Longswordsmen - Balance Poll

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

1 Like

Why should an unmounted sworsman have more attack then a mounted one?

5 Likes

Ok so are LS balanced? vote accordingly
I am a bit surprised seeing so many people on this forum think Longswordsmen as they are, are absolutely fine 100%

Because virtually no expert players or casters think so

There was even a Balance of Power tournament held where Millitia line was buffed like bonkers, and yet they were underused.

1 Like

I don’t think logic and/or historical accuracy will ever be a strong consideration for balance changes to be fair.

Why can elite woad raiders beat champions? Why do they have the same pierce armour, when woad raiders are topless, it can’t be just the shield?

If I understand it, in past threads people have said that longswords just don’t get used. It’s like man-at-arms in feudal, then in imp you upgrade to longswords and stay with them as short a time as possible (until 2-hand swordsman and possibly then champion finish).

I guess you’d see longswords more on arena if siege towers didn’t crash the game regularly.

I don’t have a good understanding as to whether the proposed balances are mild/op etc so I’m not planning on voting myself.

8 Likes

+2 attack is great, but a bit too much, I think +1 attack would be fine for now. Supplies also needs a cost reduction and maybe a decreased research time imo, since unlike with bloodlines and other techs, you need to get it before you make infantry, it has no effect on the infantry you created before. Another option could be is to lower it to a dark age technology.

4 Likes

What about +1 melee armor?

3 Likes

tbh that thread is a dumpster fire full of exaggerations…

but the LS needs a buff, i dont think its great to say the LS needs to be able to contend with knights (when that is exactly what the pike is for) if anything they need to be able to contend better with their hard counters (archers) or do better at their job (killing buildings and trash)

most of your vote options are too extreme though… almost every single one of those is better than a racial ability and those races do so better because of it, so these kinds of proposed swings are too much

here’s a weird one: +2 damage vs scout line, its the only 1 it isnt amazing at killing

6 Likes

I don’t like the proposed changes, would like to see the longsword upgrade cost reduced, but not the time neexdx and also not by as much as 50%.

Woukd also at most like to see a longsword buff of +5hp.

Coukd you add an option like, longsword need Buff but none of these, or make it more abiwous so less numbers to disagree with and more concept

7 Likes

They already have the same health as two hand sword

We could buff their HP by 5hp too then. :slight_smile:

Would +1 meele armor work just for longsword or is that the same situation so that two handed swordsmen would have get +1 too?

1 Like

+1 attack and supplies -33% but this wont solve underused infantry UU. They also need cost reduction of some sort.

2 Likes

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

7 Likes

I feel like this isn’t in good taste.

5 Likes

??
And why so?
Do Longswords not deserve to be balanced? After all these years??
Logic always trumps feelings
And Logic is on the “Justice to Longswords” side as far as I can see.

Not only is this not in good taste but you’ve repeatedly plagiarized other people.

I think it’s great use of contemplate #tags.
Taste is subjective.
#makelongsworsgreatagain

2 Likes

I agree that they need a buff. But even +1 attack could be risky because you can produce enough of them and rush the enemy. Don’t forget they do extra damage against building. TCs are faster down you could realize.

So I voted for +3 attack vs buildings, but i actually think this might be over doing it. Really, I think having the arsons tech integrated into the longswordsman native bonus damage to non-stone buildings could be a pretty sizeable buff that would allow them some more situational uses.

The problem with Longswordsman is the Castle age is all about pushing people off resources and raiding more than pitched battles. Swordsman lack the range to fire over buildings or the speed to maximize damage. They can tear down palisades and houses decently fast (but so can knights and Xbows). Getting Arsons for free could speed them up without displacing the usefulness of Xbows and knights and without buffing the Champion later on.

The did something similar when they integrated the tracking tech. I’d be worried that the Bulgarians might be too strong, and I think there might be some civs that lose out on arsons right? I suppose you could also make it nearly instantly researched like caligraphy used to be, so it’s still tech tree restrictive.

1 Like

exactly, longswords just don’t cut it in castle age because of the lack of mobility or range. Its all about map control. You don’t blame balance for that, you blame that on the game style. Longswords are also too heavy on the food toll for the numbers you want them to be effective and without a bonus, no point in using them unless there’s a good bonus or synergy like with Goths and Malians

1 Like

Less food cost would make more sense as there is no horse to feed.

4 Likes