You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

General Discussions
Moderated by Maffia, LordKivlov, JimXIX

Hop to:    
Welcome! You are not logged in. Please Login or Register.25 replies
Age of Empires III Heaven » Forums » General Discussions » Colonial Melee Cavalry Ranged Resisitance Should Go Back
Bottom
Topic Subject:Colonial Melee Cavalry Ranged Resisitance Should Go Back
ultimitsu
Skirmisher
posted 05-01-08 10:57 PM EDT (US)         
When the game was first released, LI was OP and all colonial melee cav sucked, got shot down by the unitsit suppose to counter, ES recognised this problem after almost a whole year, but then they did the wrong change - instead of weaken LI's damage to MC, they boosted MC's ranged resistance. this made MC not only stronger against LI, but also eveyrthing else, some of them are suppose to counter MC.

But no one complained because MC was still not strong enough to dominate the battle field.

Until TAD 1.01.

Now that LI are doing x0.75 against MC, MC have gained their rightful place in the food chain, but because they still havr the excessive ranged resistance their counters dont work too well against them, such as outpost, some ranged cavalry, and HI in range, and the ever weaker TC.

Lately I played many games where uhlans diving into cassadore armies, equal cost army of dragoons dont kill them fast enough before they do fatal damage to the LI army. or sowar raiding party running inside well protected base, killing many vils before lose enough to retreat. or Sioux cavalry surround army of keshik and chop them into bits.

I think it is time for colonial cavalry to take a step back in their ranged resistance. so they can be fended off properly by outpost and TC, as well as ranged cavalry.

Hussar, Axeraider, Cuirs to 10%, Axeraider +5hp
uhlan, cossack, Nagi, stepp rider, sowar, kanya, change to 20%

I think Cuirs should get that 10% nerf because it never deserved 20% in the first place.

every other cavalry can stay the way they are.

thoughts?

[This message has been edited by ultimitsu (edited 05-03-2008 @ 06:59 PM).]

AuthorReplies:
Camp
Skirmisher
posted 05-01-08 11:45 PM EDT (US)     1 / 25       
I think the best example for this is whats going on with germany. Their crossbows are no stronger than in 1.00, but because Uhlans have become so powerful now, germany is legit again..

It used to be one uhlan died to 12 crossbow shots in colonial, now its 19, thats more than a 33 percent increase in uhlan effectness!
CunniJA
Skirmisher
posted 05-02-08 00:10 AM EDT (US)     2 / 25       
I completely disagree. Cavalry are right where they should be now. People are just going to complain now that they can't expect to just spam *LI and win anymore. The patch has added a lot more thinking to the game for everybody involved. Cav should be kept exactly as they are all the way around. Outposts and TC's shouldn't be countering Cavalry anyway.

And, the higher resistances have been around for a while, so bringing up the LC vs. HC thing now is pretty late. And, LC does a fine job against HC anyway. All one needs to do is micro, and HC cannot catch LC anyway.

Outposts and TC shouldn't counter cav anyway because cavalry are supposed to be a unit with relatively low siege but a lot of ranged resistance. Outposts and TC should, on the other hand, coutner Heavy Infantry as they do because Heavy Infantry are supposed to have melee resistance and relatively high siege.

A_S: "Cunni's pic wins thread otherwise failing due to being 5-7 years behind the times."
"Brilliant cunni simply brilliant"
C_MAG: "CunniJA's post is epic win."
ultimitsu
Skirmisher
posted 05-02-08 00:22 AM EDT (US)     3 / 25       
I completely disagree. Cavalry are right where they should be now. People are just going to complain now that they can't expect to just spam *LI and win anymore.
er... who is that in the thread?
Outposts and TC's shouldn't be countering Cavalry anyway.
why else do you think TC and outpost had multiplier against cavalry sine AOE3 1.00, TC only got that removed as of TAD 1.01.
the higher resistances have been around for a while, so bringing up the LC vs. HC thing now is pretty late. And, LC does a fine job against HC anyway. All one needs to do is micro, and HC cannot catch LC anyway.
what has changed is back then LC had the assistance from LI, these days LI do significantly less damage to MC, LC by themselves are not killing them fast enough.

micro? this word is way overused here in HG, even Nature Phoenix's PR40+ opponents fail to hit and run his muskts + grenadier army, you think micro is really going to answer all your questions?

furthermore, not every civ has got dragoons. ERK are slower than cavalry, while jap cav archer and Keshike get chopped because they dont have melee resistance, cav archer and bowrider can stand and soak melee damage but that means they while they attack, they can not be moved around to avoid LI fire.
Outposts and TC shouldn't counter cav anyway because cavalry are supposed to be a unit with relatively low siege but a lot of ranged resistance.
you got the second half right - cavalry suppose to have low siege and receive high damage from outpost. this design is to reward the player that build outpost to protect their vils. and then outpost themselves are designed to be fragile against "siegetroop" class.

