Teutons siege ram?

Not saying teutons need another buff. Just wondering why they didn’t get siege ram in place of say making the TK redundant by giving their champs 2MA, or giving them a vastly better version of the boyar.

The siege ram literally shares their UTs namesake (ironclad) Like the oddity of Germans in AOE3 getting Spanish riding school, but the Spanish themselves not benefiting from the same effect.

1 Like

Siege Rams with Ironclad would just be too strong.

1 Like

I guess siege ram with iron clad would be too strong since it’d be a unit that isn’t only immune to arrow fire but also very durable against melee attacks. Probably not the greatest one from a balance perspective.

1 Like

Teutons lack siege rams because siege rams can garrison with 6 Teutonic knight inside while increasing the overall speed. Rams can defend Teutonic Knight well against archer fire while moving faster than usual Teutonic knight. (base speed: 0.6+0.05*6=0.9)

Plus Ironclad, Teutons rams are less vulnerable to melee units. I think this may be the reason for Teutons not having siege rams. Siege Ram+Teutonic Knight may overwhelm most melee and ranged units.

Besides, Teutons has already received several buff since DE. They are strong enough and Teutons don’t need a buff currently.

1 Like

I guess they weren’t ready to make a civ with full siege tree back then

1 Like

Really man. Literally my very first sentence and you couldn’t even read it.

1 Like

I think this is more the issue.

Not that hugely more than iron clad capped rams.

Remember this was at the same time they didn’t have 2MA rax, or stables and the TK was slower.

Even now teutons weakness is ranged weapons. Instead of making them even better at melee fighting (which they have the tk, full rax, FU paladin for anyway), they could have given them an even better option for fighting archer/defensive civs.

I think it isn’t down to being OP at all. Celt siege rams say hi…

I think it’s down to the usual laziness of the balance team, or the pros who have an input not wanting to affect their meta. Why s tier civs aren’t nerfed and why bottom rung stuff takes so long to get a buff.

Because if the game is balanced around archer knight meta, it becomes “so much harder” to now balance it around an anomaly like armoured rams filled with infantry.


I know its a dead end trying to convince you of anything at all. Nevermind celt siege rams…

But by your own admission you dislike paladins spread around. But you think it was better for teuts to go the lazy route and get the 2nd strongest paladins in the game. Instead of armoured siege rams?

Or is this another disagree for the sake of disagreein… :roll_eyes::roll_eyes:


Teutons are slow and armoured, it is their design, so the Paladins +2 MA is a good decision.
If they will have the slowest Paladins, then they should have the most resilient ones too.

Before the buff, Teutons were considered one of the worst civs in the game, because they were too slow and fast civs could just run laps around them, and attack everywhere.

No, after the buff, they still have the same weakness, but have a strength that compensates for it.
This is exactly how other AoK civs were also designed. Mongols have no Ring Archer Armour, but have the best Cav Archer UU; Britons have lower rate of fire and accuracy, but have the most Range out of all Archers; Franks have weak Trash, Siege and Archers, but have the best Knight line in the game… and so on.

All the Teutons buff did, was bring them in line with a lot of other civs in the game.


I honestly don’t like how the devs buffed teutons…now it’s just too much of the same. Melee armor everywhere. Teutons had already TKs to fill that (niche) role, which now are basically obsolete, since either paladins or champions can do the same job while being either more flexible or cheaper.

Teutons needed help with dealing with fast mobile ranged units in a more effective way. Imo, instead of unneeded MA, this could have been achieved in two ways:

  • +1 PA to cavalry as a bonus. Yes, I know that FU paladins would reach 8 PA like this, and that’s a lot on a 180 HP unit. However paladins would remain very expensive and easily counterable by halbs or camels. Moreover, without husbandry, they cannot catch units like cav archers. They would just become tanks for arrow fire and you would still need siege or some other thing to kill enemy CAs.

