Cavalry vs. Sword vs. Halebard test in r3897

[Da Revolution]

Like Bo said, how can you counter 50 spear with 30 axe fighters? spear are easier to build and faster too

Have you already tried that? 50 lancers vs 30 axefighters with the patch? I am not sure if the lancers will win.

[EDMatt]

Like Bo said, how can you counter 50 spear with 30 axe fighters? spear are easier to build and faster too

Have you already tried that? 50 lancers vs 30 axefighters with the patch? I am not sure if the lancers will win.

The Patch was taken away I believe.

[Bo_]

Well with the patch probably not, but I think 30 axefighters should be able to counte up to 45 lances, that feels right to me.

[Bence791]

Guys, about for the 10th try, I have to managed to kill 50 lancers with 30 axemen (without patch). And see the almost least losses of lancers. Strom attack helped. Other thingies in the replay. (Click on Continue Watching...)

[Bo_]

Well Bence even without the patch it's logic that axefighters will win when you look on the way you placed them.

Now you did 2:15 for axefighters, 5:10 for lance carriers. Since the axefighters that perform a storm attack surround the lance carriers, they will win. But try it more realistic:
3:10 for axefighters, 4:12 for the lance carriers.

So I'm sorry but your test doesn't prove a lot.

[Bence791]

Trash tactics, you are right, congratulations It was about is it possible to kill 50 lancers with 30 axemen... And it proves a lot, yes. Anyway that "4x12" formation for lancers wouldn't be 50 (just a "reminder"). You look everything negatively.. why?

[EDMatt]

Trash tactics, you are right, congratulations It was about is it possible to kill 50 lancers with 30 axemen... And it proves a lot, yes. Anyway that "4x12" formation for lancers wouldn't be 50 (just a "reminder"). You look everything negatively.. why?

Because no one other then yourself would place them so retarded.

[Bo_]

Like I care about the 4:12 position not being 50?
By placing units like that I can even make 8 pikemen win against 20 swordfighters.

[Bence791]

By placing units like that I can even make 8 pikemen win against 20 swordfighters.

I'm waiting for that, patiently.

[Bo_]

Have fun watching the replay.

[Bence791]

Have fun watching the replay.

Just tell me where to find those swordsmen-slayer pikemen. I only can see melting pikes in this replay.

[Bo_]

I probably posted the wrong file, but I'll do it later, have to go.

[Leeuwgie]

Hello guys, I was away for a while but I like to comment on some things I've read here on the forum.

And this the crux of the whole thing. The balance between ground troops is of only minor interest because it's dominated by the crossbowmen. So people try to make the cheapest unit that does survive at least some bolts. And that's the lance carrier. The milita has only 1 armor, so it's not usually used, although I've met them already.

I couldn't agree more tbh. Lancers are the best option atm. They are too easy to produce in numbers (like pikemen). They are not only cheap but lances can be produced while you can only concentrate on crossbows so you don't have to 'waste' iron on swords. So if someone trains some swordmen as a result he will be punished because he has less crossbowmen on the field and he will likely lose the game, it's as simple as that. I wasn't the first to train lancers/xbows but yes now I use it way too often (like many others). And as a result to this strategy being used, I train knights less often because the are owned by lancers too easy. Lancers are just the best meatshield and on top of that they own horses. I think thats why this strategy is so popular.

However, I disagree with Siegfried that you should weaken crossbowmen so all troops survive longer. If we want to see swordmen used we need to give them a bonus. Swordmen take way more time and resources so they should last longer but in battle they fall like flies just like other troops. If you produce swords you can't produce more crossbows so you are already outnumbered by enemy crossbows. Swordmen could be given +1 armor but I think it's even better to let them take less damage from arrows because after all they have a shield. They can't be trained in large numbers and I think that's the way it's intended so if you see them on the battelfield they should own like no other infantry.

