Removing archer line bonus damage against spears

What is your opinion on the archer line dealing 3 bonus damage against spearmen? Should it be the case?

Currently an unupgraded feudal archer deals +3 (7 total) damage to spearmen. This feels like too much, considering FU arbalesters also deal+3 damage to spearmen (13 total).

If we removed this bonus, we would potentially see some diversity in feudal age teamgame compositions (scout+skirm too, instead of just scout+archer), and we would nerf double gold compositions in the castle age (knight+crossbow is impossible to deal with even with siege or monks because of how well they cover eachother’s weaknesses).

Obviously nobody has asked for this nerf to the crossbow line, but we have been seeing archer civs dominate the top level mostly because of how well archers synergize with other units, especially knights. This also is an indirect buff to skirmishers in certain situations, and they become the primary way of dealing with spearmen. Currently a feudal skirmisher deals (2+1+3)/3=2 damage to spears per second, while an archer deals (4+1+3)/2=4 damage to spears per second, it’s not even close. For an arbalest it’s (6+4+3)/1.7=8 damage per second, for an elite skirm its (3+4+3)/3=3 damage per second.

It just feels weird for gold units to trade that well against trash units, especially covering their weaknesses so well. Keep in mind in AoK it was the opposite- archers dealt bonus damage against spearmen, but skirmishers didn’t.

6 Likes

It’s an interesting proposal. The bonus damage doesn’t feel necessary. Then again, if the bonus damage was removed we might find out that/why it was necessary after all.

It should be lowered in Feudal Age to 1.

1 Like

Maybe 1/2/3 feudal/castle/imp

the bonus dmg its fine, its a reward for players who play 2 gold units.

3 Likes

Agree. I think it would definetely be worth a try. At least in the early to mid game.

Archers are already extremely strong against spearmen even without that bonus damage.

Edit: Possible Change for Sicilians: Instead of the 50 % reduced bonus damage in general they could receive +5 spearman armor for their spears. It’s worth a try and it would fit the civ as an “infantry” civ.

The idea is that gold units are more powerful than trash units, hence the names. Without bonus dmg vs spears, you could just spam spears vs archers/skirms and get away with it because spears are faster.

2 Likes

With 0 armor … xD
What a nonsense.

They are. from their sheer stats, not because of the bonus damage. Archers already melt infantry even the much stronger militia line.
Are you really trying to make an argument that archers would need that specific bonus damage to be better than than trash units? ^^

Also the raiding potential is already difference enough why you prefer the gold units over trash… Just ignoring that fact let’s your argument look a bit biased.

I think the idea is to make them much better vs specific units, in this case the spears. Not 0 armor because there’s blacksmith upgrades!

And actually i prefer trash units :smiley: But If you want to remove the bonus plz go ahead! xD I’m a big fan of going skirms + pikes.

The issue is- Spear-line units are much faster than Archer-line units. They can overwhelm them and actually deal a decent amount of damage, if you want this to happen you’d have to atleast reduce their base damage accordingly.

I wouldnt say much faster. They are 0.4 tiles faster without squires. I have very rarely seen anyone attempt to use spears to attack archers

yeah it’s almost nothing plus spears have no armor and also very low attack. They deal almost no damage to the archers.
It’s such a weird argument. In no world spears can overhealm archers even withot the bonus damage you would need to have an insane amount of spears and the archer player not microing at all so a full surround can happen. Would take forever and the spear player would most likely use minimum triple the army value in the process ^^

I could see it if you started massing spears thr moment you hit feudal and didn’t let them make 4 to 5 archers but once they hit that…

ok ofc you need always a minimum amount of archers. But who would ever just make 3 archers and throw then into a batllte without any protection? ^^
I think we are reasonable enough to just assume that nobody uses arechers as single entity units ^^

Im talking mostly about Castle Age, they’re almost 15% faster, and 60% more HP, with decent amount of damage. Plus being naturally suited to accompany Siege which already counter Crossbows. It’s very edgy, possibly hurting the micro dimension of this game.

The reason we no longer see Pike Siege push (alternatively, why we see only Crossbows, even with Cavalry civs) is the fact map is too open, AOC Arabia was much less open than KOTD Arabia. It takes 1 Archer to shut down a whole woodline, while melee units can be possibly ignored with enough walls. AOC had 40% more trees, you needed a tower to actually shut down lumberjacks. So it’s no-risk unit to make, the most rewarded one, no strategy involved, that’s why Crossbows are dominant.

2 Likes

Then you need to reduce the bonus damage against cavalry

what they really should do, is do away with the lame ■■■ feudal rush meta. buff villagers against military in feudal age or nerf the scout/archer/skirm/spearmen vs buildings and villagers.
its awful gameplay and super cheesy.

I do like the idea and it helps Handcannon to shine Vs all infantry in comparison.

They would still hard counter Pikes easily.

That said, the happiest people would be Malians main, as their pike would suddenly become twice as resistant to archer line.

I think it should be kept as it is. At best Skirmishers lose their +3 attack bonus vs spear in Feudal and maybe even Castle age. Skirmishers alone counters Archer + Spear combo in Feudal which sometimes seem unfair to archer civ.