[This message has been edited by ultimitsu (edited 05-02-2008 @ 00:57 AM).]

TheRomans
Skirmisher
posted 05-02-08 02:15 AM EDT (US)     4 / 25       
While I don't agree with the Hussar and Axe Rider change to 10%, I do agree on the change to Cuirs. When I play as ports, nothing makes me sicker than watching Cuirassiers eat my Dragoons and then killing my Cašadors. Before anyone says micro, the reason I'm not micro'ing my Dragoons is because I need them there to try and block the Cuirs from slaughtering my Cašadors, which happens anyway in a lot of cases. Heavy Infantry you say? Well that just puts units in a Cuir's favorite setting, hand to hand combat, where their splash damage will make the most significant damage.

Cuirs are already amazing in attack and HP, they don't need to have 20% resist.

+----------+
| PLEASE |
| DO NOT |
| FEED THE |
| TROLLS |
+----------+

[This message has been edited by TheRomans (edited 05-02-2008 @ 02:17 AM).]

Spectruz
Skirmisher
posted 05-02-08 11:23 AM EDT (US)     5 / 25       
I don't think MC needs to be nerfed again, they r doing great, but I agree Musk kinda don't kill that horses as it should, because usually only 2 are in melee, the others still ranged, if u try to change the whole HI in Melee, now u have a big trouble with HnR from RI, maybe the best way is to give a small multiply for HI and LC vrs MC to compensate the +.10 RR, like 1.2 for HI that will make then better in range, not stronger vrs RI, and keep MC as good as it is vrs RI.
Humility
Skirmisher
posted 05-02-08 11:57 AM EDT (US)     6 / 25       
So what are hand infantry supposed to do wile muskets do their job?

Musketeers are supposed to be a soft counter to calvary not a hard counter.

The problem with cuirs isn't the cuir but the thoroughbred card. It makes them cheap and easily spammed. You gave dopples a card like that and you would have dopples pwning everything with ease.
TheRomans
Skirmisher
posted 05-02-08 05:42 PM EDT (US)     7 / 25       
The problem with cuirs isn't the cuir but the thoroughbred card. It makes them cheap and easily spammed. You gave dopples a card like that and you would have dopples pwning everything with ease.
I don't think Thoroughbreds is the main issue, that card is just scratching an already irritating rash. The problem lies within the unit itself.

People say that to effectively counter Cuirassiers, one needs an army of HI+LC. Now why is it that I need to combine both counters to defeat this unit. I don't need Skirms+Cannons to defeat HI, I don't need Skirms+LC to defeat Rifle Riders, I don't have to meat shield my LC from Lancers, Hussars, non-FU Uhlans, Cossacks, and now Axe Riders. Why do Cuirs get to be the exception?

For those who think, "Well just beat him before he goes Industrial and gets Gendarme Cuirassiers." What if I'm playing a civ similar to France or a civ designed to have a good late game, such as Brits or Ports? Are late-game civs doomed to be screwed vs France because they don't have the ability to take them out early? And its not like France is weaker earlier in the game.

I don't think France is OP, I think the civ is balanced nicely as a whole, but Cuirs are a little too strong vs their counters Mid to Late game. I don't think a huge nerf is needed for them, just something simple like -10% Ranged Resist, Colonial Stats, or a .75X multiplier vs LC/HI.

