I don’t know which school you went to take math courses but its pretty simple 190/28 = 6.7 vs 170/28 = 6.071
So its always 7 hits. Also early knight got 3 armor as baseline so it wont matter what the results are without upgrades. It always ends up 7 hits even with the hp reduction.
I went to the school that taught me how to read.This game has this thing called armor on heavy units? And in game tooltips instruct me that “if a unit hits for 10 dmg and the unit being struck has 2 armor the result dmg is 8dmg taken.” (paraphrase).
So… I’ll let you catch up mr 2v2 smfh
I clearly see that 
But lets play a ball game if the HP is lowered to 170 which I have nothing against. Heck nerf early knights as much as needed. The results won’t change. They just steam roll over you and moment you have to commit to spears it becomes just defensive survival battle. Cavalry just keeps running away and not picking the fight and moment they hit castle they just steam roll over you or got massive advantage by having all resources safe and been able to do what they want.
But in all honest if I was asked heavy cavalry should be nerffed to ground harder than chinese siege and grenadiers combined.
Also it wont matter if I play 2v2 or 1v1 result would still be the same, but I would be enjoying game less in 1v1=) Or do I hear good argument coming “prove it”
There are ppl in all types of games that are pro at 2v2 3v3 4v4 etc team games but they can’t play 1v1 in said games. I dont trust your lack of PROVEN experience in 1v1.
In 1 v 1 spear/horseman is a decent comp vs knight archers ASSUMING 2 things.
Resource for resource it’s a whomever has the better unit management takes fight. Something like 9 to 10 archers plus 6 knights vs 15-18 spear plus 5 to 6 horsemen.
You see in 1v1 the maps are smaller and typically easier to wall off choke points AND unlike team games you have to field your own support units. And your support units are slow so it forces some engagements you may not want but you have to take.
Depending on the eco behind these armies any of the two compositions can force the issue.
If it only requires 2 spears to challenge 1 knight you go from needing 15-18 spears vs that 6 knights down to 10-12!! That’s a big deal. Huge deal.
60% health, 70% damage and 20% range reduction are no small nerfs dude. We are talking about over-nerfing a unit from top to trash, for a 1000 resource unit. Make sure you understand what over-nerfed means.
So what is the real China’s problems? Their infantries, ranged infantries, cavaries are all mediocre, can’t stand their ground cost effectively with other civs. Their only saviors were sieges which are now also gone. That’s the real China’s problem.
Its funny how how you talk about experience from 1v1, yet you’ve advertised that you only do BBQ / TR. 
So I wonder are you the one who is lacking experience?
This also applies to TG’s and it has way bigger snowball effect than it has in 1v1. If player is playing with duo partner and is in discord then they have massive advantage but if player like me who plays with random allies and ping is only way to quickly communicate it takes my ally usually lot more to react so I have to compensate that. Also if one of your army is out of position even for 5 seconds it can mean that game is completely lost which happens quite lot. (Not saying it can’t happen in 1v1 because it can, but the snowball affect in 2v2 is much greater)
For example: Hill and Dale. My ally went for spears / longbow comp which essentially is fine but it requires player to position the units in such way that they can quickly respond. My allies choice was to try flank upcoming attack which resulted him being extremely late for the fight and because of this opponent got keep up to my face, because I had to wait my ally and I took fight bit faster than I wanted because I wanted to stop keep but keep got up and I managed to get out with half of my lancers while my ally lost everything and fight snowballed from there even tho we defended BBQ/TR rush easily with no dmg taken and opponent being a lot behind economically / tech wise it still resulted our loss.
Yes same thing happens in 1v1 too, but not same extend.
There is many things that are harder to execute in 1v1 than its in TG’s, but same applies to TG’s. Something is harder there is much easier in 1v1.
Sure it is easier to wall things off and its harder to control cavalry + infantry vs cavalry only or infantry only. Said many times its easier to micro one big group than multiple small ones, but its much harder to have your random allie to do the right thing when needed.
Is it you really can’t understand??? Let’s use your reasoning. I have ample experience playing only china bbq/tr in 1v1 rank and qs, right? And you have ZERO games playing as any civ any strat in 1v1? How did you miss that point? Also check mebak on aoe4world.com. in QS I’ve played dehli mongols english hre abbasid. Also while i mostly play aggressive bbq/tr china i have done other strats.
I didn’t read the complete rest of your post bc already i could see you attempting to draw parallels between team games and 1v1. Instead of rebutting my 190 down to 170 early knight nerf.
Yes yes you’re right sir. Didn’t bother checking your bs stats cuz I know you barely win games.
