[Suggestion Balance] Reduce range of towers in feudal to 7, Castle age it gets to 8 again

To balance out, creation of rams in FEUDAL age increased by 10 secs. The reason is simple, the tower rush is too strong.

1 Like

the tower rush is so strong only two civs in the game actually even consider using it on anything close to a regular basis.

its easily countered by a little bit of scouting, and even with the reduced health, it doesn’t stay up long if it does go up.


Tower rushes already got nerfed hard, but reducing tower range would be the absolute worst. It’s because they would be even less effective at punishing defensive plays, as it would be easier to keep your villager out of range.


Do you perhaps have a reason or some thing to back up that rather suspect statement?

Unlike perhaps saying “Knight line is too strong because its too meta”?


Not really? Seen multiple videos where opponents would go m@arms and towerrush. The two civs are the one you expect from.

what? why would you punish one type of gameplay? There are bonus for those type of plays (more hp on walls, buildings, building fast etc)

It is because it is an unexpected event that no matter how many scouting you have done, it is not possibile to predict (because again you have one scout and building near your base doesn’t garant you vision) and can take off you from multiple resources depending on the map generated.

Call that a counter if you’d like, but when the opponent is fully walled and goes for a greedy play, towers are a good way to deal with that.

Oh I’m dumb, when the enemy has half his eco on stone it’s to build sand castles of course.


Towers are already nerfed hard with DE. I dont see much Towers rushes any more. There is a good reason. It is all the nerfs. If they need a change it would be a buff althrough they seems to be in a decent spot.


multiple videos. in how long? and how often do you actually see it succeed, and what is the actual use rate of the build?
please provide sources that back up your statement that tower rushes are op

:man_cartwheeling: :woman_cartwheeling: :hindu_temple:
:man_playing_handball: :woman_playing_handball:
:hindu_temple: :golfing_man: :golfing_woman:
:church: :synagogue: :hindu_temple:
Towers everywhere, villagers are dying XD

1 Like

I dont personally feel like tower rushing is too strong. It’s a viable strategy for sure, but it’s also quite beatable at this point. I like doing the occasional tower/M@A push, and it works situationally, but it’s not a guaranteed win by a long shot. If you go towers you’re essentially committing to extended feudal age while putting your eco behind, so you have to kill vils/deny resources to break even, let alone get a lead.

Where as more typical rushes like scouts or archers you can count as a success just by harassing the opponent while still working towards castle age.

Not to mention that a Daut starting tower is essentially gg.

I didn’t say remove tower entirely?

You don’t need half of eco on stone and… sure you have explored his base but like i always tell, you have 1 scout. Or you camp him in his stone mining area or you explore more to see if he is creating units, where are they, or you use the scout in a rush, or you use him in scouting the whole map etc… According to you every one of this is possible which isn’t true given that people do forward castle drop, forward military buildings, tower rush, archer rush etc… all the time.

1 Like

Your half eco is on stone /fwd 11111

Maybe just get better and stop crying about everything: Persians too op, Towers too op, Britons too op…


It’s like 6 villagers or something. Besides tower rush or UU rush you have 0 reason to have this many villagers on stone for an offensive strat.

No, you don’t need to “camp” a place to scout it. You just need to be aware and look whether there are villagers on stone (takes 1 second) to know what the enemy is up to.

If you had enough time to make a scout rush you shouldn’t have any problem with a tower rush.

You don’t need to have the whole map explored that early. You’re supposed to find your ressources then try and find the enemy base ASAP.

Scouting the enemy’s strat doesn’t mean they won’t execute it. It just means you can prepare to counter it.

Do we really have to discuss below this troll post? Like seriously, People who suggest tower nerfs never played this game, on Voobly they were fine as well, dunno why they had to gut them so hard with -300! HP, 900 HP or 1000 HP would have been alright too, but completly banning them from the game basically was just plain stupid. IF anything they need a buff

1 Like

Most likely because your enemy can’t execute a tower rush.

You can’t with 1 scout know all the info you claim that you will know. Yes, those are the things scouting tells you but only in theory. That is it. And this only if you use scout for 100% scouting and nothing else.

Lets give you an example. Enemy does militia-m@a tower rush. You see his barracks and you assume he is going militia. you are going to need your scout home to defend so it is not useful for you to stay on your opponent base to scout what else he is doing as you will be lacking defense.

I am saying those things wouldn’t be possible because all will be denied given we assume same level people but that is not the case.

The scout is faster than militias. You just need to see the flag on the barracks (takes an instant) to know he is going drush/m@a and you only need to see whether there are villagers around his stone. Then again, only takes an instant. It’s far from needing to see everything or 100% scouting or whatever.

1 Like

I am just giving you an example of how those strats are unpredictable.

Usually it is all a game of assumption on what you scouted but whatever, you don’t assume and only when you see towers, you guess it was a tower rush?

Yes, archery ranges in dark age.

Lets assume he is going them in feudal. See how you have to stay around for a while to check if he is going drush or not? How can you say that you can stay with scouts in multiple places at once?

You don’t immediately go 6 on stone, stop saying nonesense. And in the mean time, i need to find his stone, and stay there to check if vills are coming while he attacks me with militia.

a terrible example. You gave up scouting after seeing a barracks. Which means any number of strategies. That’s a terrible way to scout. Should we balance arounf the lowest skill level?

Sepends on the tower rush time and scouting information.

If their only in dark age and are already committed to a m@a into towers rheir economy is so behind its absurd.

You act like he’s got some massive base to scout instead of an area a aingle scout can cover in less then 20 seconds.

Stop dodging. If you think strategies are so strong provude the stats that back up your claims. Other wise it comes down to this is my opinion and frankly most People seem to disagree with you

1 Like

Ok so I totally disagree with nerfing towers, as I said above, but actually these aren’t cheezy strats. Going 21 pop to feudal, training militia while you go up, putting 4 on gold, then moving them to stone once you have 40 gold for the M@A upgrade. Then sending 4 vils and 3 militia forward at about 70% to meet up with your scout in the position chosen is very strong. You’ll arrive in their base with a tower as soon as you hit feudal and a few seconds later your militia are M@A. Now you can tower and harass any recourse as you boom behind.

Not saying its an OP strat, it shouldn’t be nerfed, but it’s super fun. Especially if they were trying to wall FC as Mayans or something.

1 Like

War Elephants are so OP, that people argue they cannot be buffed. Some even to the point of hurling expletives at anyone suggesting otherwise.

As far as this topic is concerned, I have a much more fun idea, Increase watch tower range by 1, considering how badly tower rushes have been nerfed, over and over and over again.

Just because T90 and some lower level players don’t like tower rushes, doesn’t mean this entertaining and daring strategy has to always be nerfed.