+----------+
| PLEASE |
| DO NOT |
| FEED THE |
| TROLLS |
+----------+
The Jackal
Skirmisher
posted 05-02-08 06:14 PM EDT (US)     8 / 25       
Heavy Infantry you say? Well that just puts units in a Cuir's favorite setting, hand to hand combat, where their splash damage will make the most significant damage.
Wrong. Even with splash damage, heavy infantry will beat cuirassers handily. Fix bayonets and charge.
Hussar, Axeraider, Cuirs to 10%, Axeraider +5hp
uhlan, cossack, Nagi, stepp rider, sowar, kanya, change to 20%

I think Cuirs should get that 10% nerf because it never deserved 20% in the first place.
All that would do is reintroduce the original problem, namely the supremacy of light infantry. If anything, strengthen the attack of light cavalry, or give them stronger multipliers against hand cav.

Where was it written that TCs and Outposts should be effective against cavalry? The last patch actually removed outpost attack bonuses to cavalry, you're basically asking for a more or less direct reversal of the most significant changes made in 1.01.
For those who think, "Well just beat him before he goes Industrial and gets Gendarme Cuirassiers." What if I'm playing a civ similar to France or a civ designed to have a good late game, such as Brits or Ports? Are late-game civs doomed to be screwed vs France because they don't have the ability to take them out early? And its not like France is weaker earlier in the game.
Both Brits and Ports have splendid upgrades for musketeers, which make them more than a match for gendarmes. Besides, both France and Portugal both grow their economy considerably faster than France, so yes, the French ARE weaker in the early game.

[This message has been edited by The Jackal (edited 05-02-2008 @ 06:17 PM).]

Humility
Skirmisher
posted 05-02-08 06:33 PM EDT (US)     9 / 25       
Just fix Throughbreds and Cuirs won't be OP. If Dopples got a throughbred card then they would be op late game.
TheRomans
Skirmisher
posted 05-02-08 06:42 PM EDT (US)     10 / 25       
Wrong. Even with splash damage, heavy infantry will beat cuirassers handily. Fix bayonets and charge.
That might, and does, work well in Fortress, but not late-game. Cuirs are like cannons, the closer packed the enemies, the more effective the splash damage is. If I am using muskets and see a large number of Cuirs coming at them, I am more likely to leave them in volley rather than melee because that reduces the effectiveness of splash.
Both Brits and Ports have splendid upgrades for musketeers, which make them more than a match for gendarmes. Besides, both France and Portugal both grow their economy considerably faster than France, so yes, the French ARE weaker in the early game.
You would think the upgrades would be more than a match, but they aren't really. The Muskets should absolutely own the Cuirs but they do a little more than break even at best.

And oh yea, Ports have a way better eco than France early on. Must be why Ports are so well known to Double-Rax Xbow spam, right? /end sarcasm

Only if ports and brits remain completely naked and do a full out boom, do they really out-boom France.

But like I said before, France is balanced, Cuirs are not.

The reason I don't think Thoroughbreds is the problem alone is because the only units that effectively counter Cuirs are the ones who do so much Cav Damage, that they kill Cuirs before Cuirs have the chance to deal their heavy splash. The only units that fall in this category are Doppelsoldners, Samurai, Ashigaru, Ronin, Hatamoto Samurai, Cavalry Archers, Skull Knights, Eagle Runner Knights, Rifle Riders, Dutch 150 Halbs or Ruyters and possibly War Wagons.

That means 4 out of 7(excludes French) Euro civs have an easy time countering Cuirs. Russian Muskets are a lost cause vs late game Cuirs, Halbs fair better but still sub par. Russia's best bet is Cav Archers, but they are such a 1D unit to use. Ottoman's jans have such ridiculous HP that they do beat Cuirs, But Ottoman Cav Archers work well. Ottoman will get out-eco'd by France though. Dutch can beat Cuirs with massive amounts of Cuir's direct counter, but Dutch fall behind economically.

2 Natives have decent counters, Aztec does with ERKs, Sioux doesn't have the late game eco to keep up with France. Iroquois don't do very well vs Cuirs.

I don't know about India, but just saying China vs Cuirs is enough. Japan fairs quite well vs Cuirs.

So out of 13 civs(excludes France) only 7(possibly 8 with India) can really keep up with Cuirs and of those 7, only 4 can keep up with the French eco. I will agree though that most of the civs that get out eco'd by France, have a good chance to take them out earlier in the game.

Of course it is a well known fact that French is massively OP late game. I just find it funny that the civ that is supposed to be the jack of all trades civ has a great colonial in Xbow spamming, Decent FF and Fortress shipments, and the most OP late-game in the game with Sevastopol weakened. I'm sure if more Supremacy games made it past Colonial and Fortress this would be more of an issue.