So? Just because I don’t have games played on 1v1. It doesn’t mean I cant comprehend or put things into 1v1 perspective?
Your knight change is not worst idea u had. But its not so big and impactful that changes the feudal. I would be more than happy if it got reduced by 20. It would make my games easier, but the impact isn’t as big as you think
Barely winning and barely positive is same thing? I don’t get you. With your book if you win a game once out of 100 times its still winning? Sure you win the match and still lose 99 and in your case you’re barely winning / positive side. For example past few days I have been purely losing. Sure I got wins here and there but lot of losses and im not describing it barely winning even if my winrate at this period would be 50%
It won’t change it from 3 spears to 2. Yes you will reduce the hit requirement slightly but you’re not factoring rate of fire. Early knight or knight regardless rate of fire is 1.38 meanwhile spear has 1.75 which is like 20-30% slower than knight. They’re also like 40% faster???
So essentially when units are at lower numbers. Like 6 spears vs 2 knights. French can just micro one back while one gets few hits and again. Your spears remain still at the HP they were when they fought, meanwhile french can send knights back to base and wait few minutes to heal up and meanwhile use 2 new knights. Thats why I like the chivalry upgrade nerf more than reducing their health. If all units were to generate their health after getting upgraded then sure 20hp is much more impactful and matters more.
Heck I have even toyed around with monks and their healing. Get the upgrade from monastery after all relics are taken and sent 2 monks to close to your opponents base. With right rotation and cycling through I was able to raid constantly without losing units. I think I had like 150-200 kills and 10-15 deaths after the game. Not something I would recommend doing unless game is basically over but was interesting to test out.
Ofc its different. If we compare you and me. You might find it hard doing thing X and I might finding Y hard but it can be easy for you to do Y.
Disagreeing with you about the knight change and I have explained why and Im putting it to 1v1 perspective. So do you understand the argumentation behind it or are you simply going to ignore it? Told you many times what civilizations like french gain from having early knights. It gives them kill potential on any villager, map control, self healing, mobile army and they trade very effectively against spears, also they scale much better for late game vs spears which become just less valuable unit.
So the HP change won’t really affect them. Yes they trade less effectively but they still have so many strong points over the spears and other units. If bombards were so stacked for china to deserve such butchering then French knights are in same position especially when they have strongest xbows in game too.
Yes you can zone knights out with right amount of spears but knights never have to take the fight if they don’t want to which creates the threat of something coming and forces response from you as defender. Meanwhile french can do what ever they want and this is where the strength of knights come from. You have to always respect the knights and the threat even if they got 20 less HP but it doesn’t mean you end up winning because french is civ that tries to be ahead from feudal to imp and reach it before you can as defender. Their imp may not be strongest suite but they replace it by having insanely strong feudal and even stronger castle.
I much rather have early game / mid game power as china main than late game power. If the siege / grenadier nerfs result china getting one of the strongest feudal / castle then Im more than happy with the trade off because it just means I can win the game in 10-15mins and not in 40mins
this!! SEE how you changed the rhetoric from barely winning to barely positive?? EXAMPLE why I can’t communicate with you; u lack integrity in your comments AND/OR you fail to understand the nuisance in what the two sentences of yours mean?
I was wrong I misunderstood “not worst” for “worst idea”. And I still disagree that changing the required spears to kill 1 early knight from 3 spears per knight to 2 spears per knight NOT being a HUGE deal.
MORE REASONS why… I have to wonder… does this guy just not comprehend? or is he DISHONEST??
The latter part of the paragraphed I quoted from you ADMITS MY POINT!!! That DESPITE your glorious accomplishments in this game and in GREAT many other games…
So you do understand what I said?? Because you can’t quote me anywhere saying there is no correlation between TG’s and 1v1s? or no correlations from other games and this game?? So why are you building a strawman arguments:
“B/c I never played 1v1s in AOE4 I can not draw any cogent correlations between my experiences elsewhere and this 1v1 AOE4 experience?”
Notice in no parts of my post can you find this concept coming from me??? But what you can find coming from me is this:
@BdelloidBore5 looks like we getting flagged left and right?? I can’t even remember all of what was said last???
But lets start over.
siege fest is slowly becoming a thing of the past with each patch; while siege still has its place, its vulnerability has exploded exponentially! Meanwhile siege power has ALSO taken a dive.
And now we have China the old guard of siege; which is still by comparison the strongest siege civ STILL, however with the relegation of siege, YOU WONDER, is it strong enough??
I stated my opinions about the HCs and the 5.5 range AND that you’ll always mix support units at the decent to high level gameplay to make your composition work.
