We seriously don't need more pass-through damage in the game. i.e, no scorpion buffs

Age of Empires II: DE II - Discussion
1

Here’s something that might be considered a hot take: pass-through damage should be discouraged as much as possible. That means units like scorpions and chakram throwers. Why? Because they are exceptionally unfun to play against. Before proceeding further, I need to clarify that I’m talking about closed map 1v1s and closed map team games. That’s roughly 30-40% of games played, so it’s not a tiny fraction which you can ignore.

The counters in this game usually work in terms of percentage of resources. Roughly 50% of resources are needed in skirmishers, to counter archers. You need around 85% in resources, in halbs to counter heavy cavalry, but roughly half of that will survive. And also, counters in the game aren’t absolute. Meaning, you can overpower counters through numbers. Roughly 300% in resources will generally overpower counter units through sheer numbers. This keeps things nice and even.

But this is where pass-through damage breaks things. If you have like 60 chakrams and micro them well, they will take 3000% of their value in infantry. It doesn’t matter how many bodies you try to throw, all that will only add to the body count. Similary, if you have 50 scorpions on a choke-point, they will eat everything till you bring like 10 onagers/4-5 bombard cannons.

Now, you might argue, “So what, change units. You do that with everything else”. First, as I explained above, there shouldn’t be a god-tier unit which cannot be taken down by just throwing enough bodies at it (300% in resources). But also, this kills the pacing of the game. You use prior information and pre-existing units to deal with your current opposition while you make that transition. However, 25 scorpions will absolutely destroy your archers and cav archers, especially on closed maps. Even infantry won’t work. You’ll need to transition into a totally different class, and that transition is usually enough to kill you.

I saw this absolutely braindead thread on reddit and wanted to talk about it here. Arbalests are expensive, slow units that need a mass to function. They are also kinda delicate. A single good siege onager shot will flatten them. Even bombard cannons pose a significant threat. Now, imagine that scorpions had the same range. What are you supposed to do here?
This isn’t like other counters like, say, skirmishers, or heavy cavalry. Like 3 shots will wipe your mass and unlike onagers, you can’t micro against them.

What things like this will do is discourage archer and infantry play. Even cavalry is tough against these. End game will just become bombard cannons, siege onagers, halbs, and scorpions. This game has like 50 unique units, and maybe a dozen regional units. None of that will matter. You will just see more scorpions, more bombard cannons, and more siege onagers. Is that what anyone wants?

I don’t think so. So, no more pass through damage, please. Or, at least, severely restrict their range. Ghulams have pass-through, but that’s just one tile. That means they are good against clumped up archers, and pretty much nothing else. That’s okay. We don’t need more range on scorpions, and we definitely don’t need more units like the chakram.

2

yes, I really hate pass-through damage. As upgrading armor is a core part of the game, having this exists is just unacceptable.

2 Likes
3

Yes, like scorpion I hate it, chakram some time I don’t like too,

1 Like
4

Except, Heavy Scorpions right now don’t see any play, outside of maybe some civs who have bonuses for them. And even then, Chinese and Khmer don’t play Scorpions that often themselves (and Khmer HAVE 8 range scorpions).

The fact that Khmer’s team bonus isn’t turning every civ into Heavy Scorpion spam or that a +1 range on a ranged unit is a team bonus signals that the unit is very weak.

You can also micro against Scorpions, outside of Romans they lack Ballistic. They don’t have target ground attacks. +1 range won’t change this. The only times Scorpions can pose a real threat is when you have a ton of them, or you’re only playing Archers/Cav Archers/Pikemen, which… is their purpose. And that’s only in Castle Age, as the Heavy Scorpion compared to Onager is really just a very weak upgrade. Onager gets +1 range, why shouldn’t Heavy Scorpion get it?

Now, the topic itself is about pass through damage in the game, and depending on the unit I can agree or disagree. I find the Chakram Throwers a little fantastical, but thankfully it’s a late game unit which has late game counters to it. In Castle Age, I’d actually argue that they aren’t that good against Infantry, as they have very low attack and no +1 bonus without Elite.

