town center is going to take a long time to eat them up if you do decide to go under the tc.
Yoy could also mix in a ram or mangonel. And simply use that against the tc.

Either way point is you can overwhelm your opponent before they ever get going.

While in very early Feudal Age, man-at-arms harassing the woodline and stragglers is possible, by the late Feudal age (when man-at-arms massing is actually possible), the opponent would cover vulnerable places with towers (and have their own army). Thus, by the time you can mass man-at-arms, you have to attack into towers/TC, as most targets are already fortified.

And while man-at-arms can harass villagers, they are also more prone to dying on raids when compared to archers and scouts. If I cannot stall the villagers long enough to recoup the cost of a man-at-arms by the time I lose one, then the raid is bad.

[FourCloud176402]

@MatCauthon3

You don’t get to change infantries balance in the game by giving them more strength without giving them a weakness to offset

But they have many weaknesses:
- archers
- hand cannon (I seem to remember someone complaining before that arbalests are better against infantry than hand cannon by DPS. If that is the case buffing infantry pierce armor could make hand cannon better for its intended role.)
- knights (pop efficient)
- most unique units
- scouts (soft trash “counter”, this one surprised me as well, but in a straight Post Imperial fight, hussar against champion does about as well as halberdier against paladin. Early Imperial light cavalry vs longswords is also a very close fight.)

[MatCauthon3]

@FourCloud176402

While in very early Feudal Age, man-at-arms harassing the woodline and stragglers is possible, by the late Feudal age (when man-at-arms massing is actually possible), the opponent would cover vulnerable places with towers (and have their own army). Thus, by the time you can mass man-at-arms, you have to attack into towers/TC, as most targets are already fortified

Men at arms are going to utterly laugh at towers.

@FourCloud176402

And while man-at-arms can harass villagers, they are also more prone to dying on raids when compared to archers and scouts. If I cannot stall the villagers long enough to recoup the cost of a man-at-arms by the time I lose one, then the raid is bad

They don’t need to kill them. Just idle the woodline. No resource income. Furthermore men at arms is the most common opener and is considered effective If it even idles villagers, let alone gets kills. So I’m not sure where you’re getting this idea from.

@FourCloud176402

• archers
• hand cannon (I seem to remember someone complaining before that arbalests are better against infantry than hand cannon by DPS. If that is the case buffing infantry pierce armor could make hand cannon better for its intended role.)

With your changes they are much stronger against archers and hand cannons are imp only.

@FourCloud176402

knights (pop efficient)

Knights aren’t available until castle age and require time to mass up. Meanwhile I can mass men at arms in feudal and go up to castle with enough to overwhelm your knights as rhey come out. Furthermore you ignore that ls will trade more rhen cost effectively after your changes.

@FourCloud176402

most unique units

Requires a castle.

@FourCloud176402

scouts (soft trash “counter”, this one surprised me as well, but in a straight Post Imperial fight, hussar against champion does about as well as halberdier against paladin. Early Imperial light cavalry vs longswords is also a very close fight.

Only with bloodlines. And with your changes not really.
Remember you’ve given champs 15 extra hp and 2 extra armor. Champs would take 5 damage a hit and on the other hand dish out 14. It would take 17 hits for a hussar to kill a champion and a champion will only need 7 hits to kill a hussar. So a single hussar vs champion fight is going to result in a champion losing 35 hp. Less then half.

[FourCloud176402]

For example. With the proposed buffs to men at arms how would you beat them as a cavalry civ in feudal? Or heck even archers would be hugely adverse effected, as they go from killing a man at arms in 12 shots to killing them in 17. Especially for a unit that can be started training before archers even hit the field that hurts. Feudal man at arms would be insanely oppressive. Especially malian ones that would have 3 pierce armor and take 25 shots to die.

Well quite a few ways:

1. All cavalry civ (and civs in general) can field their own man-at-arms in Feudal. If enemy man-at-arms are attacking your base, you can draw and fight them in your archer/tower/TC range.

