No they can’t cause towers are useless against buildings, and even if they had 10 towers up (lets assume for arguments sake, that they are situated right next to each other, so you are able to build your own castle to counter them all without the villagers getting killed) and you build a castle inside their range and so that you can obviously shoot back, the castle just mops the floor with them, since it is dealing 64 damage to a tower (assuming the korean also has masonry) while they deal 10 combined to the castle. It is dealing over 6 times their output and their output goes down every time a tower is lost. The thing is, you can counter korean towers with a castle (or rams), but you couldn’t kill the teuton castle, without overcommitting.
Like the Teuton player has overcommitted? The Korean player can do this with less than 500 stone, the teuton player is looking at a minimum of 1050. That’s a lot of units. How do you expect them to even get the castle up when their enemy has something like ten more knights than them?
After all, the Korean player doesn’t have to kill the castle. They can just put towers everywhere and kill all their enemy’s units at zero risk. And even with lower damage, anything compared to zero is still infinite.
Well first of all, you don’t need to have the 1050 when you start making the castle, you can gather that during it’s buildup and after. The point is that when you have that castle, it’s just a matter of time when you will get the crenellations. There’s probably very little point doing such a move right now as teutons, but they have a good eco and when you have that castle up there, how are you going to take it out? If you don’t have stone for crenellations yet, pump out tks to defend. Right now since crenellations is in imp, no point doing that cause trebs are out before crenellations no matter what and such a castle would accomplish very little as teutons. But if crenellations was in castle age you could make the castle and defend it and get crenellations when the best you can and it’s effect would then be tremendous.
The only difference versus a traditional castle drop is the fact that the Teuton castle can kill the other civ’s castle. They’re both equally ‘unstoppable’ in that regard. The classic defense against castle drops has always been to block them before they happen, and it’s always been a perfectly acceptable way to do it. Indeed, a double castle drop would do everything this does, but better, with more coverage of their economy, more damage, and more health.
And sure, you can just keep collecting stone, but while you’re doing that, your opponent is collecting gold or wood or food and using it to raid your defenseless economy, or to seize map control, or any of a dozen different things.
And lastly, building TKs to stop rams is always a last-ditch defense. They immediately stop being useful afterwards, so you may as well have tossed 90 resources down a hole.
This scenario I was talking about was totally about an arena setting anyway. The thing with double castle is still that you might have to fight the enemy castle, now you wouldn’t necessarily have to take damage at all.
This was to support their damage capability over the enemy base at the same time. Anyways I’m off to bed, let us engage more tomor-… er, today.
Actually, I just thought of a simple counter the enemy could pull off; just build a castle three tiles closer. They’ll end up spending less stone than you, they’ll be able to dump all their villagers into it to win the ensuing castle war, and the building villagers will be out of range of the crenelations castle. And to top it off, they’d end up spending less stone to stop you than you spent to start the engagement.
–
Anyways, good discussion, talk to you tomorrow.
That’s not really true, otherwise celts would be hands down the best civ in the game. Siege is extremely expensive, both to produce and upgrade. Moreover it is slow and extremely vulnerable alone. I’m just proposing a discount to the upgrades to ease the transition for teutons into a mixed army composition of siege + infantry in imp. It also justifies a larger investement in castle age siege. Again, it doesn’t necessarily have to be 33% upgrade discount, the precise number can be more or less (hard to say without testing), but I think this would move Teutons in the right direction, making them also a more fun civ to play.
Regarding the whole discussion about moving Crenellation to Castle age, if it’s going to be niche, why bother? Ironclad in Castle has some upsides (ie.your siege isn’t going to get sniped by mere scouts/villies) but without being OP (since it doesn’t help vs enemy siege and archer micro). So it’s fine where it is imo.
I don’t know why you think this is an unbelievable strat? Its an improved version of castle drop, a very common strategy. Especially on Arena where players don’t have a lot of military at this stage.
Like people didn’t abuse the he.l.l out of one simple change in the Goth bonus, like Cuman second TC wasn’t an automatic advantage
Also forgive the small “ad-hominem” but its more practical than TKs building towers and pushing