They currently take 10 damage from cannon emplacements and 1 from everything else (by a large margin). That is frankly overkill, they basically ignore that. Even if you took off 20-30 armor, taking 30-40 damage from cannon emplacements still isn’t that much when they have 500+ hp and cost 250 wood and 1 pop.
Regular springalds deal 40 damage to them (which ends up being less than 10 damage per second which is just so meh)
Archer, spearmen, springalds and mangonels
Negative melee armor is very strange and too “hacky”.
They could just reduce hp if needed. But i think rams are fine in feudal.
Negative armor is how AOE2 did rams. IMO instead of that we could have an anti-ram tech in imperial that gave melee units or villagers bonus damage to rams.
I guess we’ll see on November 14th…
Gun powers ones and trebs are to op need heavy nerfs and population increase. Walls go down to easy and buidlings its super anoying for people spamming them. Its no fun.walls and towers need to be buff as well more.
Unlikely, general consensus right now is outside of team games, bombards and trebs need buffs and walls/keeps nerfs (as we keep seeing these happen)
Berkshire and Red Palace are big contenders still for oppressively strong keeps that many argue need nerfs.
Those are landmarks though, Keeps can’t be blamed for those too… I hope Keeps don’t get nerfed.
They got nerfed a couple patches ago so that the bombard emplacement no longer has the same range as bombards (so that bombards are actually usable to kill keeps). Bombards were buffed like twice the last 2 patches as well since they were pretty bad and it was better to just use rams/trebs.
It’s is only the battering rams that are too strong. I will make a post about it.
Dude you’re speaking like someone who did only 4v4 QM match with 30min without aggression …
In real games you can’t mass siege without getting some trouble …