Soft Barracks Rework

Hello, I want to share with you a couple of changes and addition to barracks.
I tried to get the goal of making infantry a more viable and common option, specially for the infantry civs without make big changes to existing ones.

I understand that many people here think barracks’ units are in a good spot. I don’t want to turn this topic in a discussion about it. Feel free to avoid the topic and let those who share my concern theroycraft about it.

Please take in count that all proposed changes work togheter and most “numbers” aren’t overthinking, so are tentative. Focus specially on the concepts.

  1. Change “eagle armor class” to “light armor class” and apply it to Spearman-line, Skirm-line and Scout-line in addition to eagle-line (potencially to other units like genitour too)

  2. Move Supplies to imperial age and give it a new effect: Infantry occupies -15% pop space.

  3. Add two new trash infantry units:
    3.1) Light Infantry Line: Cheap and fast infantry. Resistent to arrows. Strong vs siege and soft counter archers. Weak vs everything Else.
    Stats (Feudal / Castle / Imp):
    HP: 40 / 45 / 50
    Attack: 4 / 5 / 5 (+0 / +6 / +10 vs siege)
    MA: 0 / 0
    PA: 1 / 2 / 3
    Armor Classes: Infantry; Light armor
    Speed: 1.1 / 1.2 / 1.2
    Cost: 35F 20 W
    TT: 18 sec
    3.2) Shieldman Line: Slow and tanky infantry. Good armor, but weak attack. Strong vs Infantry. Weak vs everything else
    Stats:
    HP: 45 / 55 / 60
    Attack: 2 / 3 / 4 (+6 / +10 / +15 vs infantry)
    MA: 3 / 4 / 4
    PA: 1 / 2 / 2
    Armor Classes: Infantry
    Speed: 0.8
    Cost: 50F 25 W
    TT: 22 sec

  4. New stats for Militia-Line, from MAA onward (Militia remains the same):
    HP: 55 / 60 / 65 / 70
    Attack: 8 / 11 / 12 / 13 (Same bonuses as nowdays)
    MA: 1 / 2 / 2 / 3
    PA: 1 / 2 / 2 / 2
    Armor Classes: Infantry
    Speed: 0,96
    Cost: 60F 35 G
    TT: 25 sec

Note: The MAA upgrade cost could be changed to only 100F to offset the gold cost rising of each militia in order to not change too much the drush meta.

With all these changes my goals are the following:
-Make Militia line a viable option from Castle age, rising a little their cost but buffing its stats (more attack, melee armor, and speed).
It keeps their anti-trash role, except for their counter unit: the shieldman, the only trash unit without the light armor class.
-Have more options to create army combos and make those combos more powerfull that only mass one unit:
The shieldman line could work well with other gold units like archer-line specially as meat shield. With knights to deal with LS+Pikes combo.
The light infantry could work as a riding unit option (inferior than Light cav but more appealing for infantry civs. Could work well with knights to deal with pikes (less effective than shieldman but synnergices better with cavalry mobility), with archers to deal with skirms or siege or with longswordsman to deal with siege or even archers using their mobility to flank and good PA to soak arrows.

That’s all for now. Hope any found these ideas interesting. Thougts?

2 Likes

Only option 1 is a viable option. Option 4 is a total disaster as there will be no Drush or M@rush due to the cost increase. Option 2 is OP as it affects all infantry. Option 3 is too complicated.

3 Likes

Sorry, maybe I expressed my self wrong. They aren’t options. All changes work together

Can you fully explain what you see the issue with the barracks is and how this will address it? My understanding is that infantry falls short of crossbows and knights and they don’t play rock paper scissors well, range beats them, cav beats them, and they lack the mobility to raid effectively to make up for it.

To this weakness I would propose they get plus +3 to buildings which would force the opponent to deal with with them rather then kite them or ignore them.

I don’t see how your suggestions imdprove this problem, so I ask you explain your issue and how each point here actually address that issue.

I also don’t like the idea of more trash units. What you’re proposing is basically extending late game until the last tree is chopped as every situation can be handled with one trash unit or another

2 Likes

I agree that some improvements can be made to the Barracks to make infantry more viable, but I don’t think the Militia-line needs to be touched directly to do so.

