You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Age of Empires / Rise of Rome / Definitive Edition
Moderated by Suppiluliuma, PhatFish, Fisk, EpiC_Anonymous, Epd999

Hop to:    
Welcome! You are not logged in. Please Login or Register.19 replies
Age of Empires Heaven » Forums » Age of Empires / Rise of Rome / Definitive Edition » Suggestion: What if cavalry also benefited from shield upgrades?
Bottom
Topic Subject:Suggestion: What if cavalry also benefited from shield upgrades?
Draco_Wolfgand
Clubman
posted 04-30-18 08:02 PM ET (US)         
Personally, I dont think I am the only one annoyed by how a fully upgraded Centurion actually has more pierce armor then a fully upgraded Cataphract, not to mention, how in general the pierce armor of most Stable units, despite the fact they are theorically suppose to counter archers, seem to be made of sandpaper. So, I have been thinking a simple solution: What if shield upgrades also benefited Stable units?

Imagine Cataphracts with four pierce armor rather then just one, finally able to actually take archer fire. Imagine the Chariot Archer now dealing only one damage per shot to fully upgraded Stable units. Wouldnt that be the buff the Cavalry-line hungered for? Or would that be going too far? Do you think it would be a good idea? And, if it was implemented, how would it affect the meta?
AuthorReplies:
Bl4cKst0rM
Clubman
posted 05-01-18 03:57 AM ET (US)     1 / 19       
Shields give pierce armor to stable units in my mod already.

But mod is still in works, and it will be released in a couple of months...

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Hebrews 13:6 So that we may boldly say, The Lord is my helper, and I will not fear what man shall do unto me.
The_Patriarck
Clubman
posted 05-21-18 12:08 PM ET (US)     2 / 19       
Affecting the entire Stable-line (Elephants in particular) would be a bad idea. As for Cavalry, Camels, and Scouts, those units could benefit from such a change. I'd also like to point out that increased Pierce armor would increase their effectiveness against Guard Towers and below. You'll also notice that only Infantry benefit from Shielding, probably because they're slow and NEED extra protection.
Ideally, Cataphract were basically the ultimate soldier, but AOE is a game and needs balance.
Draco_Wolfgand
Clubman
posted 05-22-18 09:13 PM ET (US)     3 / 19       
It has also just hit me( It is one of those questions that I wanted to ask, but it was too related to this thread for me to believe it deserves a whole new thread all for itself ), IF that were the case, then would Yamato Cataphracts still be better then, let us say, Shang Cataphracts? As Shang Cataphracts would have 4 Pierce armor, thus only taking 2 damage per hit from compies and 1 from CA, whereas Yamato would have only two?

[This message has been edited by Draco_Wolfgand (edited 05-22-2018 @ 09:15 PM).]

Suppiluliuma
AoEH Seraph
posted 05-27-18 11:47 AM ET (US)     4 / 19       
I want my carthaginian and persian elephants fully upgraded, make them also have the metalworking line upgrades :P
Draco_Wolfgand
Clubman
posted 05-27-18 11:52 AM ET (US)     5 / 19       
Pretty sure the Persians already get these techs? :/
Fisk
Champion of AoEH
(id: Fruktfisk)
posted 06-08-18 04:24 AM ET (US)     6 / 19       
Yeah but elephants don't benefit from melee attack upgrades, only cavalry armor. I guess it makes some degree of sense, as elephant tusks shouldn't benefit from improvements to metal working. Also it'd be waayyy overpowered.

//The warrior of Isola

"I lack quotes that demonstrate Humor Intelligence or anything about me."

Pineapplefish
Cleidopus gloriamaris
Suppiluliuma
AoEH Seraph
posted 06-10-18 06:09 AM ET (US)     7 / 19       
Centys are too overpowered (one on one of course). 37 attack points and 14 armor points? that is crazy.

I never got why, if melee upgrades affected elephants made them overpowered, why they allowed them in AoK.

Unless the elephants there were shittier lol.

[This message has been edited by Suppiluliuma (edited 06-10-2018 @ 06:09 AM).]

Fisk
Champion of AoEH
(id: Fruktfisk)
posted 06-10-18 06:48 AM ET (US)     8 / 19       
I'm not an avid AoK player, but I believe AoK elephants may in fact be shittier in terms of trample damage. Also AoK upgrades in themselves weren't such a major balance shifter as the ones in AoE.

Of course cents are expected to dominate in melee. I mean, they instead suffer from being easily countered by archers and particularly siege.

//The warrior of Isola

"I lack quotes that demonstrate Humor Intelligence or anything about me."

Pineapplefish
Cleidopus gloriamaris
Draco_Wolfgand
Clubman
posted 06-10-18 11:08 AM ET (US)     9 / 19       
It is mostly because of how trample damaged is calculated in both games. While in AoE trample damage is equal to the unit-Actual-Attack, in AoK, it is equal to only half the unit attack.

I wouldnt say AoK elephants are shittier on the overral, though. First of all, because most units in AoK have significantly lower stats then their AoE counterparts whereas the Persian War Elephant has... Almost the same stats as the AoE War Elephant. In fact, it even has higher Attack. It is kind of ridiculous the raw power that it has, for the standarts of its own game. Secound, because in AoK monks arent as common place, and third, because its superior Pierce Armor combined with its already huge Health makes it almost impenetrable to arrow fire, as in opposed to the AoE War Elephant which is, in my opinion, much more vulnerable.