Yes? Siege Onagers are fun, and Scorpions outside of Castle Age aren’t made at all. I’d love to see one unit get more play, because this is the argument you’re making as well. You want all units to be playable, Scorpions in Imperial aren’t playable.

7 Likes
5

I think I’ve made it clear before, don’t talk to me. I don’t want to bring mods or whatever into this. I’ve had more than a few unpleasant conversations with you, and would appreciate it if you keep off my posts.

6

I dont see how the response above is even half aggressive unless there’s a deleted post im missing.

8 Likes
7

The person has blocked me, but still seemingly responds to what I say. I see no reason why they should have free reign to post anything without receiving criticism, so I put out a reply. They don’t need to engage with it, but having these forums turn into echo chambers is probably not what mods want.

The reason for the blocking is because I don’t agree with the OP on some things in the game, fwiw. 11

7 Likes
8

It’s not the response, it’s the person making the response. I don’t want to dig up old stuff, just not interested in dealing with them.

For the record, blocks are not effective on this forum because it still shows me that there are replies. I’m a curious person. Also, this is the only person I refuse to talk to. I have extremely contentious discussions with a lot of people. I haven’t agreed upon a single thing with @DemiserofD, for example. You can see his post below. No, critisizing me, and even insulting me (by a small amount) is fine. This person often goes far beyond that.

9

Yeah, I agree with @Nerathion , scorpions are a fun unit that could use some general buffs to be more usable outside niche cases.

I don’t think the assessment that you should be able to throw enough bodies at anyone and overcome them through sheer resource advantage is true. Like, if your enemy is making teutonic knights and monks and you’re making halbs, it doesn’t matter how many you throw at them, every single unit is going to die.

If your enemy is making heavy scorpions, make a better counter unit, or use different formations, or cut the woodline, or any of a dozen other answers.

That said, I think there are better and worse ways to buff scorpions to make them more useful without becoming overwhelming, and I’d be open to a discussion of how best to do that, but I don’t think shutting them down entirely is the right move.

2 Likes
11

Do you see a diffence between countering one unique with a trash unit (a scenario which can happen with one out of 43 civs), and one unit countering all 3 mainline units in the game?

Heavy scorpions will counter ALL stable, barrack, and archery range units in a choke point. That is not good, in my opinion.

There are two general counter units. Siege onagers, and bombard cannons. Give me the other dozen solutions.

Fair enough. If scorpion bolts stopped at, say, 2 units, I’d be a lot more open to buffing them. Or, reduce their range and increase their HP.

But all that said, I don’t think it’s a good mechanic.

12

If choke points were a more major aspect of the game I’d be more inclined to agree with you, but for the most part they only really happen on extremely closed maps, in fixed and limited locations, and even then, they can be removed.

Are you referring specifically to chokepoints? Those can be solved with anything from trebuchets to villagers, but more importantly, they have to leave the chokepoint sooner or later if they want to actually win the game.

If you’re just talking about an army of scorpions, spread formation hussars are probably the easiest solution, but anything that moves faster than a teutonic knight can do it if you spread them out enough. Battering Rams garrisoned with infantry is probably the most obvious solution, though. They’re fast enough, tanky enough, and once they’re close, the enemy WILL start losing resources.

1 Like
13

Literally said that on the post. If you want to ignore 30% of games, be my guest.

If you are going to tear down chokepoints with vils when your opponent in coming in with scorpions, you do that. Can you show me a game where trebs have worked for you for taking down choke points?

Assuming that your opponent only made scorpions. 3 onagers for support, or cavalry, and all that is dead. The question isn’t if enemy start losing resources. It is if the rate is at least proportional to yours.

Look, I don’t care about convincing you. I do care about making you understand my point, as much I would anybody else. On the flip side, I also care about understanding your point, even if I am not convinced.
So, are we good on that? After that, we just agree to disagree and move on.

14

Chokepoints existing somewhere in a game is not an issue. More like 1/100th of a typical map is a chokepoint, so it’s more like 1/300 than 1/3.

If your enemy has a powerful defensive force, you don’t just try to push through anyway, you find an alternate avenue of attack.

