I don’t know how you can balance this unless you feel Spanish are UP, being able to drop the relic and ditch whatever’s chasing would make them clearly better than other civs for grabbing relics. If you commit to grabbing relics early and your opponent commits to scouts to stop it, you lose the monks, which is an expensive loss. You probably won’t lose the Missionaries, which really warps the cost effectiveness. Don’t forget, once they grab all the relics (or fail to), they’re still monks, which means they’ll provide incremental value by healing units and converting threats.
I get what Viper’s on about, because Missionaries are very limited, but this is the wrong limit to tweak IMO.
They would have have more chances to survive than monks do, but scouts are still faster, and eventually can kill the missionary.
Maybe yes maybe no, you have an edge over other civs but it’s not sure that you missionary survive.
They trade they speed with less range, so in that regard are already balanced.
And anyone who is able to grab the relics and let his monks survive would have the same value.
If your missionary is only truely a missionary for doing one action then you can’t call that long-term or anything. Just make a normal monk instead of bothering yourself with a unit which will become a normal monk. Either make what the OP asks for balanced or just don’t do it at all, as I don’t think people will use such a unit (they are reluctant enough to use generic ones).
On the other hand, pikes are usable as long as they are alive, they aren’t downgraded when they deal damage.
monk can convert and heal repeatedly. long term they continue to be useful, I am not getting what you are trying to say here.
pike perform 1 action attack, extra damage to cavalry. nothing special compare to monk. maybe explain in details and keeping it consistent for all units might help.
Ok, now imagine if Mangudai would unmount after they do one particular important thing, like sniping a siege weapon, and then they become normal archers. Whether or not it’s balanced, would you have much fun using such a unit? Wouldn’t you use normal archers 99% of the time and make those only when you’re forced to?
You’re not factoring in the large LOS of the missionary. The scout isn’t going to just show up on the missionary unless the player isn’t paying attention. You probably won’t lose the missionary. You almost certainly won’t if you’re paying attention to them.
I am a highly elite single player AoE gamer, and I say no on this idea.
Hahaha, just kidding Actually, I rarely use missionaries, but this would help me to consider using them.
Aside from wondering why I’d want to use them in the first place, I’ve often wondered why they’re not allowed to pick up relics; which just further dissuades me from using them.
A different idea: maybe they should be able to covertly steal relics from enemy temples? Towers and castles wouldn’t be able to see them coming. Once missionary gets to enemy temple, they take ~5 seconds of monk-summoning gestures (inaudible to enemy so they’re not alerted) to collect a relic, and then escape. I admit, this might not work very well in reality; especially since it’d be too easy to see the missionary in your area and to counter. Unless the missionary got a semi-transparent alien Predator-like mode you could enable?
Yes, but the monk is immobile. The Missionary still has one more LoS than a Scout or LC in Castle age. If you aren’t considering that “large” you’re foolish. That increases the chances the Missionary will get away, simply because you have more time to react and make use of the distance.
If the relics aren’t being actively contested, you are just as likely as the missionary player to catch the player scouting unawares with the missionary passing as the scout player is to catch the Missionary player unawares, since both players probably have their minds on something different, one’s just got early investment in relics as part of the plan. If relics are being actively contested, you’d bet the Missionary player will be paying attention, and then they have the higher LoS to react with.
It’s a flat upgrade to the monks as relic gatherers. To claim anything else is simply nonsense. The Spanish do not need a flat upgrade.
Is there anything else you’d like to say on the subject substantial, or would you like to cut my posts into even smaller pieces to try to score more points per paragraph? Right now you’re at 1.6
Ok ma those actions taken by the players, the credit still doesn’t come from the missionary.
We are talking about an hypothetical scenario so…
Yes for sure, but the main goal is still to deny the relics to grab them yourself in a second moment.
I did that only to avoid having a super long post where, if someone want to read the full text of your post all he have to do i click on the quote.
You’ll excuse me if I prioritize what I’m about to say over what you already said. The next time I’ll use the […]
I’m not denying the useful of the faster building, but it’s not that powerful of a eco bonus, so I think that giving them a small advantage on relics won’t broke them.