Personally I see HCs (main units), PG(support), 2-3 clocktower cannons (support), then NOBs/Springs depending on enemy comp.
Fully upgraded clocktower bombard in ming dynasty takes 7 springald shots to die!! And with the 33% reload buff, our bombards will just about shoot as often as springald. So if the enemy can’t 1 shot our bombards, 2 clocktower bombards will clean up any other siege unit except the culverin. Add 4 vils for repair and we’re still in business!
Tower Elephants in Castle age are SUPPOSED to be a problem; but by IMP? IMP for IMP eco for eco? 5.5 HCs can kite those big boys and just go a full spearman HC composition. Spears are more so to body block cav and other units but if allowed can chase the elephants back keeping them out of range of our HCs.
Sure lets start over Ill quote everything now then.
Siege fest only happened in teamgames where one or two players focused making purely siege. In 1v1 we never saw such comp being used. Maybe like 5-10 siege units which I personally don’t find it being “main” unit of army. While I do completely agree its good to have more counterplay to siege and I actually suggested it before first massive siege butchering in this way “make horsemen take less dmg from siege like 20% and increase their dmg against siege in imperial age via upgrade” and what do we see now? Complete rework of siege and how it works. Will it be better or worse time will tell, but what I do know that when rework actually happens its double edged sword. Players that enjoyed the aspect of using siege may not feel same way. Rework has always 2 sides.
China is not strongest siege civ anymore and hasn’t been for while. Range is everything in siege war then is ability to reinforce siege effectively which both china has lost.
Before pup changes Rus and Mongols were the best “siege” civ in game this comes mainly from them outranging bombards to counter this china used villagers to heal bombard because it was easier for them to heal them than other civs. Rus range is reduced to 0.5 tiles which is still superior to chinese 12 tile bombards.
Clockwork tower was nerffed which results 1x production rate which is widely ignored fact, but because clockwork bombards or units are only created from the tower this results less than 1x reinforcement time which again neglects the 50% extra HP, because siege army was only less than half of clockworks unless player specifically stacked them over long periods of time.
Then the movement speed nerf affected the reinforcing time also which adds extra seconds to ability sent clockwork units to frontlines. In 1v1 this didn’t necessary become that big of deal but when it comes TG’s it made the comp even less mobile, less effective when trying to reinforce.
Then the fact that Trebs were buffed which meant that bombards lost a lot of their potential for all the civs making them worse and this same trend applies to pup too. Like I said. Range is the most important part of siege war and if you lose the range then your siege is inferior unless something else is replacing that in such way that its even stronger than with range this essentially would be 3x production rate for clockwork tower + 50% hp and current healing. But because all of these are nerffed or will be nerffed chinese siege is effectively DEAD
And I also stated few times that the range increase is only 0.7 tiles and not 1.5 because pyrotechnics was changed. So the 0.7 difference for unit like handcannoneers isn’t big deal especially when they shoot faster and to put it perspective bombards lose 2 tiles, nob losses 1.6 tiles (becomes more inferior to mangonel) and grenadiers well we don’t even have to talk about it. So the trade off for extra 0.7 tiles for universal unit like handcannoneer that is not special in anyway is not good trade. For example Rus streltsy costs 180 resources which is 60 resources less than handcannoneer and they have higher dmg output especially when standing still. They also have insanely good melee attack (not actually 100% sure if its changed so correct me if im wrong but it used to be one of the strongest melee attacks)
HC might become the most used unit in chinese army but its not such unit that can carry china to victory or keep them relevant when its just handcannoneer and nothing stops opponent countering them with cheaper alternatives that deal with HC very well or use mangonel.
Which might be true to take 7 hits (not counted the exact amount so I take this as facevalue) Now if it takes 7 hits to die. How many do you need to kill springalds? Answer is you don’t. The moment you open fire with your bombards they become visible to opponent and the moment that happens those 7 springalds snipe 1 bombard down which results to your loss. And once again if we include the 50% extra HP and 1x production rate from clockwork this means the effective production rate is 1.5 then if we remove the distance needed to reinforce location it becomes lot less than 1.5. So if opponent makes 2 siegeworkshops and pumps out springalds you will automatically get hard countered from production rate.
Its super easy to get 7 springalds out and way faster than clockworks so there is no question which dominates the siege war. Clockwork bombards or normal springalds. Meanwhile again its fine for french to always win cavalry war or english to archer war but not okay for china to win siege war?
33% attack speed is only relevant when you can constantly keep shooting which in this case isn’t as worth because siege cannot be healed effectively anymore and they cant kite around due lack of mobility and they’re not as effective against units and the fact that chinese siege has no range advantage anymore meaning all springalds, culverins and trebs just purely hard counters them.
