<div class="EmbeddedContent"><img src="https://msgpwebcdn.azureedge.net/aoe/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Howitzer-AoE-III.png" class="LeftAlign" /><strong>The Howitzer - Age of Empires</strong>
<p>Hey history fans! It’s time for us to discuss another unit in the AoE series. Last week, we wrote about the Hussar, and this time, we talk about the Howitzer, an upgrade to the Mortar in AoE III that we featured before. This upgrade offers a hit point and damage boost and, like the Mortar, … Continued</p>
<p><a href="https://www.ageofempires.com/news/the-howitzer/">Read the full story here</a></p>
<div class="ClearFix"></div>
</div>
1 Like
thanks for the info
I love it, but I always leave it for the end, to take the Walls down, firts I try to get rid of the regular units, and than I use the Howitzers, because its hitpoints are too short.
@MagnificSteak31 said:
I love it, but I always leave it for the end, to take the Walls down, firts I try to get rid of the regular units, and than I use the Howitzers, because its hitpoints are too short.
:lol: You can’t push into enemy base without taking walls quickly, that’s why Howitzer/Mortar is needed. I usually let them stay close to anti cavalry units because they are easy target for melee raiders. Most of MP matches are full of 5 layer walls players :lol:
Love the History Lesson, these cannons/mortars were deadly in WWI, especially when the Germans perfected the use of Mustard gas shells, and used these cannons to fire the deadly WMD over enemy lines.
Thanks for the information. My grandfather was hearing impaired from using mortars in Italy during WWII. I especially love ending a fight with Mortars taking down all enemy buildings with ease. I agree with KingDarBoja the anti cavalry unit are best for protecting your mortars!
Thanks for the information.
Since it’s a repost, I’ll just repost my comment from over a year ago from the thread about the mortar from the old forums – the only post in the discussion…
Interesting… The article states that it’s gained on mobility over the centuries, but in the game it feels like mortars are the slowest artillery units, in comparison with for example horse artillery or even falconet-type cannons.
In 1v1 I can’t recall actually using it since horse artillery, falconets and heavy cannons do much better in an open field due to their fine damage against infantry. Mortars, on the other hand, can’t attack nothing but buildings, and oftentimes you have enough siege potential among your infantry or even cavalry. Also, buildings other than walls don’t have that high HP, so producing mortars doesn’t really fit. Additionally, games seldom go into the IV age, where mortars become available.
In treaty games, though, I noticed they’re much more useful in sieging down enemy bases, which are always heavily walled and fortified. Their main advantage is their range and high attack against buildings. Cannons do well, but yeah, the range there is crucial, since culverins can’t reach them.
Certain civs have really nice bonuses on mortars, like Portuguese having 50 range on them, or Russians having access to cheaper mortars. Chinese and Japanese ones are pretty mobile, which makes them superior to regular, European. In general, though, these two nations are banned in treaty for being overpowered, so it doesn’t really matter
Since it’s a repost of an old article, I’ll repost my comment from the old thread from the previous official forums about it – the only post there:
Interesting… The article states that it’s gained on mobility over the centuries, but in the game it feels like mortars are the slowest artillery units, in comparison with for example horse artillery or even falconet-type cannons.
In 1v1 I can’t recall actually using it since horse artillery, falconets and heavy cannons do much better in an open field due to their fine damage against infantry. Mortars, on the other hand, can’t attack nothing but buildings, and oftentimes you have enough siege potential among your infantry or even cavalry. Also, buildings other than walls don’t have that high HP, so producing mortars doesn’t really fit. Additionally, games seldom go into the IV age, where mortars become available.
In treaty games, though, I noticed they’re much more useful in sieging down enemy’s bases, which are always heavily walled and fortified. Their main advantage is their range and high attack against buildings. Cannons do well, but yeah, the range there is crucial, since culverins can’t achieve them.
Certain civs have really nice bonuses on mortars, like Portuguese having 50 range on them, or Russians having access to cheaper mortars. Chinese and Japanese ones are pretty mobile, which makes them superior to regular, European. In general, though, these two nations are banned in treaty for being overpowered, so it doesn’t really matter
Any news on AOE3 DE?
Howitzers are okay but any competent player can easily take them out with something like dragoons. They’re super vulnerable…
@“TRIX Inferno” said:
Howitzers are okay but any competent player can easily take them out with something like dragoons. They’re super vulnerable…
certainly the howitzers / mortars must be well defended … as all the artillery in play (rockets, falconetti, cannons on horseback etc.). Who can better protect the artillery, certainly has an advantage! the dragons are certainly an excellent unit against the opposing cavalry, like the musketeers or heavy infantry. Obviously the mix of multiple units that complement each other to ensure each other’s health, is the best choice you can do!
Yes the mortars should be faster compared to before but they are faster than long canons except when they are pulled by a horse which does make sense.
@CostlierParrot3 said:
@“TRIX Inferno” said:
Howitzers are okay but any competent player can easily take them out with something like dragoons. They’re super vulnerable…certainly the howitzers / mortars must be well defended … as all the artillery in play (rockets, falconetti, cannons on horseback etc.). Who can better protect the artillery, certainly has an advantage! the dragons are certainly an excellent unit against the opposing cavalry, like the musketeers or heavy infantry. Obviously the mix of multiple units that complement each other to ensure each other’s health, is the best choice you can do!
True. At least they have really long range so that’s a plus. Guarding them is just a hassle, that’s all. I’m sure we can agree that no-one would use them early game tho. (But I’m open to being surprised on this point)
nice!
Lay seige only on buildings at a very long range. But it’s very slow and dumb moving!!!