Palisade Walls gives too much value for its cost

Given 2 players at the same ELO, the game always favors the player that fully walls their base. Almost every game now is a wooden arena.

This is because It takes only around 100 wood worth of palisade walls to protect an entire base, which normally gives more value than investing the same amount in military.

Palisade walls should cost 5-6 wood (or 2 wood + 1 stone), so players would have to choose between investing the amount in more military or wall their base.

IE: A player that invests the whole amount in military without walling would have equal odds with a player that walls their base

That’s a pretty radical idea. Walling your base is fundamental and available to everyone.

I guess you could say that a less skilled player is less likely to effectively wall their base and be able to protect those walls. Further the. Walls are weak are will frequently crumble under a 4 unit push if the player has over extended the walls and can’t defend them in time. Given how devastating raiding is to macro play I don’t think walling should be adjusted


Walling requires barely any skill compared to other aspects of the game. And that goes for any ELO bracket

It shouldn’t be fundamental, that’s why most tournaments organizers try to create very open maps to get more dynamic play.

And it would still be available just more taxing to achieve

Tournament organizers want to appease viewers, so open maps with fast paced action is better for them.
Regular gamers just want to enjoy the game.

Why are there new wall nerf threads every few days? I hope the devs don’t give in to these requests. It’s bad enough that 6/7 ranked maps are open, and several are not wallable. Yes, hitting walls with scouts or archers sucks, but the fact is that spears and skirms cannot effectively protect all your villagers.


Indeed. It’s not walling that is OP, but raiding that is OP.
And you can easily climb the ladder with just learning your rushing buildorders currently.

And btw the most you lose when walling is vill time, cause you need a lot of vills rushing the walls down to be protected when the first scouts arrive.

Ofc making the counters better could possibly make the walls less attractive. It’s one proposal I already made some days ago.

BTW if anybody of you has seen aoeiV, there walling is rarely a thing actually. And it’s mainly because raiding is way less effective there imo, as there are way more and better tools to protect the villagers. I think that one shows where the disbalance is actually, cause walls in age IV are actually much stronger than in age II. It’s just that you don’t need them to have at least a little protection against incoming raids.

Walls are not really OP. They’re “OP” because the counter move against a camping player of Trushing is overnerfed since DE’s release, as Towers are currently too easy to fight with Villagers. Returning the HP of Feudal Age Watch Towers to their pre-DE amount would do more to reduce the strength of Full Wall FC than any number of walling nerfs.

The only sensible response I read so far, yeah back in the day it was full pressure both sides. A camping player was normally punished for it and towers was a good answer

Now people complaining that they can’t defend against a couple of scouts

As it stands right now It is highly unlikely that towers would get buffed to their original status.

Might I recommend getting good at the game instead of complaining about walls?

Complaining about walls takes less skill than anything you do in AOE 2 and you clearly prefer it to improving your gameplay.

Proper scouting is necessary for effective walls, along with a reasonably protectable base with near resources, and the commitment of villager time to the task, which is far and away the most expensive part of walling.

1 Like

Palisades are supposed to be cheap. Their sole purpose is walling, which can also be done with other relatively inexpensive buildings like houses.

If walling is done improperly, all you’ll do is leave 90% of the map to the opponent. Plus, walls were quite important in the middle ages. And most of the cost of a palisade wall is not the 2 wood that it costs, but the opportunity cost of sending pne of your limited villager to build it instead of gathering resources. Not that cheap once you consider that.


Investment in military is always higher than investment in walling. The problem, imo, is the repairing rate of the vils. Is insane thst just one vil can stop 3 MAA just repairing a palisade

Not that insane when you look at history. City walls bombarded by artillery could be repaired to a decent enough level in the time cannons had to be reloaded. And look at the Roman armies, such as the ones commanded by Caesar at Alésia or at Pharsalus, to see how impressive it could get.

Game Balance > History accuracy

Even idling a villager can be worth it. If that villager is stuck on repair duty for 6-7 game mins then the eco damage has exceeded the cost of 3 MAA. Now that is a long time, and often players will build an archery range to deal with attacking MAA and get the villager back to work. However, the cost of an archery range plus on archer has already exceeded the cost of 3 MAA without considering villager build and repair time. The 3 MAA attack has value whether they blow through walls and murder peasants or not.

  • Palisade Walls now cost 3w each (previously 2w).

I guess someone in the dev team agrees

small nerf. won’t change much about walling.

And what about the house nerf in dark age and feudal? Will that encourage sarracen archer play?

More like it encourages Drushes and Men at Arms openings


Leave walls alone, please. I don’t want walls nerfed into hell to the point they are useless. Learn to boom, and wait until you get IMP and bye-bye walls. Spam trade carts, you can use gold heavy units to smash them down. Grab the relics in 1v1 game, while he’s busying turtling up.

mmm not on Arabia or any open map tbf