Also to unlock ming dynasty for the 10% hp costs 2400 food and 1200 gold which is 3600 resources and only benefit is the 10% hp. Which im not saying is good, but lets say every civ has tech that costs 3600 resources and gives same effect. No one would ever pick it till in situation where they might have bank of 10k resources.
Better option is to get Yuan now and have pagodas generate all the resources and get the 10% movement speed. Unit unlocking is irrelevant because we all know that all chinese unique units are shit. Zhuge nu being most useful but even it falls of so hard that not actually worth really getting song because of them or even making them in later stages of game.
This leaves chinese unit composition to be general units that other civs have access to WITH tech that improve them enough to make difference OR their unique units are flat out just better and they don’t have to make same universal units.
Which begs the question. Why is that china cannot be civ that relies on siege?? If french relies on their crossbows and cavalry, delhi elephants, abbassid melee, HRE MAA. So what is wrong for china to be siege civ? Create more counterplay for each civ by giving horses some sort of tech to buff against it so ppl don’t need feel like they need siege to fight against siege.
You can ask anyone at high level their thoughts on elephants and they say they’re way too strong especially when scholar healing is stacked to one elephant (This is same level as the chinese bombard healing if not even more broken). You can kite them as long as you want but whats the point when there is 10 scholars instantly healing them out? Now to kill elephant fast enough you need shit tons of HC to fire at same time so scholars cant heal them, meanwhile with bombards this was much easily done and handled.
In castle age there is no counter to elephants other than going around them but if delhi is at your base already then you got no option other than fight which you lose 100-0 if delhi has eco to pump out elephants.
“oh but go spears”. Sure works against war elephants but not against tower because they just instantly kill your spears and have scholars healing them. “just kill scholars” oh those bois that run faster than F1 car? Sure.
Delhi will be new mongols in next patch when they get their imperial buffed and only way to stop them is before they have any access to sacred sites and stop them there and if they get to castle which is one of the best castle ages already its basically either GG or you have to avoid fighting till you get basically 20-30 HC out to insta shot elephant.
I can tell your rn. China losses 15-20% winrate in imperial age and keeps similar or worse feudal / castle age winrates which results overall chinese winrate to be around 40%. Landmark changes are not good, granary is nice but not good enough. IA change is also good but not good enough. HC change is nice but not good enough.
Actually my playstyle got buffed, but it may only work in TG’s so I should expect to see increase in winrates. Already bouncing around 60-65% but its still inferior playstyle to any other civ that has any tech to support their universal units / cavalry. So for me only times I would probably lose unless ally can carry is games where im forced to go imp and make grenadiers to break deadlock. Other than that nothing will change but it wont make me anymore happier to see one of the comps I loved so much to play has been annihilated which was bombards + HC + something else. I loved microing bombards but them being slow, no range there is no point. I stopped playing this comp after they nerffed clockwork and I don’t even want to touch clockwork tower with long stick thats why I always go IP because it stops all the raiding that could happen with my fast castle timing and protects me while Clockwork does nothing
China mains reported my post XD
We’ll see how China does with the changes (if the nerf to the battering ram vs. arrows sticks, the zhuge nu will be deadly and won’t be as easy to push).
Someone said around here that Zhuge Nu is the closest thing to a trash unit. Curiously he is Main China, which can be expected.
I suggest that Chinese civilization can build early crossbowmen in the feudal era, even if the crossbowmen in the feudal era are weak, they can help China fight against the knights and MMA in the feudal era, so that the feudal era China is no longer so weak.
On the contrary, removing the tower guns in the dark ages of China, allowing China to use the tower guns only in the feudal era, thus preventing the TR, and making the early guns more in line with the time point in history.
Zhuge Nu should not be a unit to replace Chinese archers. Zhuge Nu has always been a personal defense weapon for ordinary people or militiamen in Chinese history. It is not used on the battlefield. Its weak power and range are difficult to use Played on the battlefield, but against lightly armed men such as thieves and bandits who generally do not wear armor, Zhuge Nu can effectively exert its power.
crossbow in feudal would be more broken than knights/maa in feudal. Why? Because French and Rus and English and HRE do not have song dynasty. So with crossbow in feudal you can SAFELY go 2 TC song boom and defend Fast Castle with superior eco and units then slowly age up to castle and GG.
China already one dimensional as is, xbow in feudal would cement song dynasty play in 1 v 1.