Final thought is: France is fine in all stages of the game, but the Cuirs are not. France gets an auto-win vs many civs late game because they simply can not keep up. I understand ES designed the game for some civs to have an advantage late game, but no civ deserves the late game advantage that French have. And I feel that with a small nerf to Cuirs only vs their direct counters that French would be brought back down to Earth late game. And yes I know this game is balanced for supremacy and not treaty, but as a former Treaty player, and I still do sometimes play it, I tend to stand up for Treaty, and I find this to be an issue in both game types if only a minor one in supremacy. As far as people saying this game was not made for Treaty, when was the last time you saw someone using duct tape to repair air ducts? Things are used all the time without the original intention in mind.

EDIT: Oh God, I'm turning into Ender_Ward.

I think I might have just hijacked Ulti's thread.

+----------+
| PLEASE |
| DO NOT |
| FEED THE |
| TROLLS |
+----------+

[This message has been edited by TheRomans (edited 05-02-2008 @ 07:29 PM).]

The Jackal
Skirmisher
posted 05-02-08 08:06 PM EDT (US)     11 / 25       
Only if ports and brits remain completely naked and do a full out boom, do they really out-boom France.
Not remotely true. France can't boom AT ALL, until fortress. Their CDBs are pop effective to be sure, but their economy grows at baseline rate. By comparison, Brits and Ports start with more villagers and have little trouble compounding their economic advantage if they can avoid hemorraging villagers to raiding.
Cuirs are like cannons, the closer packed the enemies, the more effective the splash damage is. If I am using muskets and see a large number of Cuirs coming at them, I am more likely to leave them in volley rather than melee because that reduces the effectiveness of splash.

You would think the upgrades would be more than a match, but they aren't really. The Muskets should absolutely own the Cuirs but they do a little more than break even at best.
You're doing it wrong, then.

FU Gendarmes: 1150 HP, 20% RR, 132 damage cap.

FU Portugese Musketeers: 375 HP, 20% MR, 105 damage vs. Cavalry.

Even assuming your gendarmes get 100% of their splash damage, they'll inflict only 80% of their damage due to the musketeer's melee resistance. That means just ONE musketeer will will answer back the full amount of damage that the gendarme is doing. But cavalry has a big footprint, and you should have little trouble surrounding the gendarmes with multiple musketeers in melee, which means that your gendarmes will take far more damage in than they can inflict out.

So next time, fix bayonets and charge.
TheRomans
Skirmisher
posted 05-02-08 09:16 PM EDT (US)     12 / 25       
Not remotely true. France can't boom AT ALL, until fortress. Their CDBs are pop effective to be sure, but their economy grows at baseline rate. By comparison, Brits and Ports start with more villagers and have little trouble compounding their economic advantage if they can avoid hemorraging villagers to raiding.
I find the opposite to be true. Sure Ports start with 7 settlers, but they don't have a 3 settler card or trickle card. France has a 3.75 "settler" card in comparison and starts with 6.25 "settlers". Ports booming doesn't start until Colonial and by Fortress age their booming advantage is gone as other civs can now build TCs

British start with 6 settlers and France start with 6.25 "settlers". British get a 3 settler card while France gets that 3.75 "settler" card. Sure Brits have manors that spawn settlers, but manors are expensive and slow to build. A manor boom is good, but most civs won't leave a Brit alone long enough to pull it off.

France may have slower training CdB instead of settlers, but they make up for the slower training by being worth 1.25x a normal settler in gathering rates.
You're doing it wrong, then.

FU Gendarmes: 1150 HP, 20% RR, 132 damage cap.

FU Portugese Musketeers: 375 HP, 20% MR, 105 damage vs. Cavalry.

Even assuming your gendarmes get 100% of their splash damage, they'll inflict only 80% of their damage due to the musketeer's melee resistance. That means just ONE musketeer will will answer back the full amount of damage that the gendarme is doing. But cavalry has a big footprint, and you should have little trouble surrounding the gendarmes with multiple musketeers in melee, which means that your gendarmes will take far more damage in than they can inflict out.

