And it shuts down mangonel pressure. Both factored in.
If it was just tc pressure theh would have delayed it.
Instead they out right removed.
Mangonel pressure is a use of mangonels, yes - but rams would still be viable. And mangonels would still be well and able to exert pressure around the base as they please.
They played it safe with the removal of the old bonus due to limited patch releases able to be put out.
Rams can be picked off because they have to get closer. Mangonels range advantage is what allows it to work. Why do you think pros usually use mangonels against TCS?
Nah. The devs just knew what they were doing. Plain and simple.
2 Likes
It’s precisely because they knew what they were doing that they played it safe instead of risking keeping a bonus as a different version and possibly retaining the same problem. Especially since they had very limited timeframes where they could place a patch on all user setups via expansions.
Mangonels would still be able to pick off farms surrounding the town center and would be more than able to dive-bomb the town center once momentum picks up and with enough numbers.
Why overnerf something if it isn’t a problem? Makes zero sense. Outright removal makes no sense if it’s only a dark age problem.
You aren’t being logical at all.
Literally 11 range with the bonus the way it was. Which means mangonels can’t get closer then 12 range safely. Which means if you’re hitting farms it’s second layer farms only. Your argument makes no sense. If they have eo many farms going that they are second layer they easily have military to fight the mangonel with.
1 Like
Limiting the amount of farms an opponent can have around the town center is also a possible function of the Mangonel.
As is, one can have 1 archer per farm firing directly at a farm to deny farmers the farm without actually hitting the farmer - they just stop working and it’s annoying.
Dude. Come on now. Be serious. If you’re working on double layer of farms your opponent has military and mangonrl pressure is not a concern.
2 Likes
It would be nice for the Teutons to have a balanced version of their original bonus. Be it in one form or another - I have seen comments around the web of people missing the death star town centers
I haven’t seen those comments at all so forgive me but that smells like bull.
They are spread out and far in between, so it is understandable if you have not seen them
At least one of these are sarcastic, and I remember a few others - hard to find individual comments/remember where they are in the first place
This first one appears to have a grammer error, he’s not saying or asking that Teutons had or want for auto attacking town centers, he’s saying that there’s such town centers in existence as of that date’s iteration of the game. Right? @MedievalDukemon
Screenshots were taken from the bottom-up
Feels like the changes flatten the identity of Teutons, making it more generic (melee armor only → melee and ranged generic cav, no paladin + light cav feels weird too)
6 Likes
The removal of paladin with the addition of +1/1 armor over the course of castle and imperial age respectively removes the possibility of overpowering their paladins vs archers while giving their cavaliers a decent power up. The addition of the first scout upgrade adds in the ability to have a decent option vs cav archer and archer civs in general as well as that by imperial age the +1/1 total armor on the scouts rounds them out as a perfectly decent addition to the Teuton’s well-rounded ability.
It’s also a decent bonus for their barracks units which the bonus is mainly focused towards.
It helps to solidify their main identity as an infantry civ while still keeping some aspects of their cavalry identity. They still get +1 armor knights in castle age, and in imperial age they can gain cavaliers with +1/1 armor in total and are able to spam them in greater number rather than go for the paladin upgrade. Or have them in decent number and know that they’re quality cavalier
And yes, the cavalier could have the option of being replaced by the new crusader knight as a secondary unique unit. I’ll go ahead and add that to the main post.
I mean making Teuton well-rounded is another way to say that you are flattening the identity of Teuton to make it yet another cav civ, I personally don’t like it.
5 Likes
An ability of the Crusader Knight is that it cannot be converted by enemy monks - I’ve put it into the main post now replacing the cavalier upgrade.
Teutons aren’t a cav civ, they’re an infantry-defensive structure-siege oriented civ with cav ability - my intention is for them to be well rounded while retaining and returning to them certain exciting features in a balanced format while introducing features they may need.
In reality Teuton infantries are seldom used (as main army) and I doubt your suggestions would change that. You are making their cav more generic (“well-rounded”), which is what I meant by flattening their identity.
They aren’t a cav civ- what would you change to push their infantry forward?
They are not supposed to be a cav civ - but it is played as a cav civ, at least in open maps. Do you really see halb siege push a lot from Teutons in open maps? Their champions are rarely seen as well, not mentioning their UU.
I have no idea what to change - I seldom make suggestions myself, but just want to point out that Teutons are cav civ imo.
In fact I think Teutons are fine now. the +2/+0 paladin makes them expert to handle melee units, while +1/+1 cav is much more generic and inferior to sicilians cavs.
3 Likes
added crusader knight statistics to main post