Yeah not really. Crossbows can work very well against knights even with +2 and we see this all the time at even decent levels of micro.
2 Likes
Yes, Pikeman is bad unit. Simple proof of this is power gap between Halberdier. Halberdier upgrade gives power as much as gold units upgrade (for instance, Cavalier and Champion upgrade), although Pikeman is trash unit. Other trash units don’t get power increase as much as Pikeman. Even then, Halberdier is only mediocre unit.
How big of a troll can you get? I mean, I should’ve understood you’re probably a very low ranked player given your…entire posting history, but there’s absolutely a Dark Age, Feudal Age, Castle Age, and Imperial Age on Black Forest. Watch some Rage Forest games or idk xd
it is a mass issue. Short of abusing bugs not intended by the game (fitting 40 crossbows in 1 tile of map), Knights scale better than Crossbow. Early Castle Age, Crossbow is stronger, mid- to late-Castle age, Knight is stronger. Threshold for Knights gaining the upper hand being something like 20-30 Knights AND +2.
Again, this is assuming that the Crossbows fight in a somewhat open area, not that you fit your whole army in 3 tiles of space, if an unintended bug is your reason for why Crossbow can keep up with Knights, I’m sorry but we will never agree.
Halb is not that bad, the bonus they get feels decent. Still, in 200 pop vs 200 pop, if you go pure Halb and mix in a few Siege/Trebs/Arbalest whatnot as gold units, I’d give the edge to the Knights player. I’ve seen the Knights player run out of gold and lose to full Halb spam, but generally as the Halbs player, odds are against you, the better the micro of the cav player, the better his chances also. Main problem with Halberdier play is that it’s incredibly wood intensive (especially when paired with Siege, its common complement, which is also wood-intensive), if you are the Knight player and you are smart, you know harassing woodlines will idle his production enough for you to get a critical mass and overwhelm.
I’m probably higher rank than you but sure. Surely I never played Black Forest in my life, it’s a mode that requires literally 10 APM to succeed. The odd game where 1 sneak vill builds a Castle into Plumed Archers doesn’t disprove my point, especially when it’s done by one of the best players in the world like Viper.
Most games, Black Forest = snoozefest, boom into 200 pop and spam some pop-efficient unit like SO or War Elephant. Incredibly repetitive gamemode can’t see how people enjoy it, there is no particular strat in playing BF, civ picking and unit composition (entirely decided by your civ pick and whether you are flank or pocket) are the only things that matter with the rare sneak tower or 1 side having 4 lakes deciding the game early.
The fact that you think forging is needed on pikes kinda proves you wrong…
1 Like
wow, you watched a SotL video where he breaks down Pikes vs Knights! SURELY this means you are knowledgeable and high-rated! :clueless:
I admit my wrong on the Pike thing, but it’s no big deal. This game is mostly improvised decision-making in Castle/Imp, build orders, and what tech to get when is theorized until ~min 20, after it’s mostly improvisation even at high level. You are good in a vacuum, but when you go vs something unusual you probably crumble. I’m the opposite. The latter, experience over theory, is decidedly more valuable, knowing +1 on Pikes doesn’t change fights might win u 1 out of 1000 games, meanwhile having the presence of mind to realize Persians have Handcannoneers when you are getting Halb spammed wins you a good 4/10.
you actually want to make the attack upgrades on pikes against knights… yes they are very important
1 Like
I didn’t say Halberdier is bad, it is mediocre. Goth, Japanese and Slavs Halberdier has insane bonuses. If Halberdier is very strong unit, these 3 buffed Halberdiers would dominate most of the game mercilessly.
If your opponent has 20 to 30 knights youve done something wrong.
Considering yiu are arguing rrom the standpoint of actuallu letting your opponent get to 30 knights, yeah we wont. A good player woule keep pressuring and keep those knight numbers down, and stop them from getting to 20+ knights.
Only if hes stupid ebough to not run armor upgrades. If he has armor upgrades then any attack upgrades are worthless
2 Likes
it is actually the other way around, but also depending on bloodlines btw…
yeah i can tell
you sound like a low rated BF player by the way you also seem to think you should start making pikemen vs kts only when you have 30 kts in your base
??
2 Likes
Knight isn’t ranged unit. There is not a thing that keeping enemy’s Knight numbers down like Cav Archer. Normally Knight player starts to use his Knights offensively before reaching 20-30 Knight numbers because Knights are still great in low numbers.
