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?
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...
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.
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? :/
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.
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
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.
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.