Skirmisher/Elite Skirmisher: Armor decreased from 0,3/0,4 0,2/0,3. Bonus damage against archer increased from +3,+4+6,+8
Spearman/Pikeman/Halberdier: Armor increased from 0,0/0,0/0,0 1,0/1,0/1,0. Archer’s bonus damage against Spear-line is removed except Skirmisher. Halberdier upgrade: Cost increased from 300 food500 food. Research time increased from 50 seconds100 seconds.
Scout-line: Speed increased from 1.5 1.7. Rate of Fire decreased from 2.0 1.7. Armor decreased from 0,2 0,1
Long Swordman/Two-handed Swordman/Champion: Armor increased from 1,1/1,1/1,1 2,2/2,2/2,2. Damage decreased from 9/12/13 8/10/11.
Eagle Warrior/Elite Eagle Warrior: Bonus damage against cavalries is removed. Now they gain +8,+12 bonus against archers. Speed increased from 1.15/1.3 1.2/1.3
. Camel Rider: Bonus damage against cavalries increased from +9 +12.
Heavy Cavalries: Gain conversion resistance like scout-line.
This whole thing is actually a huge buff to the knight line…
Don’t like all the nerfs to knight counters. Or units which are barely even matched with knights in melee.
But I agreee witth the change for skirms. Making skirms more positively revarding is definetely a nice thing to have.
But otherwise… If, the game actually needs more counter strats against knights, not less.
Skirmisher attack 40% slower than archers, thus even with 8/11 damage, they wouldn’t nuke archers. Skirmisher must counter high damage archers as well. They can’t counter gunpowder units, War Wagons and Camel Archers properly in Castle Age for instance. They also become useless against superior age archer units like castle age Skirmisher against Arbalest. This change solve all of this problems. Everyone referred these problems of Skirmisher in this topic by the way. You talk like you don’t follow discussions.
In order to counter buffed scout-line and counter knight-line better.
2 PA in Imperial Age is OP. That’s why it must nerfed. Scout-line is raiding proficient but it fall behind to Knight-line with raiding. Light Cavalry has no use except countering monks in Castle Age while there is knight-line. With this change, Light Cavalry become usable in Castle Age.
Meso civ already required to make pikeman in order to counter knights. +3/+4 bonus damage of Eagle Warrior isn’t enough to beat Knight-line. Knight-line beat Eagle Warriors 2 vs 1. You should look last Redbull Wololo V tournament. Eagle Warrior suffer from not having certain role. Now, it barely counter archer-line and it barely countered by Knights. With this change, Eagle Warrior gain role which is countering archers.
Camel Rider need this buff. It cost a lot of gold and it is countered by everything except cavalries. With +9 damage, they barely counter generic knights. Sicilian, Poles, Burgundian Cavalier, Boyar beat Camel Rider in Castle Age even. It need this buff as a result.
Why no? Kinght-line is countered by monks overmuch. 1 converted knight is equal to 3 monk kills (food is ~30% valuable than gold in Castle Age). It is unfair that 2-3 Monks can repel 10 Knights raiding. Speed of conversion is unfair, too. Losing infantries and archers to Monks is not big problem because they have half value of knight-line. Knight-line would be countered by Monks even with conversion resistance. Light Cavalry has conversion resistance + bonus damage + speed + cheap cost but we see that in pro matches, Monks still manage to convert some Light Cavalries. Conversion resistance will decrease unfairness of conversion against Knights.
they literally go from killing archers in 6 hits to killing them in 4. that’s a reduction of 50%.
they still counter all of those more then cost effectively. what you’re “forgetting” is that
cavalry archer units cost much more then normal archers.
gunpowder units in castle age are extremely rare and in most cases require a castle.
how are they OP? please provide stats or a source to back this up.
well yeah - one costs only food and the other is a gold heavy unit.
furthermore nerfing their PA won’t help them with raiding.
furthermore most people raid with the scout line in the late game.
do you know why that is? it’s because they cost 80 food each, which seriously cuts into your food eco. seriously. the light cavalry line is fine.
you mean the redbull where they use empire wars and all the pros say eagles are OP in Empire Wars?
o.O i’m not sure if you’re serious or trolling.
working as intended.
