Suggestion to Balance about TR and springalds

With the recent patches, the TR has been more popular and Age of springalds has been back.

In short, my suggestion is :

  1. Springald no longer has bonus damage against springalds. Bonus to other siege remains
  2. Tower nerf:
  • HP changed from 1000HP in each age to 600/800/1000/1200
  • Worker has +10 additional torch damage against buildings.
  • Barbican & Kremlin no longer able to build near 20 tiles of enemy starting TC.


  1. The current meta is that whoever loses the springald war, loses the siege war. With this change, the player with better organic units only needs to build 3 springalds to snipe the enemy mangonel to avoid dull siege war. While the functionality of springald still remains.
  2. Tower is too hard to be burnt down by units in Age I & II, while easily taken down by rams. Thus nerfing a bit HP will only slightly impact the defender.
  3. Use workers to burn down towers is a costing move only viable for defender. Considering the risk of losing precious worker and idle time, it should be buffed to counter the low-unit multiple -towers TR abusers.
  4. Barbican, with its 5k HP, is unable to be burnt down by workers. Therefore, ban it from building near enemy TC like Mongols base rush is reasonable.
  5. I am a Diamond 2 - 3 player with China and Abbasid main. At the moment, Chinese has no hope of winning HRE except TR. Hope developers find a way to balance it.
1 Like

you get 6 springalds which still one shot one springald.
how opponent should comeback?

with that said → one place springald before mangonels, and with 6-7 springalds snipe any opponent’s springalds

What about increase torch damage of infantry and cav Vs sieges?

I think you’re right to suggest changes to the springald.

Siege is the one unit class in the game that is best countered by an example of the class
Springalds are the one unit in the game that is best countered by itself

This inevitably creates really awkward balance in my opinion. We had a brief respite when siege was weaker than it is now, but as siege has started to become more powerful again the arms race to have more springalds than your opponent is returning too. Making the springald bad against itself is definitely an interesting idea. It’s a buff to the springald, but a nerf to the other siege units. I suppose the danger is that no-one builds siege any more because it will be so hard to kill the springalds that are killing your siege.

Honestly I think the biggest question for me is: why do we need springalds at all? What do they add to the sandbox that wouldn’t be achieved better by infantry and cavalry that were better against siege?

IMO the best thing would be to start again with the springalds, and go back to the original design (where it was high damage to a single unit) rather than an extreme anti-siege counter unit. Clearly springalds were overpowered initially, but we’d be in a better place now if Relic had opted to reduce their damage rather than altering their role. I don’t think this is ever going to feel okay until cavalry becomes the primary counter to siege to be honest.

Sniping siege units with other siege units isn’t enjoyable to do, or to watch.


Damange to buildings under construction should be 200% or 300%. So that if any civ pulls all its villagers to burn-down bbq it should go down. They should have army backing to prevent villagers from burning down or the civ was not able to scout it. Canceling bbq will delay ageup timing so they will get punished. This will also prevent keep drops by china or any other civ.


I do not reject increasing the damage.

But as I have rushed numerous times against HRE, you should know that Barbican with 10 workers will be built within 20 seconds. In no way you can burn it down even with that change. China has many ways to do it. I can build a tower first to shelter my workers and prevent you from burning.

The reason why Chinese mains have to tower rush is that they have little choice. Chinese is totally dominated by HRE if both choose to boom. We have no good unit to harass, we have worse economy, we have nothing except tower against HRE MAA. If lost is inevitable, why not build tower in HRE base then?

HRE is now beyond ridiculous in booming while still mediocre against early civs like French & Mongols.


The mechanics in the game do not make sense. A ball of archers just runs and shoots (kites) spearmen and horses. There should be locked in hand to hand combat time set if two units are that close. Imagine you walk up to an archer he shoots runs and shoots gain. Wouldn’t you hold on to the fucker the next time so he can’t run?

I respect your understanding of the matchup of China vs HRE . But i reject all your suggested changes!!! IMO more gameplay needs to be done in Dark Age which is exactly how HRE can optimally defend against a china tower/bbq rush.

If you either cut a later villager in order to train a 3rd scout to place at the edge of the CHINESE main or use one of your first 2 scouts to do the same. 10+ villager pull to put down bbq should never surprise you. Now 2-4 vilagers pull to place a tower may catch you off guard, but IMO you know China success is predicated on disturbing your early eco advantages? So why not use that advantage to get up an early tower on vulnerable locations? Or small wall segments on ideal bbq drop locations?

