The Counter System

[sphyrth]

If I'm getting it right, the counter system is more tactical than statistical. Units that have been granted x3 against Cavalry, and are very tanky against all other infantry have the cost of being very slow. That means that players going against pure spearmen builds are forced to hit-and-run tactics rather than making head-on collisions.

If this is where the developers intend, then I can adjust myself to it. But what I want to know is do OTHER players like it?

*As a sidenote. Have you guys realized that slingers are essentially human Siege Weapons? I just saw the patch.

Edited January 30, 2017 by sphyrth

[LordGood]

Historically for civilizations without massive  siege engines, slingers were the siege engines. I remember reading somewhere the Gauls would stone their opponents off their walls before sapping them, besides, it would be nice to have low tier siege weapons to grade out the harsh jump between town phase siege warfare and the inevitable city phase siege-and-champ blitz

[LordGood]

That said I do like how pikes handle as what actually feels like 'heavy infantry'

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

36 minutes ago, LordGood said:

Historically for civilizations without massive  siege engines, slingers were the siege engines. I remember reading somewhere the Gauls would stone their opponents off their walls before sapping them, besides, it would be nice to have low tier siege weapons to grade out the harsh jump between town phase siege warfare and the inevitable city phase siege-and-champ blitz

Players use capture by default. Slinger siege dudes never made sense. Give archers a flaming arrows option instead.

[LordGood]

Flaming arrows make even less sense, throwing a rock at a house is going to shatter tile, plaster, splinter wood and chip stone.

To make something as uncommon as flaming arrows and make it a common technology would be a disservice to the games intended historical accuracy. That should only be an Iberian skirmisher tech

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

5 minutes ago, LordGood said:

To make something as uncommon as flaming arrows and make it a common technology would be a disservice to the games intended historical accuracy. That should only be an Iberian skirmisher tech

Taking down buildings with sling stones is not "historically accurate" either.

[sphyrth]

Haha. A simple side-note just hijacked the thread.

The patch I was referring to was that the slingers' crush damage was nerfed. I believed that it it was overpowered, and I think that the developers considered it too. The slingers' sieging ability is still there, but not as strong as before.

Come on, guys. Even people in history didn't slash fortresses with swords just to take them down. fun > realism.

But what about the counter system? Do you like it when it's more tactical? Or do you want the hard-stats counter system back?

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

1 hour ago, sphyrth said:

But what about the counter system? Do you like it when it's more tactical? Or do you want the hard-stats counter system back?

I think you are using wrong terms.

 

Current way is with stats-only, with a couple exception. Old way is with hard-counters --attack bonus and penalty.

Edited January 30, 2017 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[Servo]

I like the counter system but in order not to abuse it:

1. Reduce attack damage of cavalry and foot range units on buildings and add splash damage to either friendly or enemy units this way deterring simultaneous attacks on particular targets most especially buildings. 

2. Increase building HP and increase building firepower or any ways just to discourage infantry and cavalry attacks on it. 

Edited January 30, 2017 by Servo

[sphyrth]

Come to think of it. I didn't know how the hard-countering system worked.

Was it like this?
Spearmen = Anti-Cavalry + Anti-Swordsmen
Swordsmen = Anti-Ranged
Ranged = Anti-Spearmen
Cavalry = ?

Edited January 31, 2017 by sphyrth

[borg-]

In others classics rts games is: 

Spearmen = Anti-cavalry (some "special" units can tank also)

Swordsmen = Anti-Spearmen (some "special" units can kill ranged)

Ranged = Anti-Spearmen and Swordsmen

Cavalry = Anti ranged units (kill some light infantry as Swordsmen due to its higher hp)

Edited January 31, 2017 by borg-

[wraitii]

The fundamental problem is that our civilisations don't have enough units, on the whole, since not all of them have a basic spearman or a basic swordsman (and it gets worse when you consider champions).

[fatherbushido]

7 hours ago, sphyrth said:

 

Was it like this?
 

There was a kind of web.

(I don't like hard counter :p)

[av93]

Original counter system was very messy (like Empire Earth II)

In AOE series (specially in the 3, but maybe it's the most unbalanced) you have some civs that miss some unit lines, and some of them are trained and are only useful for some civs (like champions, cav archers...)

In my flavor, I would redesign champions as unique units, not as an enhanced elite unit: generally a slighty better unit (not always) with some special feature (special countering, fast creation, regeneration, etc..)

Also, I think that counters could be introduced in a easier way...: instead of making every unit a class, play only with 4 (6) main standards:
- Heavy infantry (melee infantry)
- Light infantry (ranged infantry)
- Heavy cavalry (melee cavalry)
- Light cavalry (ranged cavalry)
- and Siege and Suport

 

... then you avoid situations like skirmishers good against spearman but not against swordman (¿?). I could explain further my own idea if you want.