Sicilians is working as intended because of their bonus. and even with “+12 bonus damage” their knights would still only take 10 damage a swing MAXIMUM.
Poles requires a castle and a unique tech to get anything close to what you say.
Burgundian cavaliers only get +2 attack so they would at max kill camels in 10 hits while dieing in 10 hits as well. not only that but camels mass up faster and cost less overall. so it’s still efficient to go camels against them.
Boyar literally cost huge amounts of gold and require a castle - good luck out massing camels.
and lastly while you’re sitting here spitting out all the civ specific examples you’re ignoring all the civ specific examples of camels performing better, Like berbers and byzantines who are cheaper, or saracens who have more health.
do castle age camels need a buff? maybe a little bit. but not +3. even +1 would be fine.
good. they need more counters then just pikes which require a 2 to 1 advantage.
so the converted cost of a knight then would be about 155 gold.
2-3 monks can’t repel 10 knights, they would get killed iwth even half decent micro.
yeah but the archer trash counter beats it 1v1 where as the knight trash counter does not.
only some. more often then not even scout cavalry murder monks.
but they get 100% more damage from archers when they get full armor. It is good balance because they kill better high hp and damage archers but they are a bit worse against low damage archers. This change would benefit balancing things out, have a look at again.
Janissaries, Conqs and Bohemians HC need to be countered by Skirmishers. Crossbow steal Skirmisher role against gunpowder units in Castle Age. Current Skirmisher is really bad now. A lot of Civ’s Skirmisher lack last armor upgrade. Current armor lacking Skirmishers (Poles and Sicilian for example) struggle a lot against archers. This change balance things out. 0 upgrade Halberdier can counter Paladin but lacking last armor turn Skirmisher into cannon fodder. It is unfair for Skirmisher. Some may argue that why Skirmisher is being used if it is that much bad. Because it is only unit that certainly counter archers. Scorpion isn’t enough, Mangonel is too micro intensive. Knight is soft counter and sending Knights to raids is more benefical than attacking big number of archers. Against archer, halberdier and bombard cannon deathball, only Skirmisher is only go–to unit. Skirmisher need to have enough strength to counter this deathball. Now, this combo is almost unstoppable because Skirmisher is weak now.
It is OP because Hussars counter 45 gold arbalests with 2 PA. Also they take very small from damages from TCs.
In Castle Age, food is 30% more expensive than gold. Therefore, Knight is better than Light Cavalry in every situations despite huge 75 gold. In Redbull Wololo, we saw Knight domination 70% of the game. Pros tried Crossbows, Cavalry Archers and Eagle Warriors, too but these units didn’t become half successful as Knight in Castle Age.
In Redbull Wololo V, Eagle Warrior is used but heavily countered by Knights in every game I watched.
In one game, even crossbow beat Eagles. Do you know any game that Eagle side win especially against Knights in Redbull Wololo V. I want to know this game.
I want to inform you that Eagle is jack-of-all trades unit. Eagle work against every unit in Castle Age but it is also countered by every unit except trash units. In old pro matches in Castle Age, we used to see 35-40 Eagles vs 20-25 Crossbow & 10-15 Knights. It is snowball battle because Eagle Warrior work against both Crossbows and Knights. I want to convert them into certain archer counter but countered by Knights. Current Eagle isn’t 100% archer counter. In high numbers, Crossbows can kill Eagles. I think I clearly expressed my point.
Pikes beat Knights in 10 vs 15. With extra 1 melee armor, they would beat 10 vs 13. 2 to 1 advantage isn’t true.
One converted Knight is 1 Knight lose for enemy and 1 Knight gain for yourselves, thus it is 2 Knights = 310 golds = 3.1 Monks.
Monks can be garrisoned in TC, therefore they can repel 10 Knights. If knights chase them, they can garrison in TC. After Knights go back, they can try to convert Knights again.
Why do they need melee Armor buff? why they need nerf in Halb upgrade?
Scout is already OP in extended Feudal fight and post-imp. Why they need that huge buff? They are already fastest unit. 1.7 speed? seriously?
