[Ok_District4074]

How would that even work.

You have a reload time where..the archers fire..and then can’t fire again unless they let the knights catch them.

You wouldn’t see more infantry used, you would just see knights.

There would be no reason to not go knights in Castle, as the pikeman aren’t going to counter them right off, and if you’re forced to mass them, you’re going to imp after the knight player.

You’re not fixing the issue that for a majority of the player base , knights in castle are just so much more effective, and easier to use, so you’d effectively just kill archer play while not actually leading to an increase in the infantry line.

What’s going to happen is, you build archers AND pikes..and you don’t have enough to stop a 2 to 3 stable Frank player from shoving extra hp knights into that mix and killing the archers AND the pikes.

The knight player WILL have their mass out quicker, and more efficiently then the right amount of pikes and xbows (with the upgrades you need to make them effective) There’s a reason why knights see so much play, and it’s not because they can’t kill 10 xbows.

Think of how much time it actually takes to micro 10 archers/xbows long enough to kill knights.

It’s not just archers shoot and drop back and all the knights are dead.

It’s micro..micro…micro…more micro…more micro…what else can’t I do while I micro these xbows (because if I don’t the knights will catch them and shred them) non stop for 10 xbows to shoot down 10 knights.

And why would the knight player not add mangonels, if it WERE an issue.

Or…ignore the xbows, wall up and raid your eco with those knights and siege? (as those 10 xbows aren’t going to kill knights running through your base –and wrecking your eco because of how quickly they kill villagers– or break down walls before getting wiped unless it’s saracen xbows.

Those 10 xbows are going to either spend all their time trying to catch your knights, or getting pushed back by a mangonel (which will also kill the infantry protecting them).

Every time I see archer play, it’s always about getting to that mass where you CAN start effectively microing down knights (that number is not 10)..and once you’ve got numbers like that..that outcome should be expected.

I don’t feel that this change would get you the result you want; but I can definitely empathize with the frustration with how little we get to see certain fun units.

I will defend teutonic knights as being the coolest unit in the game, but it’s usually not going to end well using them.

[Affectionate-Tone680]

I don’t know, we already have a meta where the top 10 civs by winrate in 1v1 ladder are all cavalry or camel civs…

If we did what you suggest, archer like would become very situational and scouts into Knights/camels would be almost the only viable play on Arabia

[Error_Great]

2

[flossdab]

Archers will always be better than knights because they don’t cost food.

This is also why eagles are so OP (and hence Aztecs/Mayans considered S-tier) because they counter archers but don’t cost much food.

Playing archers is very streamlined, all you do is put like 10 on wood, 6/7 on gold, wall up and then keep pumping out archers like you would with villagers while your food goes towards aging up.

Then in castle age, you click 2 buttons for a quick mini deathball.

I suppose it’s just inherent to the game design – aging up gives a big power spike and usually can only be matched by aging up too otherwise you won’t be able to counter the opponent

One thing they could do is have crossbowmen be a separate unit rather than an upgrade for archers so that castle age isn’t such an immediate boost to archers.

Or maybe make the cost of aging up less food heavy so you don’t get punished if you can’t land any damage in feudal age with scouts.

I don’t know about you but personally I’m not good enough to feel I’ll always get value with scouts since walls exist so that just puts me off opening with them.

Both of those are very radical changes though so would just upset people and would probably have other knock on effects I didn’t think about.

Nerfing the micro ability of archers is a bad idea because that would take the fun out of them imo and the current balance is fine anyway, don’t know why people are always calling for balance patches everyday

[Haslor]

Hard pass

[TheConqueror753]

This is a terrible idea, they already nerfed archers.

Don’t ruin them, they are fun to play because of micro, if you take this out, then there aren’t really as many fun units to use.

Melee units can’t do all the fancy stuff with hit and run and split micro.

[TheConqueror753]

If your concern is infantry, try and fix that, but don’t do it by ruining archers.

And yes, doing this definitely ruins archers.

If you have to stand still to fight, they stand no chance against literally anything.

They already lose to knights in equal numbers, if you think otherwise, provide the video to prove it.

[kokandevatten]

Knights easily beat 10 crossbows its not very close.

I d beat hera 1000 out of 999 games in that type of micro.

[TevecQ]

Archer meta?

Barely even saw crossbows in NAC.

I’m seeing Monks, Light cav, Eagles and Knights

[Sulz_mania]

Sorry but one of the worst ideas I’ve ever heard

[Author]

Posts