Every unit should have a role and right now don't know if every one it's clear.. Why I should train cav spearman over a cav swordman?

Edited January 31, 2017 by av93

[Lion.Kanzen]

I agree with @av93

there must be main standards classes. 

Calvary beat misile infantry and support units and some siege units

infantry can beat cavalry and siege units except may be splash area damage units

misile can beat infantry.

Siege can deal with mostly of classes but are slower and no much armor, but siege can deal with defenses and buildings.

 

Champion must be advanced unit with special features. But can be countered by their class.

same for heroes.

 

In AOK for example Condottiero is the version of Champion ( last upgrade of swordsman) with bonus vs gun power units.

Plumed Mayan, Longbow , Rattan Archer are different version of basic archer with own bonuses. The Mayan is fast and infantry killer, longbow have very long range and Rattan is heavy armored archer that can tank in a siege attack.

and there are units can counter their natural counter like Cataphract have bonus vs infantry or Genoese Crossbow with bonus vs cavalry.

http://ageofempires.wikia.com/wiki/Armor_Class:_Unique_Unit

http://ageofempires.wikia.com/wiki/Unique_Unit_(Age_of_Empires_II)

Edited January 31, 2017 by Lion.Kanzen

[av93]

Well my suggestion would be something like this:

HEAVY INFANTRY

Spearman: Bonus against both cavalry.
Role: Basic unit available to every civilization. Main unit and useful to protect other units from cavalry. Meatshield

Swordsman: Higher base attack than spearman, bonus against heavy infantry.
Role: Break melee infantry fronts, kill unprotected units (light infantry, support or siege) 

Pikeman: High HP and Armor, low attack (if no formations are implemented, every unit gets a bonus attack aura for other pikes).  Bonus against cavalry. Slow movement.
Role: Protect ranged infantry, capture or when massed act like a powerful slow spearhead.

 

-LIGHT INFANTRY:

Skirmisher: Shortest range. Higher base attack
Role: Basic ranged unit. Useful against everything, but with low range it's the most vulnerable unit. The best ranged unit to deal against both cavalry types

Slinger: Medium range. Bonus against heavy infantry
Role: Better than skirmishers against heavy infantry. Should win skirmishers by range, but they damage between them could be on pair.

Archer: Long range. Low attack and bonus against Light Infantry.
Role: Kill skirmishers and slingers and support long range attack.

All light infantry get a bonus against Light Cavalry.

-HEAVY CAVALRY

Sword cav: Fast. Bonus against light infantry
Role: Kill light infantry (altough spear cav should be better), raid, and maybe catch light cavalry

Spear cavalry: Tankier armour, HP, Good attack. Slower
Role: Better frontline cavalry than swordman cavalry.

-LIGHT CAVALRY

Skirmisher cavalry: Good damage. Low range
Role: Hit and Run, effective against everything, but could be killed if get caught or by ranged units (so it would be mainly anti heavy infantry)

Archer cavalry: Low damage, Long range. Bonus against light units (both infantry and light cavalry). Less HP than skirmisher cavalry
Role: Hit and Run from distance, but worst DPS against heavy. Loose against ranged infantry if gets caught in range (specially against archer, with same range)

All defensive buildings get bonus against Light Cavalry

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Then, I would make Spearman and Skirmisher infantry and Skirmisher cavalry costing only food and wood (Trash unit). More uncommon units could cost food/wood and metal (no stone for siege or slingers, only for buildings).

I would change hacking/pierce/crush to Melee/Ranged/Siege. (I think it could be easier to balance and to think, although hybrid damage could be special feature for some units)

 

*I know that there's some historical things... some slinger could out range archers, and the spear cavalry role resembles more a medieval knight-like... but I think that is somewhat cohesive system.

 

 

Edited January 27, 2019 by av93

[Zeta1127]

Other than the unit cost changes, I like where that counter system is going overall.

[Grugnas]

15 hours ago, av93 said:

Well my suggestion would be something like this:

HEAVY INFANTRY

Spearman: Bonus against both cavalry.
Role: Basic unit available to every civilization. Main unit and useful to protect other units from cavalry. Meatshield

Swordsman: Higher base attack than spearman, bonus against heavy infantry.
Role: Break melee infantry fronts, kill unprotected units (light infantry, support or siege) 

Pikeman: High HP and Armor, low attack (if no formations are implemented, every unit gets a bonus attack aura for other pikes).  Bonus against cavalry. Slow movement.
Role: Protect ranged infantry, capture or when massed act like a powerful slow spearhead.