Multiple? I’ve seen quite a few games where people have cut back doors with trebs. It does take a little effort and time, but if you’re stalemated at a chokepoint, it’s well worth the effort.

Onagers will kill maybe one of them, while the other two get close, and then they’ve got halbs in their scorpions and if they try to shoot you they hit themselves. And that’s like 1/50th the value of their deathball, so mix in even more and you become even harder to stop.

If you’re not willing to debate your point, why bother posting on a forum?

1 Like
15

That’s a bizzare argument. Guess what, 1/100th of a typical map is gold. Do you not care about that either? Closed map games are defined by chokepoints. Just watch the tournament Rage Forest 4.

The halbs are worthless against scorpions. It’s the siege rams which are deadly. Just remember to place the scorpions on stand ground against halbs.

Also, I’m not necessary asking to nerf scorpions. People like them, although I don’t. It’s fine. Keep them as-is. I just don’t want further buffs.

I’m perfectly willing, I’m just not willing to do it with you (and a few others).

The difference is, I can show you when I last changed my mind. I usually post exactly what it would take to change my mind. You haven’t even ceded a single point in your conversations with me. So, I don’t think you actually want to change your mind, which makes this kinda pointless.

But hey, show me the last 3 times when you admitted you were wrong and changed your mind on this forum, on an issue you had a strong stance on. Then, I’ll put effort in trying to convince you.

16

So you’re only willing to ‘debate’ with people who agree with you? That’s not what debating means, lol. It doesn’t matter if the other person never changes their mind, what matters is what third parties take away from the discussion.

Refusing to debate with some people only indicates you have no confidence in your own beliefs, and if you don’t even believe what you say can stand against criticism, why should anyone else?

Do we need to set up a basis for what qualifies as a location on a map? For example, gold obviously isn’t just the gold tiles themselves, but also the tiles that the villagers work on and the surrounding tiles from where attacks can take place. I’d say that in function, tiles related to gold make up something like 1/10th of all the tiles on a typical map. And of course, since markets allow resource conversion, that number could be expanded even further.

By contrast, there are typically only one more maybe 2 meaningful chokepoints on even maps that allow for chokepoints at all, so I wouldn’t hesitate to say there is probably something like 5-10 times as many gold-related tiles as chokepoint related tiles.

Halbs are fine against them, scorpions are incredibly flimsy, even with the latest buffs. Get up close to them, with their minimum range, and even halbs can deal with them easily. It’s getting close that’s the issue, which is what rams resolve.

But regardless, scorpions still aren’t quite good enough IMO. They’re rare to see from anything but 2 civs. Personally, I’d like to see them buffed in terms of speed, though, not tankiness. They’re already quite decent in their specific niche at chokepoints, they need to be made more decent elsewhere, too.

1 Like
17

Go look at my history. Actions speak louder than words. Actually, I literally said that I have changed my mind multiple times. Did I change my mind on a thing I already agree with? Is that what that means?

Also, you didn’t address my question.

Put them on stand ground.

If you want to expand it like that, also include the areas that form the checkpoint, and the surrounding areas. That’s way larger how much ever you can stretch that gold definition.

But it’s things like this that makes me not want to argue with you. This is either a bad faith argument, or dumb argument. To make this more charitable, let me lay out both positions.
My position:

  1. on closed maps, choke points are incredibly important
  2. scorpions are extremely strong on choke points.
  3. scorpions nullify all units except siege, which makes the game boring

I’ll add one more thing.
4. Scorpions with bombards and one type of trash unit for support is extremely difficult to push and more importantly, extremely frustrating to play against.

The reason I made that comparison with gold is to show that the exact area of the thing isn’t that important.

Your position, as I understand, is:

  1. Choke points are not that important, and you can change terrain around them to nullify them
  2. You have one specific combination, which is halbs garrisoned in rams, which can take them down. You went further in saying that anything will do if they get a surround, but that isn’t particularly relevant for closed maps
  3. choke point is 1/100th of a map
  4. choke points with scorpions can be solved by villagers (?) or trebuchets

Your first argument, or at least, the last part of it, has some merit. Your 3rd and 4th point can only be made by someone who has no understanding or lack the ability to communicate well.

