EdgarSamuel
Clubman
posted 03-03-17 02:30 PM
ET (US)
228 / 255
The Slinger should be affected by technology nobility (adding HP) or by mysticism (adding HP or armor). It has a very low HP (25 HP). Even its improved version (Strong Slinger) still has very little HP (30 HP, which I believe should be at least 45 HP). Since conventional armor does not influence the improvement. There should be a technology that adds at least 2 or 4 armor (bronze or iron age technology). I would also find it interesting that the Slinger (Strong Slinger) had an evolution for the iron age (maybe an Elite Slinger). Evolution this with at least 2 of initial armor, 50 to 60 HP and 4 or 5 of attack force. I do not think Slinger should be such a weak unit to the point of becoming obsolete in the ages of brass or iron.
Highwing
Clubman
posted 03-03-17 08:59 PM
ET (US)
229 / 255
I agree that the Slinger's strength should persist through the ages, but I can't think of any logical connection between Slinger and Nobility or between Slinger and Mysticism.
todler
Clubman
posted 03-04-17 09:26 AM
ET (US)
230 / 255
I think we should first see(e.g. extensively test) the balance with only the bronze age slinger, he is still relatively new concept.
1. He is archer counter and benefits from these upgrades:
-Bronze Shield increases pierce armour by 1
-Iron Shield increases pierce armour by 1
-Tower Shield increases pierce armour by 1
-Alchemy increases attack by 1
-Stone Mining increases attack and range by 1
-Siegecraft further increases attack and range by 1
Most are from iron age and some civs could lack them, but overall the new Slingers would be able to defeat Chariot Archers and Horse Archers(these are the strongest units, not inf).
2. Bowmen should be used against melee units, because they have one more range upgrade and they benefit from melee armor upgrades.
EdgarSamuel
Clubman
posted 03-04-17 11:30 AM
ET (US)
231 / 255
That there was another technology then that adds HP to the Slinger (Strong Slinger), since noticism and nobility does not make much sense. I thought of mythology because of the myth of David and Goliath. But that there was another technology that would increase your HP from 25/35 +20/25 HP. In relation to armor. There should be another technology that adds at least +2 Armor. Regarding the Iron Age Slinger would be an idea to compensate for a HP increase of the Strong Slinger from 30 to 45 or 50. And the addition of an initial armature of 2.
Note: sorry if the content is not totally easy to understand. I'm Brazilian and I'm using google translator.
EdgarSamuel
Clubman
posted 03-05-17 00:19 AM
ET (US)
233 / 255
I agree with you, my friend. I also think that the armor of the tool, bronze and iron age should affect the Slinger. After all it is a military unit and in logic it undergoes a training, therefore it would be able to support the weight of an armor. In addition let's see the Camel rider, it is a special unit against cavalry, but it is still affected by armor and attack force. The Slinger would also receive benefits from infantry armor. Regarding Strong Slinger I still think he should have a little more HP. HP 35 is a very small difference from its first version (Slinger). Why not leave the Strong Slinger with a HP of 40 or 45 minimum to have evolution compensation?
EdgarSamuel
Clubman
posted 03-05-17 03:11 PM
ET (US)
235 / 255
But unlike archers who have two consecutive evolutions in the Bronze Age raising their HP from 35 to 45 (Bowman-Composite Bowman) in addition to attack from 3 to 5, they are still affected by armor. Slinger has only one evolution (credited in mod) that only increased its HP from 25 to 30, are also unaffected by armor improvements (which makes no sense at all), as well as being units of the barracks, like yourself Said, they receive +10 HP improvement every evolution. In my opinion, Snlinger should rather be affected by armor improvements and his evolution (Strong Slinger) should have increased from 30 to 40 HP to make up for the unique evolution, unlike Bowman who has two.
knightse72
Clubman
posted 03-16-17 00:58 AM
ET (US)
237 / 255
I still think Falxman is a better choice as it bring unit culture diversity rather than having everything Greco-Roman. Improvement on the Axeman line would be an excellent for a Northern European Barbarian civilization expansion.
Suppiluliuma
AoEH Seraph
posted 03-16-17 08:00 AM
ET (US)
238 / 255
Although I love that Axeman from a design point of view, XLightningStormL I feel the axe is way too huge even more so for a single handed one xD.
knightse72
Clubman
posted 01-09-18 03:18 AM
ET (US)
239 / 255
I would love the Heavy Axeman and the Falxman upgrades of the axeman unit as a low health,high damage melee unit that has bonus vs Hoplite, Phalanx and Centurions, and only cost food to train. Also I would loved it for if the Dacians to have a factional bonuses for the Axeman line to make them viable alternatives to both Swordsmen and Hoplites
todler
Clubman
posted 01-16-18 02:19 PM
ET (US)
240 / 255
50 hp? It can't go any lower than the axeman.
knightse72
Clubman
posted 03-10-18 06:40 AM
ET (US)
241 / 255
I think the Heavy Axeman should have the same health as the Tool Age Axeman. The Iron Age upgrade the Falxman should have the same health as the Broadswordman and the elite upgrade of the Falxman which I am going to call the Champion (the barbarian tribes of northern europe historically had a long last culture of hero worship) which should have slightly less health than a longswordsman
Neils
Clubman
posted 05-07-18 09:33 AM
ET (US)
242 / 255
Is it possible to translate to different languages?
knightse72
Clubman
posted 12-16-19 02:50 PM
ET (US)
243 / 255
I think there should be a spear thrower unit that serves as a cheap trash anti cavalry archery unit. Can be upgraded in the iron age to the Peltas
Suppiluliuma
AoEH Seraph
posted 12-29-19 01:55 PM
ET (US)
244 / 255
Would it work? i mean horses may just escape galloping away. I think that's why in AoK cavalry archers have such pathetic range as a way to nerf them. xD
Historically Mounted archers have been one of the toughest units to counter because of the ranged attack and their speed.
Suppiluliuma
AoEH Seraph
posted 02-02-20 01:30 PM
ET (US)
246 / 255
The idea is not bad, but unless you gave them unrealistic range (advanced warbows have more range irl than any human throwing javelins), hps and/or speed, their use against horse archers may be limited.
todler
Clubman
posted 02-28-20 07:10 PM
ET (US)
247 / 255
Slingers are counter to Cavalry Archers. The Peltast can have small range and melee attack to make it interesting. But that way Hoplites are immune to the attack and it should be good vs heavy infantry, so hm..
Suppiluliuma
AoEH Seraph
posted 03-08-20 02:11 PM
ET (US)
248 / 255
Peltasts caused some humiliating defeats to pure hoplite armies.
knightse72
Clubman
posted 03-30-20 10:19 AM
ET (US)
249 / 255
Yeah maybe should make them an anti infantry or have them ignore armour
knightse72
Clubman
posted 05-14-20 06:16 AM
ET (US)
250 / 255
Not bad idea making the javelin line having either bonus damage against infantry or ignoring armour.
Imagine for a Northern European expansion pack one of the 'barbarian' civilizations is the Dacians representing the people of both Dacia and Thrace and two possible bonuses they can have is increased health for the Falxman line and bonus damage for the Javelin line. They would be hoplite focused civilisations such as the Greeks and Macedonians worst nightmare