  • Alternatively, and this would have been my preferred option, a buff to their siege. Teutons have very good siege, but that’s very, very expensive to both upgrade and produce. Imo giving them a discount on the upgrade techs (even just for the mangonel line) would have been much more helpful. That way teutons preserve their identity as a slow moving but with high firepower civ, however they would have an easier time reaching that point, as siege onagers are extremely expensive. Remember also that teuton trash is really bad due to the lack of bracer, light cav upgrade and husbandry.


How does that compute then?

I don’t get how now its ok for paladins to be used as the balancing tool? :thinking: But for other civs its not. If anything filling siege rams with armoured infantry fits “slow and armoured” a Heck of a load more than paladins. It takes the slow out of slow and armoured. They’re still cavalry after all. You wanna see slow look at infantry civs or pike siege balls.

1 Like

Because Siege Rams with Ironclad, would likely be much harder to fight than Paladins with +2 MA. Paladins still take a bunch of bonus damage from a wide variety of units, while Rams with a lot of MA could guarantee that every attack would demolish a TC or a production building, and that would give Imp Age Teutons an unbeatable strat.

Too many civs have Paladins while not needing them. Teutons do need them.


Because their halbs + capped rams is already deadly thanks to the extra melee armor, giving them siege rams too would make that push literally unstoppable

Small edit: i’m talking about the halbs melee armor btw


I think he was saying they should have given Teutons Siege Ram instead of the +2 melee armor buff. So your concern isn’t really applicable here


All civs should have weaknesses that can be exploited. The melee armor made them more versatile at fighting in melee without having to rely on the situation TKs. Before their barracks and Stable units were generic, fully upgraded but now they can fight toe to toe with the best melee civs like they should. They have trouble with cavalry archer and some archer civs but you can still use onagers and the elite skirms. Yea they lack bracer but they’re not completely useless either

They have some of the best halberds now which and their halberd / SO push is scary as hell. They’re toughest matchups are the cav archer civs but it’s still possible to win there


I actually like the MA buff - they trade the speed for being super tough in melee. In terms of making the TKs redundant - they could probably use a food cost reduction


Let’s be honest, the halb melee armor didn’t have slightest effect here, Teutons have been playing halb SO for years to counter mobility. Halb ram is where the halb’s melee armor or other stats matter more

That’s fair that it has more of an impact on halb / ram though it does make them the toughest halb / onager push in terms of rushing them with melee given they have the melee armor + ironclad. There’s really no way outside of maybe Magyar Huszar that you can use cav against that push

1 Like

Well, there is quite a large difference between capped and siege ram (hp, atk vs buildings, blast radius, movement speed). Although among these only hp affects their durability, capped rams need more time to take buildings down so the trade for Teutons is more melee durability vs less damage output. Siege ram is a very powerful late game unit which are really hard to take down with trash (especially when you fight against halbs with more melee armor).

I don’t think you should compare anyone’s siege to celts’. I mean they kind of are the only civ in the game that has both bad archers and bad cav in imp so the remaining options (infantry and siege) need to be very strong. Teutons are more flexible and contrary to Celts also have bbc.

It’s a fair point to put it into relation with their state before the buff but tbh I very much prefer the approach taken instead of giving them siege ram. Teutons are probably the best arena civ (btw apart from Britons, they usually kill any archer civs, here) but have always struggled a bit on arabia. So they gave them better knights which is a nice buff to their mid game.

Rams filled with infantry are only very situational. Ram+halb can be very strong in imp but you just can’t design a civ around that for castle age play. It would just be another Turks. To make that composition viable in castle age would mean to make it op in imp. And just giving them siege ram wouldn’t have solved the issue. This way Teutons would have stayed awkward where they are weak and buffed them where they are already strong.

How are Teutons a bottom-tier civ? Best civ on arena and also great on other closed maps that tend to go late. Also in very open maps like land madness and acropolis they perform very good because of their ridiculously cheap farms.

1 Like

Some good points. Except i dont see how giving them better rams ie better options vs ranged and defensive civs, is making them stronger where they are strong, and leaving them weak COMPARED to giving everything better melee armour when they already have FU rax, FU paladin, the single best melee UU in the game.

sorry i should’ve been more clear i didnt mean teutons are bottom rung (leave that to Italy or some such)

1 Like