The Militia-Line typically stops seeing use in mid/late Feudal Age, unlike other unit lines. Increasing the viability of MAA throughout Feudal Age would increase the chances of using Longswordsmen in Castle Age because you could continue massing them (similar to archers) in preparation for Castle Age. MAA see use in early Feudal Age because they can be massed in Dark Age (as Militia). Scouts, which are better at chasing villagers, and the MAA’s counter Archers take time to create leaving a window of time for MAA to shine. Once Scouts and Archers are available, their mobility and ability to kite units makes MAA less impactful. To keep them impactful throughout Feudal Age, their speed could be increased so that they are better able to compete with their Feudal Age counterparts. This can be done by moving the Squires technology from Castle Age to Feudal Age. That way, if someone wants to continue using infantry in the later stages of Feudal Age, they could invest in Squires. If they continually use/mass MAA throughout Feudal Age, investing into Longswordsman or other infantry upon reaching Castle Age is a more viable option.

For your proposed changes:
Change 1: In my opinion the Militia-line is ok as is against trash units.

Change 2: This might be fine as an Imperial Age unique tech for a civ, but would be too strong as a general change.

Change 3.1: This might be too strong as a trash unit. It sounds like a mix between Eagle Warriors and Karambit Warriors. If it were to be a unique or regional unit I’d expect it to cost food and gold.

Change 3.2: I like the concept of a shieldman line, but with a different role; primarily as a support unit for other infantry, and perhaps with some bonus damage versus siege. It would cost food and gold, and have a low attack. It’s primary stats/effect could be some combination of (not necessarily all 3):

  • Better Pierce Armor to protect it from projectiles
  • Larger projectile hitbox to protect units behind/adjacent to it, similar to rams/etc
  • Reduces damage to units behind it, similar to the Hussite Wagon

Change 4: Not needed; increasing the gold cost would decrease its usage.

Can’t tell a “soft” rework then.

2 Likes

So you propose a feudal unit that is nearly as strong as a scout, takes no bonus damage, and is resistant to archer fire? And you want this unit to be faster than archers, and at not even half the food cost a scout has?

Any proposal on how to KILL this gigachad unit you propose, once 4-5 archers are mixed in?

Edit: Overlooked that you want them to take bonus dmg from kts/militia line. Makes it a bit more balanced, but still problematic.

1 Like

Yeah I’m also not convinced by this.
It’s an infantry unit for every pupose there.
Meaning basically every civ with a decent Infnatry tech tree could make some kind of “Goth flood” with a mix of them.
That’s what I always tried to prevent with all my infantry concepts.

Imo there should only be a very limited amount of Infantry UUs that counter archers. It’s one of the main counter mechanics in the game: Archers counter Infantry. Not the other way around.

Not only you would allow basically all civs to have kind of Goth flood, but also for almost no Gold cost, as 3 of the 4 unist are trash units and the last one (which btw won’t even be the bulk of that army) has a gold ratio of like 30 %.
Even if you would tune down all these stats so it’s balanced in the midgame, the extremely low gold ratio would lead to the infantry completely outpacing everything else in the lategame.

When I designed my power Infantry unit concepts I already think a bit ahead and come to the conclusion that this will probably result in a new trash archery Unit being added that specifically counters Infantry. But If I look at this concept here, I doubt even this would be enougtnto stop this.
Especially because of the absurdly low Gold cost.

IMO the only Infantry that is missing is that one Power Infantry unit that can compete with Archers, Knights and Cav Archers. And ofc this should have also a decent Gold cost associated with it.
Even the Gold ratio of the current militia line is too low for it being ever an option for this role.

I can see this unit concepts (you need to find a proper class/name for them still) as each a UU added to new civs, probably new civs with no or bad cavalry. But I don’t think they should be added to the general Barracks roster.

I feel like option 1 is balanced with M@A’s +2 but by time you get to 2HS with +8 it gets ridiculous.

Here how I would do option 1 remove the Eagle from light armor class keep bonus damage as is but also add villager and monks
M@A +1 vs light armor, LS+2, Champions +3. I think bonus damage vs light armor should be part of the Militia line identity and should not be given to Every infantry units but there are other units I would like to receive it.
Slinger: -1 spearmen + 1 or 2 vs light armor.
Chakram: remove -1 (elite) vs infantry +1(elite) light armor.
Urumi Swordsmen: 7(9) +2 light armor.