Eagle counter archer regardless of the bonus damage due to the high speed and high PA. Otherwise, their bonus against knight line just make them aren’t hard countered by knight. Still, knight counter Eagle with their superior stat.
Why? it is huge buff for knight-line take out one of their counter. Knight-line don’t deserve that kind of buff.
Also take out one of the role of Scout line of monk-counter. Castle age Scout line become more useless.
Spear-line isn’t enough strong to counter cavalries in Feudal and Castle Age. They die to archers so fast, too. Spear-line isn’t cheap unit in Feudal and Castle Age. 2 Spear = 1.3 Scout = 1 Knight. Knights can destroy them in low numbers. 1 melee armor help both against Knight and Light Cavalry. Halberdier is OP comparing to its low cost. Paladin upgrade is 270 seconds. 50 seconds Halberdier upgrade is injustice to the Paladin. I buffed spear-line a lot. I must nerf Halberdier because it is already good unit.
New buffed Spears will balance this buffed scouts. New scout would hinder walling+FC meta. It is not OP. Towers, archers would do more damage to scouts. Scouts will be deadly against defenseless bases like in real history. Also Scouts must excel in mobility over heavy cavalries. Do you have any idea about buffing Light Cavalry? Because Light Cavalry is useless unit now. It definitely need buff in Castle Age.
New Light Cavalry is 25% faster than Knight and kill Monks in 2 hits. Knights kill Monks in 3 hits. Knights wouldn’t beat Monks with only conversion resistance (devs can adjust conversion resistance to avoid to make Knight OP). Knight has disadvantage in any case because 1 Knight conversion is equal to 3 Monks as well as Knights come with opponent’s upgrades (Monk side could have no knight upgrades).
Debatable about them countering archers. Even cavalier have trouble doing that.
Also the fact that they have no melee armor and low base damage should tell you rhey are intended to be better against ranged units then they are against melee units. Your changes completely alter that dynamic.
On a 1v1 basis sure. But all of those perform better in numbers. Which is intended. Knights are after all the most expensive unit you just listed.
If crossbows are beating eagles the xrossbow player is already ahead.
And eagles aren’t supposed to win 1v1 vs Knights. They are dirt cheap.
In high numbers crossbows beat everything. That’s the nature of archers. Eagles are intended to be a combination of heavy cavalry + scout cavalry for meso civs. So them being an “all arounder” sounds like it’s working as intended.
Still require more rgen a 1 pike per Knight. Which isn’t true of skirms vs archers.
If your resorting to these types of tactics the monks will take so long fighting off Knights that rhe Knights will win just by idling your eco so long.
It’s a little strange that Scout/Light Cav/Hussar and Knight/Cavalier all have the same 2 PA. I do think the Scout line needs it for raiding though, so reducing to 1 PA would probably be a bad idea. At the same time, increasing Knight to 3 would definitely be too strong vs crossbows, so that cannot change. The only potential change would be increasing Cavalier to 3 PA like Paladin, but this would be a massive buff for Cavalier civs like Bulgarians, Poles and Malians (not mentioning Sicilians because Hauberk would be broken unless reduced to +1 PA for the same 8 PA total). Also probably not a good idea, so I guess Light and Heavy Cavalry will remain similar for surviving archer fire.
Actually I think eagles beat cav in most of the Holy cup games, one of them being Yo vs Jordan in particular afaik.
EW settings are hostile towards meso civs somehow imo. I can expand on that, but it generally comes from fact that eagles are extremely bad in fedual age.
Maybe check the winrates before making blind assumptions… afaik and iirc the civs that are hurt in EW are the slow to get going civs or ones who relied and lost their DA bonus (Italians, port, Lith)
Conversely mesos are still doing really well (aside from Inca obviously)
I think even Mongols are lower down on WR due to no boars, and not always have accessible deer.
I was mostly referring to RBW5 argument above - Mayans have 0/4 winrate and Aztecs 0/2 (well Inca 0/0) on elimination stages. Do you have any other winrates to refer to? (just checked that aoestat has no winrate as well)
(fyi: I knew that they are banned often and I think Mayans have 100% win rate in groups. I am still shocked by the fact that they have 0% winrate on elimination stage and thats what I was thinking why they suffered from EW, compared to RM)
Mayans lose a lot of their bonusses in empire wars. No extra vill, no big extrs free food advantage (mayans farmers work slower which makes them actually worse than normal farmers).
