Masonry, Architechture and bonus Building armor

Masonry and Architecture each gives +3 bonus armor, many units have had their bonus damage changed to standard building so that their damage doesn’t get nullified. The ones left are mostly:
A few UU(mostly siege,elephant or ship UU)

Some of these units are particularly noteworthy.
Hussite Wagon(elite) +1(+2)
Elite Organ Gun +1
Elite Conquistador +2
Fast Fire Ship +3(only does 1 damage vs buildings with Masonry)
Scorpion(heavy) +2(+4)
Most of these are imperial age units and have their effect fully nullified by the Masonry.
Question: Were these Bonus were specifically designed with Aztec and Vietnamese in mind?

The effectiveness of certain units against building, and how much of it gets nullified by upgrades and what unit are more effective against which type of building(fortification vs non-fortified building) should be more deliberate.

Battle Elephants should be more effective against building in general, you shouldn’t need any additional siege when sending 30 BE in someones base, BE should particularly effective against non-fortified building, having a portion of their damage nullified by Masonry/Architecture but having almost the entirety of their bonus damage nullified doesn’t feel very good.

Infantry should be more effective against fortified building relatively speaking(they wouldn’t trample a house like an Elephant but they would be better are taking fortifications apart) currently it’s the opposite.

Idk how effective ships should be vs building, but currently I think they are too cheap, if they were more expensive they could also be a bit more effective against things other than ships.

The champion line has bonus damage against standard buildings.

Tarkans don’t. I think they should not countered as much by masonry/architekture.

Overall masonry/architecture should be most effective against siege, trebuchets in particular. It would make more sense to give all the living units damage against standard buidlings, but increase the building armor from masonry/architecture to 10 or 20 maybe against siege. But Trebuchets have +250 damage against buidlings, its kinda unbalanced, so that no reasonable amount of armor really helps much. Especially not +3/+6 like atm.

Masonry/Architecture increases the melee/pierce armor of buildings(excluding walls) by +1, reducing the damage of all non-siege units by a non negligible amount. I think it’s fine for units with high damage to building to have damage reduced by a slightly higher amount.

I’m not too familiar with Tarkans I heard they are quite good but I never see them tho. I find that what building they are good at is a bit unintuitive. They do 14 damage(elite) vs regular building with architecture, 27 vs Castles, 26 vs Keeps/BBT and 25 vs fortified walls. I think the -8 damage from Masonry+Architecture might be fine if they did at least 30 damage to regular building, they do 34 damage to Keeps/BBT prior to those tech.

Currently the units with Building Armor bonus damage.
Heavy Siege(Mangonel and up), not much impact from the current bonus armor.
Villager, some impact, but still fine, Sapper has good damage.
Unpopular/Neglected units(like scorpion and BE)
Ships, map specific
Unique Units(like Tarkan, Organ Gun), civ specific
Balista Elephant’s case is clearly deliberate since it’s bonus damage is split between Building, Standard building, and Stone Defense.

Completely removing the +3 bonus building armor would likely not have a high meta impact, +10/20 armor to target heavy siege likely would, this should only be done if toning down the strength of siege is desirable, the main effect of Masonry/Architecture is +1 melee/range armor +10% hit points.

1 Like