Of course. I think the problem with barracks is the lacks of options. Except for Meso civs, that have Eagles (that actually fill the role of cavalry), you only have spearman-line, a dedicated counter unit that is only good vs the unit that counter and militia-line, the heavy infantry option that pretend to be a generalistic unit (all civs have at least THS, except Persian) but ends filling another counter unit role when, as I see it, it should be a go to unit with the proper counters, just like most “gold” units.
Another flaw in barracks is a mobility option. Of course, stables should have the best mobility, but there is no mid steps between slow generic infantry and stable units. Ending in infantry based civs are forced to play stables to ride, even if this goes against the whole civ concept and design.

Well, one of my suggestions is adding a proper trash counter for militia line (the shieldman). This able buffing militia line without the risk of being unstopable.
Other is add a faster trash infantry. A cheper, but weaker version of lightcav line that fill a similar role.
The 4 units have specific roles that not overlap.
Pikes hard counter cavalry.
Light Infantry riding and support vs siege and archers for Militia Line.
Shieldman counter infantry.
Militia Line is the all-round infantry unit that could match vs archers and kts and win in the correct scenario, making a viable “gold” option specially for infantry civs.

Well, I don’t see the problem here. Most games end in castle and early Imperial Age.

You have a good point here. With the cost rised and the shieldman added, MAA surely could be buffed enough to make it a good option beyond early feudal and promote their training.

Look it as a diferent version of light cav. Maybe my proposed stats are a little much, but surely wise balanced should make them usefull and not too strong.

I think that slow units with bonus vs siege are a kind of contradiction. Shieldman surely should fill a support role, but not maybe for infantry. For cavalry or ranged units vs other infantry.

Maybe you are right… It should be tested of course.

You have a good point, but as I said at the beggining, stats are tentative. Maybe I exagerate some stats. These could be better stats:
HP: 40 / 50
Attack: 4 / 5 (+0 / +6 vs siege)
MA: 0 / 0
PA: 1 / 2
Armor Classes: Infantry; Light armor
Speed: 1.1 / 1.2
Cost: 35F 20 W
TT: 18 sec

Which stats would you give them?

Well my proposed light infantry is not an archer hard counter. Is more a riding alternative. Easy to full upgrade and mass than light cav, but not so excels in that role how the latter one.

Militia Line is supposed to occupy that role. Its description says it. Being the only generic gold infantry unit says it. All except its stats says that militia line is the infantry counterpart of crossbow and knight.

I will refine some of the tentative stats taking in count some suggestions.
Thanks for your responses

I don’t care what the tooltip says.
I’m realist.
And the current app. 30 % Gold ratio is just too low for a Power Unit. Period.

I am all for adding a Power Infantry unit. But with the current cost associated with it, the militia line just can’t be that.

And especially not with the addition of a new trash Infantry units that covers the archer weakness.
This infantry comp could be spammed forever and once the opponent is out of gold there is literally no way to stop it.

They not cover militia line weakness vs archer (I understand that you refer to it). At least not as skirms can do.
Light infantry just can outrun archers better, but still die hard against them.
Shieldman can take more arrows maybe, but they are slow and very low dps.
Anyway, I’m not proposing all civs should have these two full upgraded trash units.

Amazing set of changes. Loved how you balanced well between cost, base attacks, bonuses and armor. The siege sniping and raiding light infantry line not costing gold or a ton of food is nice, I would increase wood cost to 35 though. Shieldman design is solid as well, I would keep the castle age version of it at 1 p.armor because of the militia line changes you propose.

As far as militia-line changes, I think maa buff is a bit too much with +2 attack and +1 melee armor. I’d rather do 7/10/12/14 attack, 0/1/2/2 melee armor, 1/2/2/3 pierce armor for maa onwards. Its also nice how you increased p.armor and adjusted the cost accordingly. As such this is good but this also means that the other infantry unique units need a similar buff.

Overall I like these changes. I’d suggest that there needs to be an upgrade that gives +1 attack for foot archers against infantry that’s available in castle age and costs something like 200f, 300g to enable defense against mid game infantry floods. This upgrade could be denied to the super strong new and legacy civs like Chinese, Mayans, Hindustanis, Poles, Franks etc.

1 Like