Militia-line Change: remove Two-handed Swordsman

Age of Empires II: DE II - Discussion
1

Hi! i don’t know if this was proposed before, but i though about this and wanted to share to see what are the opinions of the forums on this take.

So militia line has some problems, obviously castle age is not the moment when they shine and, altough they could use help in that regard, today i mainly want to focus on another problem i see, which is transition cost

atm, transition to militia line in the late game is very costly both in terms of times and resources.

for a comparison, the whole upgrade with all techs costs about 2300, and requires 260 seconds.

FU a knight to paladin requires about 3000 res, and 270 seconds, so not that much compared on how much more powerful the unit is

FU and arbalest costs 85 seconds and about 2370 res, but also considering chemistry and ballistics which also unlock other units and affects more targets and situations than just the arbalest alone

so to sum up, i think a switch into militia should be cheaper and easy to do compared to other unit, since its supposed to be the cheap “well-rounded” unit and not a power unit like knights or crossbows, so it’s ok to be weaker than them, but the upgrade cost should reflect that weakness. So my proposal is simple: Remove the THS upgrade

this change alone would save 400 resources and 75 seconds, making the transition much more easy and considering champion upgrade already costs 1100 res total i do not think it would be a problem.

this would change some other civs, which is why i’m asking if this could be ever a good idea, since i have some ideas but maybe they are bad. for example:

  • Malay Forced Levy would be stronger. removing supplies could balance that to have champion with no gold, but at 80 res and not 65. this would also make them a better actual infantry civ, which i do not think would be bad at all

  • Bulgarian Bagains would be stronger on the champion: could be balanced by making the tech just +3 MA or such, keeping the same cost to offset the free champion upgrade their would have from their civ bonus

basically any other civs that hasn’t the champion upgrade could balance it out by losing supplies, or squires, or something, or maybe even nothing since its not a powerunit after all

THEN the THS could be reworked into a completely new unit keeping the model to spice up the barracks building, making it a unit you get right in castle age for example and with a unique ability, so no bonus vs eagles and buildings, but maybe a bonus vs other infantry or something different

so what do you guys think about this? i think it would be quite a nice change to both help the militia line and the barrack building which is atm the worst military building imho

2 Likes
2

Just make 2hs and champ cheaper and faster to research.

12 Likes
3

I’m not even sure that’s necessarily a buff. Champ upgrade still is not exactly cheap and sometimes when you really need the unit (vs eagles for instance) you are completely fine with THS. The value of that upgrade is actually insane if the situation fits it.

Wait so you nerf all those civs without champ and then wanna balance it by also taking away supplies? Or are you gonna give champion to ever civ? That’s not good as you don’t wanna make civs too similar. Also you really distort balance by giving champ to some civs even if they lack some upgrades (mayans, khmer for instance).

2 Likes
4

well that would do the trick as well, i just tought it would have been cooler and simpler since currently is the only unit line with 5 units stages which will always result in switch problems

in your view, what would be a good discount for those upgrades? like 25% on both cost and time?

5

in my proposal, THS is removed so all civs that has it get champions instead. i do not think civs difference is made through the lack of champions honestly since is just such a niche option anyway. for example, khmer would never train infantry aniway even if they have champion instead of THS, while on the other hand, mayans could train them vs goth to have a better chance in that MU. so yeah, it would impact balance a bit, but since militia line has so many problems i do not see gamebreaking to give champions to most civs.

for instance, i never heard something like “wow bro this civ is strong they even get FU champions!” you hear that about paladins, cavalier, arbalest, onagers, and such, not militia, so i do not see a problem besides the “too similar” problem which i must agree with, but then again, in my proposal THS would become a new castle age unit with an imperial upgrade and a unique role (to be found) which some civs would have and some other not, so that would enhance the differences

but yeah, if simply making both upgrades a bit cheaper is easier, then ok i guess.

6

Sure khmer really struggle against halb siege if they can’t use their mobility. That’s why on maps like arena you default into that comp vs khmer. Give them champion and they will use that here. Same for mayans. On closed maps you default into champion and onager vs them because they just die vs that. On open maps you mostly see champion only if you have a lot of bonuses for them or if you play vs eagles. I honestly think it less of a question of resources to go champs but more about are champs the correct unit against what my opponent makes?

7

it is also totally a question of resources cause even if champions could possibly be the good call, you still need 260 seconds to get to them and 2k+ resources to upgrade them, without even blacksmiths armor upgrades into consideration, so that whole switch could not even be possible in the first place precisely for the resources problem and the time needed

8

Its also the only unit available in all 4 ages.
also, removing one unit from the line and repurposing it, and then changing some ut is simplere than making two techs cheaper and faster?

Unsure.

1 Like
9

Well yeah if champs are generally a good call that’s a nice buff for sure. I’m just generally sceptical if making the upgrade cheaper will lead to more champ play? Like did the recent buffs to longswords increase their playrate? Tbh I don’t think it did. And equally I don’t think we will say slavs go for champ more often if they don’t have a particular reason to make that unit. I might be wrong here but that’s my impression. I think to see more champs they’d need a stat buff or the like.

10

To see more play rheyd basically need to overhaul balance dssign as is. Weve already seen that multiple buffs arsnt helping ls much.

Champs are seen as gold runs out. Making it cheaper and faster to upgrade makes that transition easier and more effective.

But if your goal is to drastically increase how much they are seen a redesign of balance is needed

2 Likes
11

If we’re going for the big changes anyway, I’m proposing giving two-handed swordsmen the place of long swordsmen, as a straight upgrade from men at arms in castle age. Any civ that had long swordsmen now gets two-handed swordsmen.

I mean, if we’re just trying to shake up the meta, buff infantry civs and hurt the dominance of knights (crossbows not so much)…

Yes, that would be broken, because 2HS has 3 more attack than LS has (plus extra bonus damage), but champion only gets 1 extra attack over 2HS (and no extra bonus damage). (Champion does gain 10hp, while 2HS has the same health as LS.)

1 Like
12

no of course is not simpler. it was just an idea. as i sayd, if making the upgrades both cheaper and faster is an option than surely it’s the easiest option

13

no my goal here is to address how hard they are to switch into, which sometimes makes them a bad choice even when they should be good, which is when gold starts to run out. of course to have them dominate a bit would need a complete overhaul of the infantry of the game, which is unlikely to happen

which isn’t to say that militia-line cannot be helped a little to be more competitive, something like give them bonus vs scout line (making the scout and eagles the same armor class) to make them able to really counter hussar supply wise, give them some form of raid potential maybe in bonus vs villagers…but that’s matter for another post maybe

14

Why would we want to hurt knight dominance but not xbow dominance?

15

Just make THS available in Castle Age instead!

16

I could see bulgarians abusing thr heck out of that

1 Like
17

actually there could be a new infantry civ bonus like “militia upgrades are available one age sooner except champion”

18

Bagains is available in Imperial Age so I don’t think it’s that abusive vs anything Archers, but I guess you do have a point with Bulgarians getting double researches from hitting Castle Age, probably why they only get THS, too.

19

Feudal LS sounds problematic there.

4 Likes
20

Of course It would have to be balanced but could be a cool unique bonus. You still have to pay 150 food and 65 Gold in feudal for the upgrade , on top of the 140 Total res of man at arms, and commit with supplies (another 150) so it’s pretty all-in, food heavier than going scouts probably while also requiring Gold, and still countered with archers, and lack of mobiliy means you can wall them out while you go Castle faster yourself

Could be and interesting concept for a future infantry civ