Sometimes I see players train axemen but it's basicly the same story, they are not better then lancers as a meatshield and require a shield so I never train them myself. If axemen were better (like they should) I would train them ofcourse and maybe even scouts. When was the last time you've seen scouts used in a multiplayer game? And if you seen them when have you seen them being used effectively? It's just as useless as swordmen and axeman which is a shame. A few people like Mulberry try to use all troops in battle (like I think it's intended) but in general can't win against an equal skilled player who has mass xbows and lancers.

He asked me about using less knights lately. Well, some time ago mass xbow/militia was the standard and knights were still usefull. Now lancers are more and more popular so knights can't be used effectively anymore in most games. If axemen was the backbone instead of lancers it would be much more interesting to train horses. The fact that knights (and swordmen) can't be trained in large numbers (because they take so much time and resources to produce) is for me the main reason to say they will never be overpowered. If I choose to train 12 knights it's no more then logic I don't have many crossbowmen in my army.

I accept that xbows will always be produced with priority by most players. It was in the original impossible to play without them like it is in the remake. It's just that if you throw in swordmen or lancers as a meatshield it makes the player with the swordmen lose the battle because he has less crossbowmen, the swordmen simply have too less armor and on top of that they are outnumbered.

So in short;
1 - Pikemen and lancers should mainly be used to counter horses only.
2 - Swordmen and axemen should be the main 'meatshield' in the army so they both need to be buffed.
3 - Crossbowmen shouldn't be nerfed. Bowmen probably need to be buffed.

It's all about forcing players to concentrate less on producing only xbows and using a unit not intended for it's purpose (lancers). Wouldn't it be much more interesting and fun to see all 9 units used instead of only these 2?

To

[-George Stain-]

So in short;
1 - Pikemen and lancers should mainly be used to counter horses only.
2 - Swordmen and axemen should be the main 'meatshield' in the army so they both need to be buffed.
3 - Crossbowmen shouldn't be nerfed. Bowmen probably need to be buffed.

I completely agree with you.. it is my dream about Remake and IMO key for good balanced game with many options for players and teams.. (everybody must think about enemy plans).

Maybe bowmen is good enought.. (don't forget that bowmens are better killers of towers than xbows) comparing Bowman with Crossbowmen is like compare Lance and Pike.. In my Remake idea are archers more like Support units, not as main damage dealers, specifically they are good against polearms, average against shield and weak against horses.

[Lewin]

So in short;
1 - Pikemen and lancers should mainly be used to counter horses only.
2 - Swordmen and axemen should be the main 'meatshield' in the army so they both need to be buffed.
3 - Crossbowmen shouldn't be nerfed. Bowmen probably need to be buffed.

It's all about forcing players to concentrate less on producing only xbows and using a unit not intended for it's purpose (lancers). Wouldn't it be much more interesting and fun to see all 9 units used instead of only these 2?

That sounds like a pretty good idea, we'll probably test changes like this first. I notice you didn't mention that scouts/knights need a buff, and I agree. They are already fast and tougher (more HP), and once there are less lance carriers around they will become much more useful for flanking etc.

A few points:
1 - We need to make sure lance carriers/pikemen are still useful, but that shouldn't be too hard.
2 - Your suggestion of making sword/axemen more resistant to arrows sounds like a good thing to try out. It means the "paper-scissors-rock" balance is unchanged, because as Krom showed, it's already quite well balanced when you take archers and unit costs out of the equation. If they are better against arrows then they'll be the best choice for a meatshield. We just have to make sure that they don't become too powerful and make lance carriers/pikemen/scouts/knights useless.
3 - I guess bowmen could receive a small buff because ATM they're basically useless compared to crossbowmen who are twice as powerful and nearly twice as hard to kill.

Thanks for your well written and constructive post To

(don't forget that bowmens are better killers of towers than xbows)

They're not, they both do the same amount of damage per arrow, the same as all units. I guess you'd have more bowmen because they're cheaper, so in that sense they're better against towers.