This doesn’t make the champion bad per se but it does make you wonder what strategies are we not seeing because MAA and longswords are underpowered relative to alternatives.Į.g. But in a dynamic analysis it’s clear that champions are also held back by their most of their middle upgrades not being justifiable until imperial age. I think in a static analysis champions are good and have a well-defined imperial age roll. If nothing else this make those design decisions questionable. I was just making the point that prior to imperial age the militia line cannot reasonably be justified using against buildings, despite having explicit design decisions toward that end. Tons of things tear up massed halbs though. IDK seems like supplies and arson need to be way cheaper to even let them do the role that separates them from knights. However with all the upgrades they can, but then they’ve spent like 855 resources. they can’t break in any faster for it to matter. The cost is especially ironic because without the upgrades villagers can easily repair/quick wall or they can bring in units. Without wanting to fill that “well-balanced but able to break-in-quick” niche there’s no reason to build them except as an eagle counter. I don’t really need to explain each of these because they’re self-explanatory in how they are detrimental toward the militia-line niche of being good at attacking buildings. Once they get inside there is no ? → profit.Requires being on the offensive (relates to their speed).Theoretically they should be good at breaking through the ‘wood-wall’ of houses, barracks, palisade, etc. One thing that’s bugged me about the militia line is they differentiate themselves with bonus attack against buildings, in an attack classification which doesn’t get affected by masonry/architecture.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |