Cav deals with mantlets just fine, especially desert raiders which bypss the ranged resist.
900HP mantlets?? I dont think so as Mnt dont have malus vs cav. Its known for all of us that cavalry is not that effective to counter artillery (otherwise azt/inca wouldnt have any issue) Now that they arent infantry is way worse as canons and lancers dont have bonus vs them, plus siege armour.
desert raiders would do fine at least before the age 4 card is sent for siege resistance and most hand cavalry will be fine due to no melee resist on the mantlet. Not that youâd make them specifically for dealing with mantlets though, ranged infantry can kite them all day though it may take awhile due to the high range resist, artillery deal with them very well even after they get siege resist.
Haudenosaunees eco drops off in late age 4. Unless your going livestock, which takes a few cards to set up. It takes several cards to get the mallets up to full strength. I just donât see them being the monsters your worried about. If they FI then attack early. if they were going musket rider and skirm and switch to mallets then it will be slow. Love to see a game where they had beast mode mallets that did not have some counter play opportunities.
mantlets are still infantry, its rams that arent infantry anymore. 30 siege resist or not, mantlets do still get shredded by gatling guns
weirdly enough I still find that rams are dying to cannon shots very easily, especially in groups, I wonder if there are any splash shenanigans happening
en fait les cartes dâinfanterie ont dĂ©jĂ Ă©tĂ© nerf puisque cela ne concerne plus que les trois unitĂ©s de baraquement et non plus lâinfanterie dans sa globalitĂ©, mais sinon jâai vu les mantelets Ă plus de 900 hp pour un de population, le seul moyen de rĂ©duire la casse est dâenvoyer de la cavalerie de mĂȘlĂ©e et encore ça aura du mal Ă les contrer je pense, en tout cas ça sent le nerf et je dirais que câest mĂ©ritĂ©.
In 1v1 supremacy, mantlets may not be a big problem, but in treaty and late team game, they are balance destroyer. How could 1 pop unit own 900 hp, 65% range resist and just cost 160 resource?
Wouldnât be the first time treaty has been inconsistent with supremacy. But your right, still not a good thing for the game
It is strange that rams have cover mode. Rams do not have melee infantry tag (and they do not even have infantry tag now), but they can use cover mode, and they do not lose damage in that mode (they just walk slower).
Also AOE3 rams do not have covered heavy armor, just like they did in AOE2. How could two armorless native warrior carrying a log use cover mode and tank 80% range damage?
Cover mode should be removed, and their ranged resistance should be reduced to 20-30% too. Instead, rams should be much cheaper (60 food 60 wood for example). Itâs just a pipe of lumber! Why should they cost more than a petard?
they used to be 1050 hp 1 pop monsters up until last week and had wayyyy higher dmg. The ranged hp is a bit higher now, but they die faster to cav. I wouldnât call them balance destroyers, more that people are finally using them after 16 years
Really fun for Sweden, Ethiopian, Portuguese, German, ottoman, USA to show us, how they beat Haudenosaunee with their suck/slow/limited/slow training cavs
Whatâs wrong with swedens cav? Bulkiest Hussar in the game
add Italy and Malta, his calvary sucks too
fire thrower erase everything, they donât even need cav
yes, i agree, their new units are too broken, no way to deal with them without good cav.