 

-LIGHT INFANTRY:

Skirmisher: Shortest range. Higher base attack
Role: Basic ranged unit. Useful against everything, but with low range it's the most vulnerable unit. The best ranged unit to deal against both cavalry types

Slinger: Medium range. Bonus against heavy infantry
Role: Better than skirmishers against heavy infantry. Should win skirmishers by range, but they damage between them could be on pair.

Archer: Long range. Low attack and bonus against Light Infantry.
Role: Kill skirmishers and slingers and support long range attack.

All light infantry get a bonus against Light Cavalry.

-HEAVY CAVALRY

Sword cav: Fast. Bonus against light infantry
Role: Kill light infantry (altough spear cav should be better), raid, and maybe catch light cavalry

Spear cavalry: Tankier armour, HP, Good attack. Slower
Role: Better frontline cavalry than swordman cavalry.

-LIGHT CAVALRY

Skirmisher cavalry: Good damage. Low range
Role: Hit and Run, effective against everything, but could be killed if get caught or by ranged units (so it would be mainly anti heavy infantry)

Archer cavalry: Low damage, Long range. Bonus against light units (both infantry and light cavalry). Less HP than skirmisher cavalry
Role: Hit and Run from distance, but worst DPS against heavy. Loose against ranged infantry if gets caught in range (specially against archer, with same range)

All defensive buildings get bonus against Light Cavalry

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Then, I would make Spearman and Skirmisher infantry, Swordman and Skirmisher cavalry costing only food and wood (Trash unit). More uncommon units could cost food/wood and metal (no stone for siege or slingers, only for buildings).

I would change hacking/pierce/crush to Melee/Ranged/Siege. (I think it could be easier to balance and to think, although hybrid damage could be special feature for some units)

 

*I know that there's some historical things... some slinger could out range archers, and the spear cavalry role resembles more a medieval knight-like... but I think that is somewhat cohesive system.

 

 

isn't the game already structured in that way? I mean.. Ranged units have the advantage to stay in range while melee units have to reach them, thats why Archers for example have advantage over swordmen btw they die easly vs cavalry

[av93]

Yes in some way, but I think that should be more difference and clearer roles.

[Servo]

Counters can be real basic but should be defined property. Since units are already established with specs that should be enough or just tweak the melee specs in order to establish balance. Units are moving and can dodge projectiles. Even slowest units should be able to do so and that's real. For example any cavalry should be able to kill any lighter units especially ranged but you can't tell that a foot archer can't kill the best unit in the game even the hero! 

Counters are specifically designed on melee units be it foot or mounted. Of course pike has advantage against a heavy cavalry if they fight all the way. 

If we want a game that's almost real then we have to try and do so as much as we can. I really appreciate the efforts here of everyone but I know there are limits as to what, why, and how we can have this beautiful game. I'm satisfied and for now is the best RTS for me when it comes to single player. I stopped playing any game like my favorite RoN, AOE2, Stronghold and Civ5, LoTR etc because I like this game. 

Its awesome to play this game against hardest AI in very low resources and slower speed. My limit is up to .75 % but can use fastest just to speed up. I like to watch the battle in slower motion like in the movie ;).

i have so much thing to suggest for this game to become "real" good in terms of gameplay but I know the limits. If I'm rich I could hire the best developer and brains to do my way like for example an archer should fire in an angle and the travel should be in arching path when they are at maximum range and up to less percentage of range. That's just one thing and there are many more. Well im not so I have to live with what the guys can do.

 

 

Edited February 3, 2017 by Servo

[Lion.Kanzen]

I saw this in AOE official forums.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1XMFVhx-bJQJ3PbZEbJ4C4Bpw1CY5dKFiE6sr9MWpJME/edit?usp=drive_web

[av93]

On 31/1/2017 at 7:43 AM, wraitii said:

The fundamental problem is that our civilisations don't have enough units, on the whole, since not all of them have a basic spearman or a basic swordsman (and it gets worse when you consider champions).

Well, the game could be based on the asymmetrical balance concept. Starcraft is the main well-know game with 3 very different races, but then you have AOE 2 that also revolves with different tech trees, currently with 31 civs.

Champions could be reworked, instead of being super-units, could have special features, like aoe 2 unique units, pe:
 

-Iberian swordsman champion: slight better swordsman, that gets better bonus with the special monument, and moves faster.

-Spartan champion:  very good stats (like current champions)

-Persian immortal: could be the only champion trained on barracks (current champions that are trained on special buildings, could need the building to be trained if it offers some other bonus), slighty better than spearman but doesn't have the penalties that other persian infantry has (if persian infantry gets penalties as it is written on the DD) and also can use a ranged attack... (immortals were called like that cause they were replaced very fast)

and so on..