This is your suggestion, it is in your OP. Are you telling me you would paste whatever people suggest and not decline responsability for it ?
This is as ridiculous (if combined both bonuses). It doesn’t break the game as much but makes an unit unnecessarily powerful in the situations where it’s already good without fixing any of their problems.
I doubt you will find the perfect change that makes the unit suddenly viable without making Slavs noticeably stronger. So if anything the Boyars change must be followed by a Slavs nerf to compensate for the new option. So, close your “Slavs buff” topic and rename it “Boyar buff + Slavs nerf” and please do the same for other civs because it is unfair to focus on 1 good civ when there are plenty of bad civs with bad UUs.
Do we want Boyars to be seen in high level play ? Will the game genuinely be more interesting, or are we just adding variety just for the sake of adding variety ? Variety by itself doesn’t necessarily imply the game becomes more interesting.
You’re just playing with words without going anywhere. Why are we now talking 10+ messages about the Siege meta when it’s obvious we disagree. I fail to see where you are going with this discussion, and how it counters my argument about the Boyar buff:
Proof being this top 4v4 game where Teutons play with just Paladins which is just entirely not possible with Slavs. If you want to argue then argue with this statement.
Slavs boyar is quality vs quantity. reducing their quality by making them near obsolete vs the teuton war machine reduces want to play of the slavs vs playing the teutons instead - they may be different, but the civs are vastly similar, and now the teutons have both quality and quantity in terms of production speed vs the slavs castle only unit.
The slaves civ is one of the best civs in the game, and you are saying they need a buff??!!! No ofcourse not, they don’t need anything or maybe decreasing the Boyar cost this will be enough
This is your suggestion, it is in your OP. Are you telling me you would paste whatever people suggest and not decline responsability for it ?
This is as ridiculous (if combined both bonuses). It doesn’t break the game as much but makes an unit unnecessarily powerful in the situations where it’s already good without fixing any of their problems.
I doubt you will find the perfect change that makes the unit suddenly viable without making Slavs noticeably stronger. So if anything the Boyars change must be followed by a Slavs nerf to compensate for the new option. So, close your “Slavs buff” topic and rename it “Boyar buff + Slavs nerf” and please do the same for other civs because it is unfair to focus on 1 good civ when there are plenty of bad civs with bad UUs.
Do we want Boyars to be seen in high level play ? Will the game genuinely be more interesting, or are we just adding variety just for the sake of adding variety ? Variety by itself doesn’t necessarily imply the game becomes more interesting."
“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”
1 - It is clearly underneath the ‘anymore suggestions?’ section.
2 - Both alone would be a good bonus, Melee armor is preferable, an HP buff would probably be easier to adjust be it +10/20/30, etc - tho I prefer the melee armor because it shows quality.
3 - +1 melee armor, and that alone would make the slavs perfect in my mind.
If we’re talking about something that could be adjusted? I’d be for changing their monk tech into something a little more beneficial but still for the monks -
for instance:
conversion time decreased by 33%/50%/ + increased conversion range by 3
monks heal 25%/ faster per relic garrisoned up to 4 relics, (may effect only slav monks or for the entire team depending on how it may be used whether it’s a team bonus, unique tech or a civ bonus)
or another one that’s monk related but focuses on the boyar
thus indirectly buffing monks further by increasing the effectiveness of their heals:
Boyar gains +1 melee armor per relic garrisoned up to 4 relics
So you mean you use Teuton CAs, that are the worst in the game (Celts are better cuz husbandry means they can at least raid)
nothing says “quality” more than cheap cost, and low stats outside PA and speed.
Just Aztec/Mayan economy sparks controversy in the community, I don’t think non-pro people would refrain from riotting if devs gave a 20%farm boost to Slavs 11
At any level rams are good tbh. Players either underestimate them and only send 2 vills to kill them or they overreact and try to send their whole army to kill them. Either way siege rams > capped rams by a lot. Also they are quite convenient to use and they don’t need SE to be good.
??? If anything more HP = more quality, as it protects both from melee and ranged attacks.