So I’m not surprised that mayans lose some of their power in EW.
When empire wars begins mayans normally would have already a nice eco advantage, but in EW they don’t. And that’s also true for the other meso civs.
And normally the meso civs thrive by their early economic advantages
I didn’t watch Yo vs Jordan but I saw that in Holy Cup playoffs, Hera has 100% winrate (4/4) in graveyards with Franks. Franks dominated every match thanks to Knights (their eco is only above average) which mean Knights are definitely OP. Vikings eco is better than Franks but Vikings isn’t as dominative as Franks. Mayans 10-20-30% archer discount is stronger than Franks Knight bonuses (free bloodlines + free farm upgrades).
My reasoning is Monks convert Knights in micro seconds. In pro games, most of the time, Pros lose their Knights before escaping. It is unfairly OP. It must be nerfed. Every pros approve this. I started to hate Monks against Knights after this 40 seconds battle. Liereyy lost the game he was winning because 5 Knights converted by Monks. This is the game I am talking about:https://youtu.be/bocVbKbUppc?t=9925
In my vision, Scout-line will be designed to raid enemy’s base’s outskirts (wood eco, distant gold and stone mining camps) and only Knights have privilege to afford to go under TCs. Scout-line and Knight-line purpose must be separated from each other. Light Cavalry doesn’t have niche. It satisfy same task as Knight-line. They only differ from each other against the Monks. This is wrong design. They have same PA armor. Light Cavalry has only 11% speed more which is not enough to diversify its purpose. Even Paladin’s 180 hp and extra 1 PA don’t make Hussar diversify from itself. Hussar is only used after gold become scarce. It is still a specialization which is good but it comes with in late game.
It looks like all of guy who reply me, doesn’t understand my viewpoint. I proposed to buff Spear-line, Skirmisher, militia-line, Camels and nerf Monks. With this changes, I am 100% sure we won’t see Knight + Archer + Monk domination in 100% of the game. Why not, we can’t see Light Cavalry, Militia-line play. In current game, in tournament matches, Berbers win rate over Franks is not huge. Pros choose to select Franks knowingly opponent will choose the Berbers. Isn’t this a strange situation for you? Berbers counter Franks (the only strength of the Franks is their better economy) in every field. 10% faster villager resist scout raiding better, 15-20% cheap camels, camel archer beat Throwing Axeman and Franks Skirmishers can’t counter Camel Archers. In conclusion Berbers should destroy everything Franks has but it is still equal match-up because knights are OP.
Um no. Frank scouts also have extra hp for free as well. They also have cheap castles. It doesn’t mean Knights op. It means franks are strong. Did other knight civs go undefeated? Did franks go undefeated period? If Knights are op every cav civ would go undefeated by the standard you are showing
And yet I bet if you asked those same pros they would say mayans and aztecs are stronger then franks and vikings would be right up there with them.
Where is the pros approving of buffing heavy cavalry against knights?
Really? The same task? Why do light cav move faster, have bonus and resistance vs monks, lower health and attack and melee armor then? Seems like very different tasks to me.
This is some of the biggest bull I’ve ever seen you claim.
Light cav see use in arena games and as meat shields for cav archer civs.
Militia aren’t intended to compete with knights and archers. They have different strengths.
No we see your point of view. We disagree with it.
You say you want Light cav and militia more? This wouldn’t make that happen. Militia are still slow and archers will wreck them. Two handed swordmen and champs actually fair worse against melee units after your change. (+1 armor but -2 attack). Furthermore if you’re actually going to make militia compete with knights and archers rhey absolutely need a trash weakness. You’d have to utterly rebalance the game
Light cav would only be used for raiding but other then that they would get utterly murdered by archers (3pa means 4 damage a shot from crossbows. 20 shots to die). Their insane speed would be too much and rhey would get that nerfed. Not that I think it would ever get implemented.
0,2/0,3. Bonus damage against archer increased from +3,+4