Balancing Idea

[Ben]

Many of you will probably recognize Nissarin's melee unit test map. His reults were thusly:

As you can see, leather armored units are far inferior to iron. Of course that's natural.

I've played many games lately where I try to go for militia spam. I concluded that the strategy is only practical for... unpractical reasons: having fun. Militia are, though I hate to say it, nearly worthless. I thought that maybe they should have a slight[/] increase in attack. This will make them still very susceptible to ranged units, but at least give them a chance to make some kills against swords and pikes.

Again, I say this change can be very minor. I'd like to see if a small increase in attack can bring back militia spam strategies

To further extend my idea: perhaps we could increase the attack of axes (the weapon)? Axe fighters are currently pretty expensive, at least more than a bowman. Still, massed bowmen are much more powerful than massed axefighters; at a fraction of the cost.

Just an idea. Would be nice to test it...

[Strangelove]

Seeing that numbers was kind of shocking to be honest. I mean, everybody knows that Leather and of course Militia are inferior to Iron-troops, but I didn't know they were THAT inferior. I'd agree to a rebalance of axes as well, however, I do not really play multiplayer, so I do not know how much it would change things or upset people.

[Tiank]

Militia are, though I hate to say it, nearly worthless.

I can't agree with that. Recently I played many 1v1 games and I got to say, that having large militia troop (even a 20 is enough), among with other, standard troops, is really important. Of course, Milita can't do any huge damage in fight, but they can easily slow down enemy, make other troops busy for some time, which could be essential in winning the whole match.

Of course, making miltia only spam is totally worthless, but that's what makes game interesting - you just don't go for one type of unit, you're trying to find the most effective mix.

Still, massed bowmen are much more powerful than massed axefighters;

But massed Bowmen are nothing without a melee deending them. For me it's an obvious ranged advantage - being really powerfull on battlefield, but vulnerable at close encounter.

[dicsoupcan]

i do have to say that the militia must do what it does best on a battlefield full of quality units, being worthless in straight battle. they can have uses of harrassing enemy ranged a bit, take a nice flank resulting in kills or simply be cannon fodder, but should never be as strong to be a main force.

i am a bit indifferent about axefighters, yes they are inferior to iron units although they can fight a bit toe to toe with pikemen but you can mass them more easily once you are setup in the long run. the only reason swords are still the superior choice is that an ironproduction works immediately unlike leatherproduction, which always needs to start up. but once the mass of pt swords are dead the axefighter is actually the unit that starts to be the main infantry, because most swords are being saved for knights. i would not mind testing a power increase, but at the same time i do not think it is actually needed.

[The Dark Lord]

I think militia are fine. Giving them more attack would make them even more unpredictable (of course, they die like flies, but sometimes they make some very annoying and improbable kills, especially in battles without ranged support). I hate it when my expensive units get killed by a mere militia, because it can only happen through luck (which is a factor I despise).

[Kamykos]

I agree with Tiank about militia. I think they should be as they are. Their task is to avoid enemy arrows and keep melee units busy. I think boosting axefighters would be nice. There are situations when 3 axefighters can't kill 1 knight. I had a situation when 6 axefighters and 7 bowmans lost against 3 knights. I know knights are expensive and should be powerful but please. When you spend 13 leather jackets and 32 wood you should be sure to defeat 3 knights. I'm not even talking about gold here.
I do not mean to nerf knights. I just think axefighters should have more attack. But this is only my thoughts. Maybe someone who plays more often can relate to this.

[Krom]

I would not take "I had a situation when 6 axefighters and 7 bowmans lost against 3 knights" into account without extensive testing, because KaM is random by it's nature and like shown in recent test of 20 vs 20 units, outcome is fair, yet sometimes up to 15 from one group survives.

[Kamykos]

Yes, you are right Krom. That was only example. I just have a feeling that axemans are too weak for their cost. But thats only my feeling.
Another thing about boosting axemans can be increasing the use of crossbows. It could be a good alternative for strategy swords+bowmans in my opinion.

[Strangelove]

Totally agree.

[Leeuwgie]

I think militia is pretty good as they are now. They are good for breaking through towers. And thay are not too bad (when numbered) against other melee units (even knights) without being shot at if they are in the open. They are however very bad against any ranged troops. They just don't have the armor to even reach them. if this could be changed a little I'm not against it.