Suggestion for Swordfighting Series
- This topic has 17 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 1 year, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Considering granting the Longswordsman +2 attack power against Pikeman, Scouts, and Skirmisher, would they be better equipped to counter anti-trash units if the adversary runs out of gold?
What if the swordsman line was removed from the game entirely?
Instead of trying to balance them and make them relevant, just redo the team bonuses and whatnot
Swordsman line
bottom text
I have previously posted a recommended buff for long swordsman:
**Longswordsman: increase pierce armor to 2 (from 1)**
**Two Handed Swordsman: increase pierce armor to 2 (from 1)**
**Champion: increase melee armor to 2 (from 1); increase pierce armor to 2 (from 1)**
The goal is to have swordsman line more resilient.
The current issue with swordsman line is not that they do not deal enough damage, or that they are too expensive.
Rather it is that they die too easily.
It does not matter how much damage they can deal to buildings and trash units or how cheap they are if they cannot even close the distance in the first place.
On a broader level, we should not think of AOE2 only as a game of rock paper scissors, where knights > archers > swordsman > knights (very general cases), but also consider the roles of the units outside of the counter system.
This is because these are gold units, not trash (counter) units.
They should have a role outside of countering units.
For example, knights are useful even if there are no enemy archers, because they can raid.
Archers are useful even if there is no enemy infantry because they can shoot across obstacles.
From this perspective, swordsman is very lacking.
Let us assume that swordsman can counter trash (except light cavalry) and eagles efficiently, what can you do with a group of swordsman?
1) Can they efficiently attack the enemy TC or buildings?
No, archers and defenses can kill swordsman much faster than swordsman can kill buildings.
You should use rams or knights here.
2) Can you efficiently attack villagers and raid the enemy economy?
Sort of, but archers and knights can perform this role much better.
3) Can swordsman be a good meatshield?
Not really, hussars and pikeman are better (more cost effective) meatshields.
4) Can swordsman be the main damage dealer?
Not as well as archers and ranged siege.
5) Can swordsman fight knights?
You should use pikeman for this job, and knights can always run away and attack somewhere else.
Basically, there is no reason to create swordsman, because they have no identifiable role.
My take is that we make swordsman high-quality meatshields (damage tankers), which they should have the best survivability of the three main gold units.
Specifically, they should be able to force an engagement from the enemy and have some way of winning/surviving it.
But since giving swordsman the same HP and armor as knights would wreak havoc on the meta, we can start with just adding armor.
I think the best way to balance infatry is to have them fill the same role as irl back in the day.
make them waaay cheaper.
almost every infantry unit needs their cost dropped by significant amounts.
militia line to something like 40f 10g.
armies would then be mainly infantry and would then be supplimented or eventually replaced with other units.
The main problem is that there are for Upgrades and that it is too expensive to get to them.
Longswordsman got to go than everything is fixed.
It is simple too expensive to get into swordsman when getting into crossbows is faster to tech into so the counter is just around the corner.
+2 vs houses and farm
I like the idea of a tiny speed increase in Feudal, and maybe reduced costs / faster tech for upgrades.
Unsure about unit cost change.
What if all infantry had the ability to sheath their weapon and gained a speed boost and a decrease to armor.
Then you shift back into melee mode and gain the armor back and the ability to attack.
Similar to the chariots shifting between melee and ranged.
I would resolve the problem using the AoM and AoE3 approach: all horseman and siege cost more population.
Swordsmen are niche, doesn’t matter how many buffs you add for them.
After a certain threshold they become op so you have to tone it down.
When you do they become situational.
They’re just not an all-purpose unit in early castle age.
I really love how the anti trash is only really anti-pike.
Skirms can actually kill them or just kite them, hussar just run around them, or, the right hussar civ just engages and kills them favorably since, for some godamned reason it’s a 20 gold unit.
The commenter below me makes a good point, even with insane bonuses oppressive to most other gold units, they still don’t encourage people to go for the militia line.
I think they should decrease the gold cost to 10 and reduce all associated research time by 200%.
I find they’re way too hard to tech into, especially in imp.
You need to research 14 techs (all barracks & blacksmith) to get FU champs.
If you have cavalry and need a counter to halbs, you can save on the atk upgrades.
Not only does this cost a significant amount of resources, but researching just the barracks techs takes a whopping 365 seconds!
Cavalier & Paladin only take 270 total in comparison.
The THS upgrade should either be a free upgrade in IMP (provided MAA & LS researched), or have it’s time cut in half.
The Champion upgrade also needs it research time reduced and possibly the cost as well. 950f & 350g for 10HP & 1 atk is super expensive.
+2 vs scouts might make men-at-arms opening even more oppressive vs.
scouts than it already is, but I’d certainly be ok with that as a buff for longswords and onward, since they’re only questionable against hussar despite supposedly being trash killers.
The bonus against spears and skirms might be overkill because champions are good against those units already.
Any militia buff is welcome, but this buff will probably only make them overwhelming where they are already strong.
In my opinion, they need either more raw damage or HP, but any buff is welcome really.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
