Ram cost must be reduced

With the new upcoming patch, the ram hp is reduced to 420. Though, it still takes the same amount of hit from vill to take down the ram, but it is not the case for the military units or just TC arrow to do so , e.g.

  • 8 knights can run back and forth twice to destroy a ram
  • 20 ZGN can destroy a ram from a safe distance in less than 7.5 seconds.(instead of the previous 13.75 seconds)
  • Chinese castle can kill a ram even more easily
    • a ram can only hit the chinese castle 2 times (dealing 400 dmg) before being destroyed (as it takes 7 hits, 18 sec. (instead of the original 12 hits, 33 sec.) in which a ram alr gets 3 hits before reaching the castle (took 10 sec. for a ram to walk to the castle since the 1st hit)
    • 3 rams (900 woods) pushing together will deal only 3600-3800 dmg to a chinese castle before all being destroyed by a single castle.

This makes ram even more obsolete (even now we don’t see ram in any pro level game becuz it is too cost inefficient). I think this encourages more booming play. Therefore, decrease the ram cost to 200 or at least 250 is a must.


I don’t know how relic does balance numbers with costs, but I think it would be beneficial ifnthere was a resource price associated with certain attributes, that way when numbers are changed, prices can be adjust accordingly.

e.g. 100 health = 50 wood, or 3 attack = 30 gold, etc.

All siege weaponry should have reduced pop and cost after next patch because their intent is just to destroy buildings so pointless to invest 1k resources on bombard that does nothing and gets completely countered and shut down by unit that costs 80 resources.

Relic has no intentions of making game balanced in near future all they focus on over nerffing everything which is far from balance and we have proof of this from old patches.

Proc scout for example. The reduction on movement while carrying deer made its so unusable that no pro player ever picks it anymore because the investment is too much for the risk it provides now. Idea is cool that they create more counterplay but when they create counterplay they forget how it affects over all performance and how it ruins something.

Same was stone wall tower rushes. No one does it anymore and if someone does it, its basically game over and loss at that point.

Same thing will happen with rams now. No reason to invest 300 resources on something that does nothing. Its much more effective to go castle and spam MAA to burn down buildings or get treb that cant be sniped with anything than make a ram.

For siege overall I said patches ago before first nerfs hit that all they needed to do was create 2nd counterplay to siege by giving horses more dmg to siege weaponry / less dmg taken and give horseman additional imp age upgrade to deal with siege and now we see similar rework, but also massive nerfs to any siege making it completely useless

1 Like

100-120 siege dmg, 10 range, 5.25 attack speed; that’s not useless; BUT I agree it’s been nerf to the point that its extremely extremely vulnerable unit. IMO, this is GOOD, it makes it need excess protection and makes it less likely to be spammed and/or allows devastating siege mass to be instantly countered via appropriate cav/melee switch.

People have been saying since the beginning “we don’t like siege fest”, so yes it’s better for them to TRY deleted siege then adjusting them up!! rather than keep the community bleeding as they STILL don’t like siege-fest patch after patch after patch of small siege nerfs.

We need DATA on current nerf siege before we conclusively determine siege need buffs and/or re-purposed. I personally NEVER EVER liked bombard, yes even as a China main, I still hate bombards!! So I welcome this change.

Now for Rams? I like rams have been nerfed b/c they the stronger feudal civs aren’t strong b/c they 2 TC boom, rather they are strong b/c their unit/ram pushes are unstoppable! English Lb/spears/maa ram push can’t be stopped by anyone that doesnt have knights. This is a meager nerf, IMO, b/c only military kill rams faster, technically static defense also kill rams faster but it’s going from 700 shots to 420 shots wow, huge nerf…

Beastyqt also mentions it, I’ll wait for the first week of testing to do a survey

And then there is 2 springalds that are cheaper and faster to produce and just snipe it and it deals no dmg.

Good making unit that cant be protected and doesn’t do anything is good? Balance is not about making unit or strategy useless its to make it so that it is balanced and has enough counterplay and measures so its not insta win button.

When sieges movement speed was reduced because “infantry” had hard time getting on top of them, but the issue wasn’t the movement speed but torch animation which makes infantry or cavalry to stop for very long period of time which results siege or mongol structure to get away. So their solution was to nerf sieges movement speed. Was it good solution? No, because it affects multiple other things like reinforcing capabilities and micro potential vs other siege. Essentially when you take first shot it makes your siege instantly target for free kill and nothing can be done if opponent has enough anti siege this also made trebs far superior option because they can’t be sniped and can shoot over the stone walls.

Plus there is no way to save siege anymore if they get flanked by horses or even melee because how slow they’re to unpack and get away so its just better let them stay put and let them deal dmg till they die.

First change made most cancerous meta which is mass trebs and if map is choke point style then there is no counter to them especially english trebs that work as mini mangonels and kills all your units and siege if they stay in one spot.