2. You can also raid with scouts to hamper their economy (swordsman cannot reciprocally raid effectively after Early Feudal). Man-at-arms are actually quite (if not the most) expensive unit in Feudal, as they technically require a steady income of gold, food, and wood (to reseed the farms), all of which has a hefty start-up cost (drop sites).

3. Or you can put up some house/palisade and shoot with archers. While man-at-arms has anti-building bonus, they are still not able to to break down palisades or buildings quickly at this stage of the game. And if they do not have squires, you can actively engage with your archers in shoot-and-scoot (bump).

Regarding Malian swordsman, we can simply make it so that swordsman receive +1 pierce armor starting from Castle Age (instead of Feudal), and they would be none the worse for wear. But again, we should consider civilization bonus after the base stats are finalized.

[MatCauthon3]

@FourCloud176402

All cavalry civ (and civs in general) can field their own man-at-arms in Feudal

And how are those men at arms going to hold up to Japanese or vikings or goths or Burmese all who get extra stats or are cheaper?

@FourCloud176402

If enemy man-at-arms are attacking your base, you can draw and fight them in your archer/tower/TC range

Dude why would rhey need to go to your tc? Just destroy yout production and idle you’re resources and yout screwed. And stop with the tower bull. Towers are going to br so bad.

@FourCloud176402

You can also raid with scouts to hamper their economy (swordsman cannot reciprocally raid effectively after Early Feudal).

Man if only the opponent had a barracks to make some cheap as crap spears. Or hear me out. A wall.

@FourCloud176402

Or you can put up some house/palisade and shoot with archers. While man-at-arms has anti-building bonus, they are still not able to to break down palisades or buildings quickly at this stage of the game.

Someone hasn’t seen the recent nerfs to house walls. They already break palisades down in 30 seconds with 3 and thats before you increase the damage of men at arms by 1.

Furthermore here you are forcing cavalry civs to have to resort to using archer units (which by the way still won’t work well because of your changes of giving them more health. Not to mention just how badly longswords in castle age are going to laugh at archers. Especially malian ones.

@FourCloud176402

Regarding Malian swordsman, we can simply make it so that swordsman receive +1 pierce armor starting from Castle Age (instead of Feudal), and they would be none the worse for wear. But again, we should consider civilization bonus after the base stats are finalized

Or maybe you can realize that your changes are busted. The fact that you think towers are a good counter to the militia line is hilarious

[casusincorrabil]

@MatCauthon3

Or maybe you can realize that your changes are busted. The fact that you think towers are a good counter to the militia line is hilarious

well towers are quite a solid defence against maa / archers. Shouldn’t be priorized as it is so expensive, but if you have no other option it can stop the feudal push (you need several towers at different spots though). It’s an expensive defense but can be worth it.

Don’t forget that you can block the tower fundament with houses or palisades.

Still maa is total meta opener currently, so they definetely don’t need anymore buffs.

[MatCauthon3]

@casusincorrabil

well towers are quite a solid defence against maa / archers

No not really. Especially with his changes.

@casusincorrabil

Shouldn’t be priorized as it is so expensive, but if you have no other option it can stop the feudal push (you need several towers at different spots though). It’s an expensive defense but can be worth it

The fact that one of the best answers he can come up with to his feudal men at arms buffs is “use a tower that cuts into your macro” is a clear sign that they are TOO STRONG.

@casusincorrabil

Don’t forget that you can block the tower fundament with houses or palisades.

You mean houses that are about to lose a bunch of armor? Furthermore using towers is going to set your macro back heavily in castle age. Allowing the infantry player to get even further ahead

Furthermore the issue becomes what do you do in castle age

[FourCloud176402]

And how are those men at arms going to hold up to Japanese or vikings or goths or Burmese all who get extra stats or are cheaper?

Okay, don’t used man-at-arms for those civs then. After all, you don’t match Frankish/Berber/… knights with your own, or fight archer-to-archers against Ethiopians/Mayan/…

Dude why would rhey need to go to your tc? Just destroy yout production and idle you’re resources and yout screwed. And stop with the tower bull. Towers are going to br so bad.