Just to clarify, I’m talking about giving the spanish this minor (in my opinion) buff, either because that would be a bit faster on gathering relics and because they would have a bit more survival on their missionary over the standard monks.
Again, in my opinion this wouldn’t make them OP, but like everyone else I’m here to discuss it.
Why shouldn’t I?
Are we playing at points? 1.6? I don’t what you talking about?
However don’t take it personally, we have two different options but don’t mistake this for an attack on your persona.
Also I apologize if you fell that I wanted to misinterpret you arguments, I just find easier and faster to answer to small portions of your post.
It was clear you wanted to mischaracterize my arguments. You were continuously and consistently separating the foundation of the claims from the claim itself. You were, and are, arguing in bad faith. The fact that you are acting like this isn’t what you were doing is further indication that you have no interest in hearing my position and taking it at face value.
“Monks aren’t immobile, why would you say that they are” Because it’s an exaggeration placed there to make the difference between the two units as clear as possible, as quickly as possible. I believe you understand this, so you were going for cheap points and using it to distract from my actual point because you didn’t want to contend with it.
“If the relics aren’t actively being contested, clearly this is just the fault of the opponent and has no bearing to the discussion” Nice cut, clearly you weren’t doing this to mischaracterize my point at all, given how my point had to deal with the fact that I said:
to which you said, and I’m not taking anything out of context, because I don’t need to whittle down your position to fight it;
and my point, if you care to take it at face value, is that As a player going for relic control, you should be paying attention to the monks. If you aren’t, you are very likely to be in a situation where your opponent isn’t going to be either, for a variety of factors. That could be the fact that you are pressuring the map, that the opponent is dealing with just as much as you are which is causing you not to, or you simply aren’t playing in a bracket where relic play is focused. Further, I made the point that If you are paying attention you probably will not lose the missionary, because of all the factors I’ve already elaborated.
You are not addressing my entire point when you take a five-word section out of it. You are directly addressing that five-word segment. You are intentionally making a strawman out of the position by taking individual bits of a cohesive argument away from said argument and then attacking those points out of context. I’ve explained how you’ve done this several different times. I don’t “feel” like you’re misinterpreting my points. You are misinterpreting my points, intentionally, in a bad faith attempt to win the argument. This is plain to see. I am not a fan. I’d appreciate it if you stopped.
Now who is mischaracterize, if I apologize and specify that I didn’t meant any offense and that was a misunderstanding, who are you to say that I’m lying.
I mean, we are talking about a game, I don’t care that much to be right to distort you words.
Maybe I genuinely didn’t understood what you said? Did that cross you mind?
I also answered with a question, precisely because I wasn’t sure that I did understood.
Again, maybe I genuinely didn’t understood you (I not sure I understand it now…), I simplified because in my opinion the important point was to deny the relic, not to kill the missionary/monk, that just 2 different opinions.
That’s an attack directly to my person, I don’t tolerate it.
That you implied that you are superior to me and that you refuse to be at my same level, again implying that it would be an offense to you, this is just gratuitous.
And again, I’m not cutting any of you sentences anymore, so that there isn’t any misinterpretation.
So now I fully quote you, so to avoid again more misinterpretation.
To answer to the game argument, I think that if one is paying attention, he won’t lose a monk too, the missionary yes facilitate on this, but it won’t (again in my opinion) that much easy.
Then to answer to you accusations on my persona, you are no one to accuse me of malevolence, especially not after that I apologize, tried to clarify with you, explained my wording and took the blame on my side.
You can ask to others here on the forums, I may disagree with a lot of people, I like to discuss with people here, especially when we have different opinions, and I’m always respectful, despite disagreeing most of the time.
So, if I already explained my behavior, I don’t understand why you keep ranting and insinuating that I just want to be right.
I think differences of opinions should be celebrated and embraced. In too many places in this world (social media mostly) differences dissolve into spiteful exchanges. I agree that it’s better to have conversations rather than descend into rants and nastiness.
Cheers to all!
Actually, I rarely use missionaries, but this would help me to consider using them.
Just a silly suggestion…