So next time, fix bayonets and charge.
You're math works fine in a 1 Cuir vs 3 Muskets Scenario, but you didn't calculate the splash damage overlap, and thats what gives Cuirs the power they have. In small numbers they are countered fine, but in large numbers splash damage overlap makes them do almost exponential damage.

It will take your muskets 11 hits to bring down 1 Cuir, while the 1 Cuir is likely to be damaging 3-4 muskets at once. 1-2 of which are probably trying to make it around their fellow musketeers to even attack the said Cuirassier. Path finding and splash overlap is the main reason I keep muskets in volley.

+----------+
| PLEASE |
| DO NOT |
| FEED THE |
| TROLLS |
+----------+
Flair
Skirmisher
posted 05-02-08 09:26 PM EDT (US)     13 / 25       
Cuirs can only hit 2 muskets at a time, I have no idea where you're getting that "3-4 muskets at a time" thing from.

Cuirs are really overated if you ask me. Sure, they're awesome late game, but Goons and Halbs can easily take care of a full cuir spam. FU volts+FU Cuirs is arguably the strongest late game combo. If you're fighting that late in the game, France's +25% eco will be almost unstoppable anyways.
TheRomans
Skirmisher
posted 05-02-08 10:59 PM EDT (US)     14 / 25       
Cuirs can only hit 2 muskets at a time, I have no idea where you're getting that "3-4 muskets at a time" thing from.

Cuirs are really overated if you ask me. Sure, they're awesome late game, but Goons and Halbs can easily take care of a full cuir spam. FU volts+FU Cuirs is arguably the strongest late game combo. If you're fighting that late in the game, France's +25% eco will be almost unstoppable anyways.
This is a thread made a long time ago that speculates on the damage cap. In that thread you can clearly see examples of Cuirs attacking more than 2 units at once.


This picture most clearly shows what I mean. Splash Damage is flawed and only ES knows exactly how it works.

And FYI, France +25% eco is equal to a 100 settler normal eco because France can only build 80 CdB.

80 CDB +25%=100 settlers.

+----------+
| PLEASE |
| DO NOT |
| FEED THE |
| TROLLS |
+----------+

[This message has been edited by TheRomans (edited 05-02-2008 @ 11:32 PM).]

Humility
Skirmisher
posted 05-02-08 11:30 PM EDT (US)     15 / 25       
It's a area effect attack geez it's not rocket science.

C) that is a splash of one everything within that area is damaged.


C_) that is a splash of two everything within that area is damaged.


C__) this is a splash of 3 everything withing this area is damaged.

Cannons area damage is less of a arc and more of a circle.

o area of one. O area of 2.

It's not rocket science.

Does anybody here ever play Final fantasy 12?

[This message has been edited by Humility (edited 05-02-2008 @ 11:31 PM).]

TheRomans
Skirmisher
posted 05-02-08 11:40 PM EDT (US)     16 / 25       
It's a area effect attack geez it's not rocket science.

C) that is a splash of one everything within that area is damaged.


C_) that is a splash of two everything within that area is damaged.


C__) this is a splash of 3 everything withing this area is damaged.

Cannons area damage is less of a arc and more of a circle.

o area of one. O area of 2.

It's not rocket science.
While the area for damage is quite simple and the type the area is(cone, arc, circle, parallel), is also simple. What is not simple is how damage is distributed over an area. That is the center of speculation if you actually clicked the link.

+----------+
| PLEASE |
| DO NOT |
| FEED THE |
| TROLLS |
+----------+
Humility
Skirmisher
posted 05-02-08 11:50 PM EDT (US)     17 / 25       
Why do so many people seem to think that a area damage of 2 means they can only hit 2 units?
TheRomans
Skirmisher
posted 05-03-08 00:06 AM EDT (US)     18 / 25       
Sorry Humility, I just realized what you meant in your previous post. I thought you were saying that area damage was simple and that speculation in that thread was stupid. But now I realize you were trying to explain that area damage doesn't mean it attacks 2 units at once, but an area at once..... I think :S

+----------+
| PLEASE |
| DO NOT |
| FEED THE |
| TROLLS |
+----------+
ultimitsu
Skirmisher
posted 05-03-08 03:00 AM EDT (US)     19 / 25       
All that would do is reintroduce the original problem, namely the supremacy of light infantry.
no it wont reintrodue "the problem", because x0.75 has made LI very ineffective against MC.