The tower point is fair. Although you seem to think that man-at-arms can destroy a production site without any retaliation. It is not as if the opponent have an army as well… And while idle villager seconds are bad, if I park a group of archers within the the range of my TC, are you just going to attack with your man-at-arms, or are your going to ignore archer fire?

That being said, I notice that I made a mistake. The buff to man-at-arms is on the normal armor, not pierce armor (the pierce armor is always +1). I will update the post to make this more clear.
Man-at-Arms: 50 (+5) HP, 7 (+1) Attack, 1 (+1) Normal Armor, 1 Pierce Armor

Man if only the opponent had a barracks to make some cheap as crap spears. Or hear me out. A wall.

Now if spears can catch up to scouts, that might be an issue. And surely I would surely never make any archers/skirmishers myself, because cavalry civ means … Cav only?
And regarding walls, scouts can run around it and archers can shoot over it. Unless it is black forest, you better be very good with quick-walling.

Someone hasn’t seen the recent nerfs to house walls. They already break palisades down in 30 seconds with 3 and thats before you increase the damage of men at arms by 1.

And I wonder what is the firing rate of archers? Surely 30 seconds is enough for to kill 3 man-at-arms with any significant group of archer. Again cavalry civ does not mean cavalry only, you still need to build archers when necessary.

Not to mention just how badly longswords in castle age are going to laugh at archers. Especially malian ones.

(Assuming the +1 Pierce only starts in Castle age) I don’t seem to recall a time when malian longswords were ever considered overpowered. Maybe Malian pikeman, but that is why spears don’t get the extra pierce armor. Currently, I think most Malian player goes archer or knight, with some gbeto mixed in once a castle is up.

The fact that you think towers are a good counter to the militia line is hilarious

I don’t think towers are good against milita. But I do think that militia have are far more affected by towers than scouts or archers. If I have 8 man-at-arms, and the opponent have 6 man-at-arms (or scouts/archers) + a tower protecting an exposed mining camp, that I am not going to attack that dropsite. And placing a tower to protect an gold mine/ wood line is not that uncommon during heavy Feudal pressure.

At the end of the day. If you feel that the buff is too much, we can discuss about it. But I don’t think that swordsman are quite valid yet.

.

[MatCauthon3]

@FourCloud176402

Okay, don’t used man-at-arms for those civs then. After all, you don’t match Frankish/Berber/… knights with your own, or fight archer-to-archers against Ethiopians/Mayan/…

Those units all have TRASH COUNTERS that are very good for equalizing

@FourCloud176402

if I park a group of archers within the the range of my TC, are you just going to attack with your man-at-arms, or are your going to ignore archer fire

I’d rather just go wreck your production first. What archers then?

@FourCloud176402

Now if spears can catch up to scouts, that might be an issue. And surely I would surely never make any archers/skirmishers myself, because cavalry civ means … Cav only?

But that’s a big investment that they have to transition out of later which will cost them even more

@FourCloud176402

And regarding walls, scouts can run around it and archers can shoot over it. Unless it is black forest, you better be very good with quick-walling

If my base is full walled you’re not getting in. Meanwhile my men at arms are destroying yout production buildings.

@FourCloud176402

And I wonder what is the firing rate of archers? Surely 30 seconds is enough for to kill 3 man-at-arms with any significant group of archer. Again cavalry civ does not mean cavalry only, you still need to build archers when necessary

A significant group of archers takes 34 seconds each to create. And that 30 seconds is pre your buff. With your changes archers take 17 shots to kill 1 men at arms. Do the math.

@FourCloud176402

Again cavalry civ does not mean cavalry only, you still need to build archers when necessary.

Which requires investing into an archery range and rhen archers that train very slowly in feudal.

@FourCloud176402

(Assuming the +1 Pierce only starts in Castle age) I don’t seem to recall a time when malian longswords were ever considered overpowered. Maybe Malian pikeman, but that is why spears don’t get the extra pierce armor. Currently, I think most Malian player goes archer or knight, with some gbeto mixed in once a castle is up.