Spanish rip-off
15 range monks. Can convert absolutely everything while remaining safe. Only way I would see this bonus having any kind of interest would be on a civ without block printing but they get additional range in castle age (but certainly not +3, and I’m not sure less would be balanced)
Why do I feel like it would be followed by a “Lithuanian October nerf suggestion” thread?
On a personal level, I use cavalry archers behind my palladins to help pick off halberdiers in emergencies, a small number at that, and generally because they’re what keeps up with them.
Huskarls tend to have high quality in just that, and I am content with choosing fights for them that benefit them and thus benefit me cause dealing with ranged units be a pain while I’ll take on the huskarl’s weaknesses with my own units.
Regarding Boyar
Melee armor shows more quality to me since it improves how much each second of on-hand heals is worth and if you can heal while in combat, perfect - I figure their pierce armor is high enough and the current number of HP looks good from a visual standpoint, it screams, I might look low, but take a gander at my defense, these badbois be rockin my hp to be worth hi hi numbas
Regarding conversion range, the goal is that the monks will convert the longest ranged siege onagers when timed properly before they can get a shot in as a consistent counter
If you look at his profile pic - you can get a sense of what he is referring to. I don’t know what elo that is or whether it is against just AI, but any aoe damage and that army is going to get slaughtered. Also the amount of gold that army would require with upgrades is staggering. I also have no idea why anyone uses cav archers as Teutons - no bracer, no parthian tactics, no thumb ring, no heavy CA.
He should be trying to win the best screenshot challenge - not actual games
You’re absolutely right that ranged units are the general counter to it when it’s alone,
Especially onager shots - which is why you bring other unit formations into the equation and know when to retreat. Lets say you fight huns and they go full palladin, the healing fortress will never break. That being said, conversion from a distance, a well placed teutonic knight, palladin, bombard cannon shot etc, and said onager is gone anyways. Regarding for when against other types of ranged units, like cavalry archers for example, onager shots, castle+tower fire, playing defensive until the general threat is gone to push again, using the skirmisher line, or a mixture of all of those things and sometimes other unit formations, and you’re golden. Being allied to goths and them using their huskarl to counter that weakness goes a long way btw
As for adding in cavalry archers or not, they’re more of a recent addition that I’ll continue to test, but the general idea is for them to reduce the amount of time the palladins might have to break through a small blockade of pikes to get to whatever is behind them, reducing damage/losses as much as possible. Elsewise playing ring around the fortress does wonders for reducing pikes to 0
Also, if I can create this army fairly often on arabia while under pressure, you can do it pretty much anywhere, and I play pvp, thank you.
After it’s created, the entire army may be ran by 5 farmers with a strong backlog of wood, and 2+ relics, guarded by a castle in one of the corners of the map for maximum defense, housing is a bit nomadic, but you can figure that out.
When played properly, your k/d ratio should be 10-1, with most of the 1 being villagers
Without practice properly using it, yes.
Each mistake you make has the possibility of being deadly, so it takes skill and focus to use properly. Expect your opponent to be skilled and do not underestimate them. Move your units accordingly as a commander should.
If your men die, it’s your own fault for letting the opponent get the better of you.
No dude, it’s just a bad army comp. No amount of pratice will make that work against a competent opponent.
It costs too much gold, at a devent level no one will allow you to make it and even if you get it you’ll just get raided to death
In enough numbers? Jags, samurai, maybe shotels if memory serves - without counting cataphracts and leitis among other types that give the teuts a hard time.
In any case, the use of the smaller formation of 20 teutonic knights and 20 hand canoneers is generally as an outside formation to be used alongside the healing fortress. The hand canoneers give the extra firepower needed as a whole to counter most physical units and to make the load easier on the teutonic knights in general. as a short summary.
I’ve read everything and i’m not lacking imagination. I simply know the game enough to tell you that if your opponent is decent (meaning 1k2/1k3 1v1) he will eat you alive. That army comp makes no sense whatsoever, and it certainly is not my lack of immagination the problem here