How is everyone feeling about the new infantry changes? Is it at all making infantry more viable as a unit to throw into your regular army? I had a play around with it last night and honestly still don’t feel the need to make infantry, everything they do I can just do easier with other units without the drawbacks of infantry. I was almost forcing myself to make them just to see if it was worth it and couldn’t see a reason to do it. How is everyone else finding it?
2 Likes
I would say they are much better than before but then again, cavalry are still better because they can control the map with higher movement speed and can force a fight or easily run away. Infantry, at the moment, still cannot force a fight against either cavalry or archers, but they can run away better from archer units and still helpless against knight and cav archer.
Here is the experience I have with infantry at the moment, overall, they are good in feudal age. Still kinda meh in castle because knight exists, and are pretty good in imp if your opponent doesn’t have gunner or mass arb, though you can get around this with siege tower meme. The faster movement speed is quite nice though.
I still hope that they would bring back “supply” tech but change the effect to “population cost is reduced by 25%” so that they can become more pop efficient in late game.
Not a bad idea…
They no longer auto-lose to Archers, which makes the Men-At-Arms opening much stronger. We will see MaA more often. Changes to Arabia will also make Scout openings less popular.
So a buff to Civs with a bonus to a MaA opening, overall more options for everyone, and a nerf to Civs who want to go for a Scout opening.
For Castle Age the Long Swordsman still does not feel strong enough to be your Castle Age unit of choice for most Civs.
Overall a very good change.
2 Likes
I feel like if they only had small bonus damage against Cavs. The way AOM handles. Doesnt have to be very strong but very minimal. AOM solved the problem in this way.
Opening Maa has definitely become more viable. But by a lot. That doesn’t mean you have to play LS in Castle Age, but the point is to put pressure in early feudal against Scouts Civs to make Archers as follow up much easier.
1 Like
I think they should have a bonus against the Scout Line in particular. This would be more interesting and would make them the clear trash killer in the late game.
2 Likes
Giving it overall would be much much better. Even throwing them against Camels is a safe bet to pick.
If the Militia line would be good against cavalry there would be too much overlap with the Spearman line.
In AoM no civ has 2 Infantry units with bonus damage vs. Cavalry.
The only Infantry units with a relatively small bonus are the Greek Hoplite and Egyptian Spearman but both civs have a cavalry unit as second anti cavalry option.
Berserks, Murmillo and Dao Swordsman don’t have a bonus against cavalry.
Overall not a big deal.
The speed update is big vs pretty much just skirms. As for archers…knights end up struggling at a critical mass - maa will just do some damage before they die. The changes to 2HS and Champs are age4, so relevant to dedicated inf civs (plus malay and bulgarians) and thats it.
Everything they can do early, scouts can do better and every comp they get to be part of just isnt as effective as archer + scout/spear. The only real advantage is that you can out number the enemy for a bit before they make enough archers to hold and go age3, where knights/siege make you irrelevant again.
Aside from the obvious infantrty/rush civs, I’d say maybe tower rush civs could use them to support their frontline?? Except for that the meta is gonna settle back to the same state as before, eventually.
1 Like
Infantry will always be slower than cavalry (= cavalry decides if the fight happens, or they run away) and archers retain their range. So having them strong once in melee isn’t shocking.
1 Like
New infantry is better. But I wouldn’t say that now is viable. Until devs doesn’t swap the food and gold cost, milita line never will be viable.
Keep the stats and dedicated techs as they are now, but make militia-line costs 25F 50G (like eagles). Then, take back supplies, but make it an imperial age tech and change its effect into swapping the food and gold costs (50F 25G).
That’s an interesting idea.
From what I’ve seen, they are extremely viable now. Not overpowered by any means, but the fact that they are usable even at the highest levels of play means that they are very close to perfect, and probably will not need significant changes from now on.
1 Like
Totally agree, maybe one day +1 attack on the LS. Maybe, but it’s very early days.
But why? It seems so complicated and unnecasary to me. Besides, a MAA rush would be practically impossible.
1 Like
Castle Age onwards is still bad and I wouldn’t wanna continue much further with this. Feudal is perfectly fine to use now. Just having small bonus vs Scout class and Camels could solve things. Or flat small bonus damage. Or Gambeson offering some resistance value. It solved like 50% issue but rest 50% is still something needs to be talked about.
I think that’s not really a problem tbh. Midgame will always bias towards expensive units, and that’s okay. What this does is make the gap between maa and champ much more accessible, so they can be used where you could potentially want to use them.
Which is the complicated part? And Why this would make MAA rush imposible?
Because as soon as you click into feudal you already have a dozen (or so) vills under the TC, so it is much easier to continue collecting food.
Should you very quickly move a huge amount of vills to gold and then move them again? That’s really inefficient. You would have to collect about 140G of gold in something like 130/150 seconds to make it work. Plus keep collecting the 100F for the MAA upgrade and another 100F for at least the wood upgrade.
What you say sounds pretty similar to an standard double archery range BO.
You will not need too much people in wood. So, instead a second lumbercamp you put those vils on gold early.