Now, I’ll repeat.
Show me the last 3 times when you admitted you were wrong and changed your mind on this forum, on an issue you had a strong stance on. Then, I’ll put effort in trying to convince you.

Or, tell me what exactly it would take to change your mind here.

18

Scorpion mass can be risky to onager shot and bbc can also flatten them… And their slower speed compared to arbalest makes them more vulnerable. Even if 8 range heavy scorpion fight back onagers, I believe onager can kill scorpion before scorpion do. Most range units can be hard to dealt with after critical mass. Heavy scorpion upgrade is a big investment as well.

5 Likes
19

I did, actually; go reread what I said.

Namely, that someone admitting they’re wrong is not a very useful metric, so there’s no point in answering. Frankly, it’s the sort of strange and arbitrary request someone makes when they want an excuse to dismiss someone, similar to asking for numbers of games played or ELO figures - other things I’ve seen you doing.

But that’s just a fallacy. Good logic stands on its own.

Yeah, try it yourself; it doesn’t work out as well as you might think. Their minimum range is pretty dang prohibitive, even with relatively large groups of scorpions. Losing half your potential DPS is crippling, even with the other half still able to fire, and at close range, the pass through capability is also much diminished.

Even accounting for that, you still have a dramatically smaller area than, say, gold.

See, that’s why you get so frustrated. Not everyone arguing with you is an idiot or a manipulator; some people just disagree with you. And that’s okay.

Yes, Yes, and No. ALL siege is extremely potent in chokepoints, not just scorpions, but that’s just the nature of closed maps. If you don’t like that, don’t play closed maps. It’s a feature, not a bug.

No; choke points are definitely important, but that’s a feature, not a bug, and other features are available to counter that if you want. If you don’t like this type of gameplay, don’t play closed maps.

No, that’s just one of the better ones. Go watch SOTL’s video on scorpions; virtually anything can counter them, even in chokepoints, given sufficient quantity.

That much I’ll agree with.

Or anything else that can deal with trees.

You are the one claiming that 30% of gameplay involves chokepoints, which is obvious nonsense. Stop making such clearly absurd statements and maybe people won’t feel the need to answer with equally absurd rebuttals.

No, lol. If you want to prove me wrong, prove me wrong. But thus far, you have failed to do so. If you want to ignore me and let me sit there and rebut you without response, that’s your choice, but just know that I WILL be here. My other forum, for Elite Dangerous, has over 10000 replies from me, so you should know I’m more than happy to do it.

If you want your arguments to stand, they should stand on their own merits, not because you attack the people giving them. That will only discredit YOU.

I don’t believe my mind can be changed here, at least not in terms of what you’re asking for specifically.

Now what I might support is avoiding buffing scorpions in ways which make them excessively powerful in the scenarios you point out, but that’s different from being against buffing scorpions wholesale. I’d also be in support of nerfing some of the powerful scorpion bonuses on civs like the romans, IF they were paired with reasonable buffs on scorpions as a whole.

But if you want to say that scorpions are fine, when they’re barely ever used, is just clearly wrong. If a unit is OP in one specific use case and terrible everywhere else, that is a place where change is needed even MORE, not less.

Now, if you can come up with a solution that makes them more potent in other places, perhaps with a slight reduction in their power in chokepoints, while maintaining their identity, then I’d happily support you.

2 Likes
21

So does SO, right?

Since you’re talking about TG closed maps, maybe at least one of you should have BBC. Also mass rams work sometimes when there is not enough halberdier or melee unit.

22

I just find it very funny how the Scorpion player in these scenarios are allowed to make Onagers, but the player defending against Scorpion mass somehow isn’t allowed to make a few Onagers that will completely shut down Scorpions even if they got +1 range.

Also very funny how the player said to watch Rage Forest, where full Scorpions… wasn’t seen, to my knowledge. Like, at all. Because in tight chokepoints, mass SO is far more potent than Heavy Scorpions, because Heavy Scorpions suck and really need buffs. 11

4 Likes