Attack upgrades are better than armor upgrades for Pikeman. With 2 attack upgrades, Pikeman kills FU Knight in 5 hits. If Pikeman doesn’t make attack upgrades and goes armor upgrades, Pikeman kill FU Knights in 6 hits. With attack upgrades, Pikeman can also harass villagers, kill Monks and destroy buildings.
Im talking about the Knight player takinh armor upgrades for his units. The only reason you need attack upgrades on pikes is if your opponent has +2 armor and bloodlines. and seeing as the op is saying knights have nearly no investment required, clearly thats not the case
Yes tgere is. You go force your opponent to engage with his knights. Pick them off with your archers. Keep his numbers low. Thsts how good players play.
Normally, Knight-side should make bloodlines+2 armor upgrades. Knight with no upgrade is trash.
It is other way around. Knight-side attack archer player first to prevent enemy to mass archers. Knight is great in raiding. Good players don’t wait for massing Knights because it is waste of time.
1 Like
If you plan to make at least 20 knights then this are the only really “required” upgrades for knights.
Bloodlines is not necessary if you make like 5 knights or so to clear enemy skirms.
The intersting thing about this is that it faorces the pike player to make the attack upgrades, that’s why indeed (like with skirms vs archers) pikes are way more costly on the tech side, the initial investment.
(you also often want the armor upgrades on your pikes for varios reasons).
especially if you know that you have a timing advantage as it is so costly to tech into pikes, you want to use that timing.
But that’s fair. It’s ok that with this tech investment there is incentive on archers and knights to make for being agressive and use your timings as best as you can. That’s not a problem imo.
The problem is that even in contínouation pikes often just have problems to catch up and get outmanouvered.
True. But the way rhe op is talking youd think he lets his opponents buikd up 20 to 30 knights and he aint doing anything about it.
Tell that to the op
22 seconds pike production > 30 seconds knights
Pressuring way before he gets 10, let alone 20 knights > Camping at home waiting
Monks / Camels / siege to back up pikes > Just pikes
Scouting > Not scouting
Mass crossbow with ballistics / bodkin, pikes + a few mangonels + more food to boom > Double stable +2 Knights / Skirm
1 Like
you can’t do much, Knight player takes good engagements and avoids bad ones. At top level, like Viper or so, we even see people send back less than 1/2 HP Knights to get healed.
As for your post above though, I’m curious how you can justify moving out with the “ritualistic” 8 Crossbows that 1 shot a Vill when 3 Knights can intercept you and destroy you at any time. Knight player has mobility/map control, you as the Crossbow player need to sneak. The ONE chance you have to deal real damage is your faster Castle time (due to Crossbow play and not Scouts opening) + you HAVE TO get on top of his gold (denying him like 200g of lost resources which prevents early Knight flood resulting from surplus resources accumulated due to aging up). If you don’t get on top of his gold for whatever reason (house walled, too many skirms, bad map layout etc.) then your early 8-10 Crossbows will find 0 damage and the groups after will ALWAYS be less effective than first (because by the time he has 6-8 Knights, any mini group you send to attack from the sides will be intercepted and destroyed).
would be good except for the small detail that a Knight beats a Pikeman 1v1 so you need 1.5 Pikeman to comfortably beat a Knight, better if 2+ and then there is the mobility aspect.
bottlenecked by Wood, also Mangonels are very useless vs Knights, they are good IF you get to be the attacker.
If he has 3 knights i question why you only have 8 crossbows.
1 Like
I think this shows that even a lot of higher mid-elo players don’t have developed the right feeling for the counter unit play.
And a lot of people just watching pro games conclude it would be easy to make “the righ amount” of counters.
But it is indeed not that easy - a ratio of 1-1.5 pikes per knight is fine IF you manage to position them right. Even if the knights might win against a 1:1 ratio, the damage done is often not worth it, especially as this also gives some time to move your exposed vills away.
And of couse if you make 2:1 pikes:knights you actually have basically no eco benefit from the counter play and give all initiative “for free” to the opponent… that is a really bad play.
I don’t agree with a lot of things said in this post. But the reality is, that counter play isn’t as easy as often narratively told. Even with good scouting you need a lot of experience like whith the thing with the attack upgrades we discussed earlier.
I am not surprised so many people actually don’t know much about the real counter strategy mechanics. Cause you currently can climb the ladder just with basic buildorders and unit control, you don’t really need to know this stuff. What makes me kinda sad, but it also don’t surprises me lot of people don’t know this stuff under these circumstances…