Thing is with your changes longswords take only 3 damage a shot. 20 shots to kill. That’s going to take a long time. And as cheap as longswords are I can judt keep spamming them.

@FourCloud176402

At the end of the day. If you feel that the buff is too much, we can discuss about it. But I don’t think that swordsman are quite valid yet

They are valid. What they arent is a unit that competez with knights and archers. Which is working as intended. Go look at the tech tree. You want something different? Givd them a trash weakness.

[FourCloud176402]

Those units all have TRASH COUNTERS that are very good for equalizing

Trash counters that you can choose to run away from.

I’d rather just go wreck your production first. What archers then?

In the current game, Japanese and Viking man-at-arms are stronger than that of other civilizations. If I play as the Britons and I get attacked by Japanese man-at-arms, do I just throw up my arms and say “all is lost”? You can still create your own man-at-arms and fight/block enemy man-at-arms on the defensive (with scout and villagers if necessary). I get that the idea of very early Feudal attack is to force idle village seconds, but there is a lot you can do to prevent/minimize that disruption.

But that’s a big investment that they have to transition out of later which will cost them even more

By using 175 wood + archer/skirmishers cost, you have the superior Feudal combination that the opponent have to counter by adding his own stable/range. So while, yes, it costs more, now the enemy cannot just respond with man-at-arms + spearman either and also have to spend more. And remember, you have the advantages in both range and speed.

If my base is full walled you’re not getting in. Meanwhile my men at arms are destroying yout production buildings.

If it is black forest, sure. But on Arabia or any open maps, that is going to cost a lot of villager seconds.

A significant group of archers takes 34 seconds each to create. And that 30 seconds is pre your buff. With your changes archers take 17 shots to kill 1 men at arms. Do the math.

But how fast is it to kill those man-at arms? If I have 6 archers and you have 9 man-at-arms, that is 3-4 volleys to kill each man-at-arms (let’s assume 10s). Now, you will probably break through the house/palisade in about 15 seconds. That means that you would have lost (45 food + 20 gold with supplies) while I have lost 25/5 wood. And then my archer can run away and harass to bleed-out your man-at-arms. Unless you then immediately attack my dropsite villagers, and I tell them to fight, you are going to lose more resources overall even with the idle villager seconds.

Thing is with your changes longswords take only 3 damage a shot. 20 shots to kill. That’s going to take a long time. And as cheap as longswords are I can judt keep spamming them.

Archers are not that much more expensive. All things being equal, if you decide to mass swordsman during Castle age transition, then I can also mass archers. And if I can mass 20 archers (not that uncommon), I can still kill buffed longswordsman quite effectively.

They are valid. What they arent is a unit that competez with knights and archers. Which is working as intended. Go look at the tech tree. You want something different? Givd them a trash weakness.

Are they? We are talking about a unit that cost gold and gets killed by anything else that cost gold. And while they beat trash (but not very good against scouts apparently), who would create a purely trash army while they still have gold? In the end, even with my buff, they still die to massed archers and knights (on a per pop basis).

[MatCauthon3]

@FourCloud176402

Trash counters that you can choose to run away from

Sure. Go back to your base. Gets you away from mine.

@FourCloud176402

In the current game, Japanese and Viking man-at-arms are stronger than that of other civilizations. If I play as the Britons and I get attacked by Japanese man-at-arms, do I just throw up my arms and say “all is lost”?

Except britons archers are trained faster. Furthermore scouts are at least halfway decent of doing damage to them. Remember. You give men at arms 5 extra health. 1 extra attack and 1 extra melee armor. Doesn’t sound like much but in feudal it absolutely is. Right now a feudal scout will do 4 damage a swing and take 5. With your changes it’s 3 damage done and 6 taken

@FourCloud176402

By using 175 wood + archer/skirmishers cost, you have the superior Feudal combination that the opponent have to counter by adding his own stable/range. So while, yes, it costs more, now the enemy cannot just respond with man-at-arms + spearman either and also have to spend more. And remember, you have the advantages in both range and speed

You’re forcing them into tech they don’t want to use. Meanwhile the infantry civs are exactly where theyvwant to be. See the issue yet? Or do you just note care?