Where was it written that TCs and Outposts should be effective against cavalry?
written in the proto file ever since aoe3 1.00, the big x1.5.
The last patch actually removed outpost attack bonuses to cavalry, you're basically asking for a more or less direct reversal of the most significant changes made in 1.01.


TC bonus was removed 30 month after original release, and the only reason was Wacko thinks differently to original aoe3 designers.

it is significant, in a way which i dont agree with. players invest in defensive structures should be rewarded accordingly, cavalry civ should not have the early advantage of being able to kill opponent's vils that close in TC coverage.

[This message has been edited by ultimitsu (edited 05-03-2008 @ 06:14 AM).]

English Shogun
Skirmisher
posted 05-03-08 03:20 AM EDT (US)     20 / 25       
cuirassers hit 2 area in a semi-circle in front if it so:

)
C ))
)

it's something like that, i'm sure.

and oh, i play final fantasy 12!! well i did before ps3 came out XD.
Killa4life
Skirmisher
posted 05-03-08 08:37 AM EDT (US)     21 / 25       
I agree with you ulti, goons especially dont kill cav nearly as fast as they should. Also Tcs+outposts do far too little dmg to cav now, its next to impossible to stop some raids like sowars or Uhlans since they can ALWAYS kill like 1-2 vills without losing much HP even if its RIGHT next to a tower. Thats just ridiculous.

there is no way musk/cav should counter RI/LC as well.
The fights go like:

Goons stay behind RI so they dont get shot by musk, cav moves in and forces the RI into melee, the RI has no meatshield and the cav kills the RI faster than the goons kill the cav. Wtf? Maybe all cav is gone eventually, then its musk vs goons, go figure.

Another really annoying thing is imo how well musket units do vs melee HI. Its just WTF when musk/hussar keeps beating xbow/pike given equal VS. The hussars get killed by the pikes just fine BUT the problem is that they kill the RI just as fast as the pikes kills them AND they have more speed -> pikes never touch them.
Now if the musks at least wouldnt do much to the pikes it wouldnt be a big problem. Pikes however get WTFOWNED by any sort of musks, even more so by sepoys, ashis etc.
That results in the cav simply moving in and out, forcing him to move the pikes infront of his xbows -> musks can kill 2-4 every time. The cav moves out again before the pikes touch it, the xbows shoot a bit at the cavs but hardly do any dmg.
Last patch this was compensated by xbows etc doing good dmg to cav so the cav guy couldnt just dance around with his cav laughing "haha cant touch me" since the xbows would deal considerable damage to it.
Now xbows do hardly any dmg to cav at all (iirc you need like 25 or more xbows to one shot a naginata rider wtf is that) while musks own pikes faster than xbows beat musks WTF.

So unless ES changes that stupid 0.75x vs cav again (it was overdone imo), which they wont, musks need a penalty vs melee HI/HI in general. In jap mirrors its equally dumb, naginata/ashi beats ashi/yumi WTF
Humility
Skirmisher
posted 05-03-08 10:09 AM EDT (US)     22 / 25       
Ever heard of walls? Their cheap and effective. place a line of wall towards a vulnerable direction and vills have lots of time to make it to a TC or tower.

And I agree muskets need a penalty vs Hand infantry. Just because muskets are to good vs hand infantry.
ultimitsu
Skirmisher
posted 05-03-08 06:56 PM EDT (US)     23 / 25       
wall has nothing to do with outpost, wall gives very little LOS, does no damage, and do not garrison, saying "outpost dont work so what just use wall" is like saying "xbow dont work so what just use falc". they are meant for completely different use even though they may both do something similarly.
Humility
Skirmisher
posted 05-03-08 07:17 PM EDT (US)     24 / 25       
What? Walls are supposed to slow down the calvary to give villagers time to make it to a outpost or TC.

Thats what I just said. Who are you talking to?
jayce
Skirmisher
posted 05-06-08 10:59 PM EDT (US)     25 / 25       
Late game cuirs are only op cuz they upgrade off vet stats. They are not op at all in age 3.

If you change the RR for cav units then u should give RI a .65 penalty vs cav. Will make goons units more effective but keep RI weak vs cav.
You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Hop to:    

Age of Empires III Heaven | HeavenGames