I actually suggested horseman to get a imperial age tech that would allow them be more useful against siege by taking less dmg and dealing more dmg to them and buffing horses overall but this was before any changes was done to siege and now they do similar rework and throw everything into chaos by doing so and adding multiple heavy nerfs to siege. Delhi is the biggest winner of the patch while china is the biggest loser.

Too bad it still won’t be possible to protect them. If you commit protecting your siege with army then your army thats fighting up front is much smaller which results you losing the straight up fight and then forced to back down or if you commit to spears vs cavalry then they just run to sieges melee and insta kill all of them and because the changes were done from torch to melee which increases dps of cavalry units against siege to insane levels and HP reduced even further which results them dying so much faster which results cavalry user trading much more effectively than it used to be able to making protectin siege pointless. And lets be honest. No one right mind is going to use charge ability against siege if there is spears in there. They just move to melee range and start killing the siege and ignoring spears.

There is no way to protect them. Even in current patch its just joke to go take them down. Takes 10-15 lancers to force all siege to run away even if there is 30 spears guarding them.

Only game modes that mass siege EVER worked was TG’s where individual comp should be irrelevant vs what team has. If one civ focuses making siege because its their strength there shouldn’t be problem. No one in 1v1 went any form of mass siege comp because it wouldn’t work and it didn’t work.

And? I don’t like rus, english or french and been saying it for months and so has many other ppl. Should we just remove them? We have 0 data of how over all ppl feel about siege fest because majority that complains is from TG’s and there is not single good poll that determines how whole community feels about them. Players who are most unhappy about something will be extremely vocal about it and ppl who are fine with something are mostly not bothering bringing it up. Thats why listening / reading complaints and basing changes to them purely is stupid.

You’re free to wait the data as much as you want. We have already seen on PUP how fast siege just dies out and we do know in fact that units kill them way faster and there is no way to kite with them or trying to protect them. In very specific situations the protection is possible for example choke points.

Out come wont change anyway. Siege is over expensive useless unit that has no viability. Player makes enough siege to take down towers / keeps and walls. More you commit to siege smaller your standing army is because siege has no use outside of that. Also there is no point of getting 10 tile range bombard especially when keeps got changed. Better get trebs with insane range and you wont lose them. Most cost efficient way to deal with and structures.

I hate bombards too nowdays. Since they changed their movement speed I have hated any siege unit. It makes it impossible to have any form of micro and horses just deal with opponents siege just fine.

Rams goes extinct after this patch which leads again one dimensional play. Everyone sits in their base for 10 mins to boom because there is chance to do anything. English might make 5-6 longbows and shoot arrows at edge of your base but outside of that nothing will happen and everyone is doing same thing which is bad for the game just like siege won’t be used anymore.

Everyone does TR or standard play and thats it.

FALSE OUT THE GATE!! New bombard will have 100 base siege attack 280hp 30 range resist 10 range 5.25s attack speed vs springs will have 30 range attack (70 bonus range attack vs siege) 140hp 20 range resist 10 range 4s attack speed. This means you need 4 springald shots to kill 1 bombard; if you wish to snipe the bombard you’ll need to invest 30s each spring plus 2k res; which is fair if you wanna snipe! Now if you wanna snipe and take zero dmg then you need invest in the spring upgrade Roller shutter triggers for 500res and 60s; again fair!

So already clarifying your falsehood makes a looooooot of what you said moot…

This tells me you DID NOT play the PUP… b/c had you actually played you’d see that you need to get MUUUUCH closer than torch before to hit siege, which means builds and units immediately around the siege can body block TO INCLUDE villagers repairing forces the units that don’t have the range to move around the repairing villagers…

You don’t play 1v1? And admittedly you don’t watch tournament games?? So where did you learn ppl dont mass siege in 1v1? lol. All my Imp games is a siege-fest, all my late castle+ games vs mongols is a mongol siege fest; the only civ I think I’ve notice IS NOT siege fest by imp is french*; oh and delhi (but elephants are siege…so that’s technically a siege fest also).

Again you didn’t play the PUP? But that last point you made is what I referenced earlier, body blocking for siege is now going to be a REAL REAL thing, most units only have a 0.29 attack range; well most units hitbox is larger than 0.29 by 0.29.

1 Like

This is how the game will end up after the patch. Majority of competitive scene will hate it im quite sure of that.

finally casual players will take a breath of fresh air.

1 Like

There have always been plenty of options for casual players to play their game. There’s many maps that are beneficial to a defensive playstyle, further there’s arena where each base is surrounded by a stone wall.

If the competitive scene dislikes something I usually see that as a positive sign for the team game community.

Besides, give it another week and there will be inane youtube thumbnails screaming about the new amazing 1v1 meta and everyone will move on

Tbh if you do not like the rushing part of the game just ask for bigger maps or play arena. That’s pretty much problem solved. Why change the entire game and make the entire competitive scene disappear when it is basically that easy?