IMO secure your gold!!! Bc likely you’ll have 2 starting woodlines that are often separated so its unlikely a bbq/towers will force you off both simultaneously. But getting pushed off gold REALLY sets HRE back.

i can tell you that even with 3 scouts you will be unable to stop 10 worker BBQ. It is not a joke, it is fact.
In Diamond II, I have played it for multiple times and it worked. In Map like Hill and Dale, China BBQ + tower could entirely shutdown your gold and woodline. Towers are extremely cheap and tanky. I highly doubt if you have ever faced this strat.

China Having 100 wood + 10 workers, HRE should pull its own worker to attack. But China could build a tower first, which means HRE either lose numerous workers to burn the tower, or withdraw.

Interestingly, the most viable HRE strategy to counter Chinese, is making spearman and tower rush China in Age I. China is very vulnerable to TR as well due to 150 starting wood.

I really like the AOE3 setting that the cavalry is good at destroying siege units, and I hope it can be set like this in AOE4; using Springald to destroy Springald is stupid, this setting will only make the war of siege units the same as it is now Naval battles are just as boring and tedious.

As for the TR, I haven’t thought of such a good idea at the moment, maybe making buildings too close to the enemy TC more expensive? Or take longer to build and be more vulnerable to destruction during construction? In any case, these settings are better than outright banning players from building buildings next to enemy TCs.

1 Like

So you explaining to us lowly players that IFF you spot 10 villagers leaving the chinese base with one of your scouts its gg out?? :thinking:

And that preemptively using key unfinished wall segments or preemptive towers and or barracks with 1 or 2 spears and ready to spam more CANNOT stop or slow down a BBQ/TR??

I don’t believe you diamond ll guy.

You can search Athanatoi in aoeworld and you will know my rank :slight_smile:
It is not a gg called, but HRE cannot stop the Barbican being built. Surely HRE can build Horseman, counter-harass and transfer workers, but Chinese can use towers to continue blocking your woodline and completely nullify Aachen Chapel. Thus buy time for Double TC Song and turn the game into a 50-50 battle.

In Hill and Dale where there is only one safe woodline in base, it is a disaster if that woodline is blocked. It is the only viable strategy for China.

Interestingly the best HRE strategy to counter is to build spearman in Age I and Tower Rush China, followed by fast castle. It has been increasingly popular now.

Yeah you are right. Banning is the least favorable option, but i am not sure how could we balance if the building is one of the landmark. I don’t think we have many alternatives at the moment.

The key point is that towers are too cheap and tanky. Emplacement upgrades should not increase attack range of the tower.

Thats how it used to work till some point in development, i’d say aoe2 only tryhard council members are to blame here

This won’t be a good idea. That wil make building castle extemely dangerous, since the trebuchet will one shot the castle in building, and you lost 850 stones.

Anytime I have been bbq rushed I have won. Also every time I play against Chinese spearmen come out ASAP

they need to just get rid of siege all together just keep rams and towers. siege is just to annoying in the game to deal with. or limit 1 siege at a time that’s it i am tired of siege is the biggest problem ruining this game why i don’t play a lot.

1 Like


Ok lets toggle this bit. If siege players is able to force you to choke point then siege can feel dominating force but fact is once map is open siege is complete ■■■■. Top of that siege is so slow that you can just out maneuver them too easily and go around them.

??? Why do you care if someone is tower rushing you? Each tower costs 100 wood and they can tower you so slowly that you can either relocate your villagers to safe spot and leave the tower rushing player to do their thing.

TR in AOE4 is ■■■■ and works only against bad players, unless civ has some specific bonuses to benefit early game TR like mongol resource bonuses but fact is because AOE4 has so many resource locations and its easy to relocate villagers to different resources its ■■■■ tactic especially for lower elo players who commit too hard on TR and putting them behind.

Barbican rush is joke. Only thing its good is to give vision. Glorified tower and does nothing.

I see lot of players who over react to tower rushes and which leads them unfavorable economic position.

I had english doing 4 villager TR from the start of game and I just laughed my ■■■ off and let him build towers around my base and only reacted with small wall between my woodline and went to fast castle and killed them. So whats the point of TR when its pure ■■■■

rank/elo please? so we have an idea what level is presenting this advice/opinion.

Playing solely 2v2 and elo is around 1500-1600. If you dont want to listen my opinion then maybe check certain beastyqt’s opinion on bbq/TR rush from youtube, its essentially exactly what I said