IMO would they should do is give Zhuge a movement speed of 1.5 tiles/s and reduce their range from 4.5 down to 4.0 range then upgrade their range by 0.5 tiles per zhuge nu upgrade (veteran 0.5, elite 0.5 again ). Main issue with Zhuge nu besides them being locked behind dynasty is they get out macroed by archers; but with a movement speed of 1.5 tiles per second they can catch all retreating spears all kiting archers/longbows AND go on efficient raids on villager lines.
I was confused why I was tagged but now I realized why. Hey cool story. Im not into that. To me everyone should be able to freely express what they want to say regarding things even if its something that doesn’t make sense or work. But hey if you want point fingers go ahead please.
But try sticking your tags when to me if its relevant to discussion about china and not some random stuff ty
In order to make the feudal crossbowmen’s China not too strong and still need to focus on defense, we can certainly make some adjustments so that China in the feudal era is still dominated by defense and still lacks offensive capabilities. For example, we can weaken the Song Dynasty. , but the current dynasty system is broken, so we will not discuss the dynasty system for the time being.
Zhuge Nu should be as cheap and low in combat power as in real history. They should always only be regarded as the main force of China’s defense before the Castle Age, or as an auxiliary force that can only protect the base after the Castle Age, such as militia. If so I, I would suggest nerfing their range and health, but increasing their mobility so they can defend the base better. They should also have cheaper prices and shorter training times than archers to match them As a militia. Once in the castle age, Zhuge Nu should be a unit that supports the main force and is always ineffective against armored units.
In fact, I think the development team should have redesigned the special units of the entire Chinese civilization. The unique units of other civilizations are stronger than ordinary general-purpose units. Only many special units of the Chinese civilization have subtle effects. They either became broken when they became too numerous, making them unbeatable in TG, or they became too difficult to use in 1v1 because the number was too small. I guess the development team originally wanted to design the Chinese civilization to have only soldiers Only after reaching a certain number will it become a strong civilization, but this is too extreme, and it is impossible to balance 1v1 and TG, so this concept needs to be revised.
Hope to see more interesting and easier to use China in the next (if there is one) PUP, until then I will stop playing Chinese Civilization because there are too many design flaws.
With the Single exception of English, I think it was legit Chinese design to TR/BBQ and aggressive Dark age play ESPECIALLY given the costly and slow rewarding concept of Song Dynasty, even TWO TC Song Dynasty. If you can setup a network BBQ and/or TR to delay progression of the enemy ESP if you can deny first/2nd gold mine, you put China in an amazing spot!
It’s safe to say BBQ/TR is NOT going anywhere b/c they barely nerfed arrowslit range AND they gave BBQ upgrades.
So what China needs?! Is for Castle age Zhuge NU to upgrade into CROSSBOW verison! It won’t be a separate upgrade but the one veteran upgrade for Zhuge which will also now add +3, yes +3 Heavy dmg bonus!! This will take a marginal Castle unit straight into a cost efficient alternative to crossbows AND allows you to salvage whatever army of zhuge you have from feudal age.
Let’s look at the alleged new stats compared vs MAA and KNIghts:
New Veteran Zhuge Nu : 80 HP, 1.125 tiles/s movement speed, 4.5 tile range, 5 by 3 base attack, +3 heavy bonus dmg, 1.75s attack speed.
Castle MAA have 155 hp and 4/4 armor; this means it would take 13 triple burst shots to kill. Compare that to the 10 shots it takes crossbows to kill; compare 5 crossbows to 7 Zhuge Nu; the 7 Zhuge Nu is cheaper! trains faster and attacks faster!
Next vs Castle Knights which have 230 hp and 4/4 armor; this means it would take 20 triple burst shots to kill. Compare that to the 14 shots from crossbows. Compare 7 crossbows to 10 Zhuge nu; AGAIN Zhuge Nus are CHEAPER, train FASTER, and kill faster!!
Also consider this! If Zhuge Nu get upgraded into crossbows like I suggested in Castle, not only does it prolong the usefulness of this unit in CASTLE, but!! with the changes coming to Spirit Way IT MAKES LEGIT SENSE TO MIX ZHUGE NU WITH HANNCANNEERS!! It would make sense with my suggested changes to have a mass of Zhuge nu going into Imperial then start mixing in HCs and researching the new Pryo!
Last point, Zhuge NU with my suggested changes WILL NOT BE OP; b/c standard archers out range them and can kite them, Mangos will be getting a beefy 20-30 range resistance, so mangos would love to see a mass of tasty zhuge nu; AND with the changes to late game horseman, IMP ELITE horseman will absolutely counter all archer units!!
Relic make it happen!!!