When did I say player needed to insta kill it? Nowhere. I said 2 springalds is more than sufficient to snipe bombards especially when all bombards got 10 tile range so they’re hard countered by even 1 springald.

Yes your scenario is true if player desires to insta kill it, but once again I never talked about that. Even if you force bombard away its already big victory for you because then its useless unit in fight.

Even 1 lancer that costs 240 resources now effectively kill 1 bombard without taking considerable amount of dmg.

So good try with your “falsehood” stuff.

Im well aware of the range change of torch vs melee and yes you’re right you have to get closer to siege now to deal dmg, but so what? You really think you can commit such number of units to protect your siege that its impossible to get around? How many units are you going to invest protecting against siege that is hardly doing anything other than shooting either keep or outposts? More you commit, more likely you’re going to lose the fight because siege won’t be that devastating against high valued targets like lancers.

You’re throwing lot of wild assumptions and assuming im not knowing how things have changed. I don’t have to play on PUP to see the changes and understand how it will affect them.

Did you also know that you can use charge at melee range at closest target??? Probably didn’t. So even if you got spears blocking some of the cavalry once you get to melee and in right angle you can either use other siege units to utilize charge or use spears against siege by utilizing the charge.

In current system in 6 seconds torches dealt like 90 dmg from lancers. Now its 29 per melee every 1.38 seconds which results 116dmg in less than 6 seconds which is massive difference. Close to 30% increase in dmg dealt against siege that is massive difference. All you need is 9 hits without utilizing charge or charge tricks to kill bombard which can be achieved with very laughable numbers. 3-4 lancers are enough to get through your “defensive” line to shutdown all bombards and if charge tricks are utilized then bombards die even faster.

So tell me how many spears are you going to commit defending your siege when I attack siege line with 20 lancers? You literally need 40-50 spears to sufficiently win the fight which is massive pop difference already when considering how much pop is invested to siege and trying to protect it from knights/lancers. Even Xbows won’t deal with MAA fast enough to make difference. So its just so much better not to commit making siege other than having 1-3 trebs to take walls, outposts and keeps down other than that siege is dead. Mangonels will be used against heavy ranged comps but bombards and culverins are history. Too heavy investment for very little gain and too high risk especially when they’re immobile and slow and cant be protected.

Villagers heal 5 per second which is nerffed from 20 per second so 75% reduction to healing. This change alone would’ve been more than enough balance out the siege, but because they increase the dmg from units + nerf healing and HP which is pure butchering.

Do I have to watch tournaments to watch high elo players to play? No I don’t. I do watch some players when they stream and I do not play 1v1. I find it funny when you point those things out everytime in such manner that it would be a bad thing. At least Im not trying to act tough guy with fake conqueror rank xD

Here is what actual siege fest looks like. 100pop pure siege. This is what siege fest is and this is what lot of players refer when they show up to forums and complain. If you see 3-5 mangonels and maybe 3-4 bombards thats hardly a siege fest.

No one has done single pro play in tournament and won a game going pure siege. Yes they have utilized siege heavily but far from what you can see from TG situations where 1 or 2 players purely focus on siege while remaining team goes frontline.

Yes I didn’t play but last time I checked I had pair of eyes and I was able to read and process the information that was given. GL trying to bodyblock anything if its not in choke point / area that movement is heavily limited.

And once again im going to ask you. How many units are you going to commit protecting your siege? More you commit more likely you’re gonna lose the fight and when you move out its easy and simple to circle around to kill the siege with couple of units.

You like those fantasies that devs have and think how its great when 50 lancers charge at 100 spears and get stunned and killed by spears, which is far from reality.

I don’t care about the competitive scene, all that does is stifle any change as the ‘pros’ become terrified of any change that may impact their BO and the established meta.

if the pros and competitive scene are that important then they can go load up a custom match ig

The competitive scene should care about the casual scene and vice versa. In my opinion there should be different game modes e.g. one for casual play with bigger maps, stronger defensive structures and another one for competitive play with action from the very beginning on. They can’t do both at the same time because the way I see it a big part of the AoE community loves long games while when playing competitively it is often the goal to end the game as quick as possible.

Ye I start to think that this is a good idea, like for example, in bronze rank gamplay, TC has a vision of 30 tiles, TW around enemy TC take 3 times to build, and vills has tripple burning dmg, ram can be called from TC and so on. xDDDD Then when ur skill develops, move up another rank, you need to deal with more reality.

Well im thinking of different leaderboards for both game modes. Just like Empire Wars on Aoe2.

Ye that would also work as well, like in DotA1, there is an easy mode to pick

YOU ARE SO DISINGENIOUS. You gona tell me the word “snipe” is nuanced? PAHAHAHAH

1 Like