@FourCloud176402

If it is black forest, sure. But on Arabia or any open maps, that is going to cost a lot of villager seconds

Dude walling is meta. Do you not pay attention to the game?

@FourCloud176402

But how fast is it to kill those man-at arms? If I have 6 archers and you have 9 man-at-arms, that is 3-4 volleys to kill each man-at-arms (let’s assume 10s).

Dude it’s 1.75 minutes to get to 6 archers. Assuming you have 2 range. How am I going to have 9 men at arms only? 3 before feudal is already common. In 1.75 minutes I can make 5 each per barracks. That means even counting men at arms research 11 on 6. At least pretend to be unbiased.

@FourCloud176402

Archers are not that much more expensive. All things being equal, if you decide to mass swordsman during Castle age transition, then I can also mass archers. And if I can mass 20 archers (not that uncommon), I can still kill buffed longswordsman quite effectively

In early castle age 20 archers is uncommon. Go watch some pro games.

@FourCloud176402

Are they? We are talking about a unit that cost gold and gets killed by anything else that cost gold

First false. Rhey cost effectively beat cavalry. Secondly they beat Eagles too. Thirdly they train insanely fast.

@FourCloud176402

d? In the end, even with my buff, they still die to massed archers and knights (on a per pop basis).

Provided you actually get a chance to mass knights. Which won’t happen with yout changes. You want infantry to compete? Trash weakness or bust.

[WrathofInnos]

@casusincorrabil

infantry power unit (that needs to have a trash counter also).

@casusincorrabil

But I would like to see a more tanky heavy infantry unit with accordingly high gold cost.

This could be cool. I doubt we’ll see a new generic unit, but maybe as a UU for a new civ. Something like a heavily armored flemish militia or kamayuk could have the spearman armor class so they take bonus damage from skirmishers and archers. They could have high melee and pierce armor (to survive defensive buildings, and reduce some gunpowder unit damage) and still have both a trash and a gold counter.

[letmepickthis]

I think those buffs are way over the top and too reactionary. It also makes them good against everything. If anything, I think a reasonable buff is to give LS, THS, and champion +1 pierce armor. Very little PA and being slow are their biggest weaknesses which causes them to die too easily to archers. This change makes them more viable by improving their survivability without being OP.

[SMUM15236]

I’d agree if they didn’t get the +1 MA recently. I always thought they needed PA more than MA. Guess devs don’t wanna do that.

[Zelley00]

I am against the need to make the champion line generally more durable, and especially against the increase of Pierce Armor: the archer line (along with hand cannoners and scorpions) should be for me the primary counter to the champion line, and it should work well.

I am also against the idea of a complete redesign of what the champion line should be and a complete redesign of all corresponding civ boni. The game is in a good state, and I wouldn’t want to change it more than with a few small balance tweaks. Whether or not a unit is overused or underused is less important.

However I like the idea of a late game attack composed primarily of champions, plus supporting units (scirms, scorpions, bbc, halbadiers) dealing with counters.

I think it would be nice to increase the strength of the champion line against the scout line, for example by either giving +1 Melee Armor to champions, or by giving them +3 damage against cavalry (maybe +1 damage already starting from the LS). Then we have champions spam as a “finishing move” when the enemy is nearly out of gold after you took map control.

Before making any bigger change than that, I would rather first decrease the upgrade costs (especially the last champion upgrade)

Anyways, I would rather first to wait for a few months & patches to see the changes (+1 MA to LS, buff to infantry UU) before making any change.

[Zelley00]

I wouldnt want to do that wither. I think the champion line “need” PA more than MA to get strong, but “should” get MA rather than PA.

I mean, it is like for vietnamese battle elephants, to get strong they “need” movement speed, or conversion resistance, or +1 range. But it is not what they “should” get.