The only downside there for the Elephants is the Halberdiers as a ridiculously cheap and cost-effective counter for then . On another hand, they dont have Centurions, so...
Suppiluliuma
AoEH Seraph
posted 06-17-18 05:28 AM ET (US)     10 / 19       
So, is decided!

All Melee and piercing armor upgrades should benefit elephants!
Ris1ng
Clubman
posted 06-18-18 08:13 PM ET (US)     11 / 19       
It would be nice to see cavalry become an even harder counter to the archer line. Camels with bronze shield vs Chariot Archers would be an interesting situation to see their effectiveness and perhaps make them a bit more useful.
Cataphracts with their base +2 pierce +3 bronze/iron/tower shield upgrades could also be very effective against horse archers.

[This message has been edited by Ris1ng (edited 06-18-2018 @ 08:14 PM).]

Suppiluliuma
AoEH Seraph
posted 06-24-18 07:40 AM ET (US)     12 / 19       
I am not sure these to become permanent changes. But I'd certainly would like to test these changes sometime.
Fisk
Champion of AoEH
(id: Fruktfisk)
posted 06-24-18 12:28 PM ET (US)     13 / 19       
The role of cavalry in AoE is pretty peculiar. I mean, from the bonus they were given it seems the developer thought was that they would function as counters to light infantry, but seeing as light infantry borders on uselessness in Bronze only to become so powerful in Post-Iron that they outperform then modest boost the cataphract gets in terms of price, cavalry instead got to fill the role of some kind of all-round unit.

In general I believe the solution would be closer to making light infantry more viable rather than having cavalry counter archers as well.

//The warrior of Isola

"I lack quotes that demonstrate Humor Intelligence or anything about me."

Pineapplefish
Cleidopus gloriamaris
Draco_Wolfgand
Clubman
posted 06-24-18 04:38 PM ET (US)     14 / 19       
Errrr... Wouldnt boosting light infantry make cavalry even more useless in the Iron Age? I think the cavalry-line is actually mostly fine as it is on the Bronze age, and would even dare to say a Bronze Age Cavalry rush is a pretty good idea if your opponent lacks Camel Riders. It is more on the Iron Age where they lose momentun
Fisk
Champion of AoEH
(id: Fruktfisk)
posted 06-24-18 05:42 PM ET (US)     15 / 19       
Hm... valid point, bronze cavalry do in fact pack a decent punch, once again as more of an all-round unit. Still I believe if the unit they're meant to counter in that age was more viable they would also see more use.

Then I guess the question should be "what do they lose momentum against?" IMO it is primarily the dominance of horse archers and siege, as well as the extreme power of heavy infantry.

//The warrior of Isola

"I lack quotes that demonstrate Humor Intelligence or anything about me."

Pineapplefish
Cleidopus gloriamaris
Draco_Wolfgand
Clubman
posted 06-24-18 06:09 PM ET (US)     16 / 19       
Yep. Now, personally, I dont think cavalry should ever be made "good" against heavy infantry, but I think it certainly could fare better against horse archers and siege then it currently does. Admittedly, the change I suggested wouldnt help then exactly a lot against siege, but it would tilt the balance on their favour a bit against horse archers, as they would go from dealing 9 to 6 damage per shot( Assuming the Cataphract was fully upgraded, of course. ). As it stands now, I personally feel the Horse Archer is actually more well-countered by other archers then by actual cavalry. Dunno what is your opinion.
Fisk
Champion of AoEH
(id: Fruktfisk)
posted 06-25-18 11:35 AM ET (US)     17 / 19       
The horse archer is in fact a ridiculous powerhouse, as the devs somehow decided that the most powerful archery range unit for some reason should garner 2 pierce armor as well. This means that they only take 4 damage from Compies/EA's with Alchemy, and 3 from CA's. This means that they're pretty favorable costwise against these units as well, though it can be a good choice for civs lacking HA's of their own.

There's a reason these things almost always dominate RM games in Iron. There really isn't any hard counter to them.

//The warrior of Isola

"I lack quotes that demonstrate Humor Intelligence or anything about me."

Pineapplefish
Cleidopus gloriamaris
Draco_Wolfgand
Clubman
posted 06-25-18 12:28 PM ET (US)     18 / 19       
Actually, in DE( For those who have it or actually give a damn ), the pierce armor of HHA was nerfed from 2 to 1, which I personally think that was a pretty good idea. Anyway, dont forget that the HHA is the most gold-intensive archer, as well as one of the most gold-intensive units in the game. So I would say that this nerf, combined with the low gold cost of compies and no gold cost of Chariot Archers, makes then a valid counter( Although it is a bit more debatable with the Chariot Archer as they are actually just as expensive as the HHA in terms of raw resources and lose embarassingly in a equal numbers match. Of course, this is assuming you deem gold as equally valuable to food or wood, which most players... Dont. It is kind of a case by case thing to analyse. )
Suppiluliuma
AoEH Seraph
posted 07-01-18 06:13 AM ET (US)     19 / 19       
I have two words for this:

Hittites, forever.
You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Hop to:    

Age of Empires Heaven | HeavenGames