Papist wrote:Again, why should you be able to do the exact same build (especially if your opponent knows what you're doing) every single game without consequences?
Who said that ? I said in some match ups you have to fb, doesn't mean making the same build. It's like saying germany does always the same build because it always takes a trade post...
Papist wrote:I understand that early nats are very good for applying pressure, but shouldn't they be?
Age 1 is an age where you can't make any military unit. It's the way the game is designed. If this were aoe2 then ok why not, but it's aoe3 and here you're not really supposed to kill vils in age 1... Also there's a difference between applying a pressure, like against explorer, preventing the guy from getting his tp down etc, and completely preventing any vil from going out of its base without risking to just die. It just forces you into playing defensive, because of only 1 treasure, which is absurd.
Papist wrote:After all, the guy with the nat had to spend time taking that treasure, time that could have been spent scouting and picking up resource treasures.
Most nat treasures are insanely easy to pick, considering how much they are worth... You can get a huaminca (insanely op nat) by killing 2 sarbacane guys (insanely easy). Most other nats are just 3 wolves, which is usually the design of a treasure worth less than 100 resources (except the 150g treasure that the developers invented when they were completely drunk). So you basically get a nat worth 100 res (relevant in the later stages of the game, where it will become a soldier among others), plus the ability to sometimes kill enemy explorer, or to deny fb, deny tp, deny herding, etc. Also your opponent might get a resources treasure while you pick the nat, but then you have military advantage so you can deny him treasuring as well, which snowballs into more resources treasures in your favor...
Papist wrote:And we all know that vil and fb harassment is all those nats are really good for; if they had a negative multiplier against vils, NOBODY would pick them up. Because no matter how good they are in theoretical 2 uhlan vs 2 uhlan fights, they aren't worth it 99.99% of the time if you can't pressure with them.
They would still be worth picking if they had a negative multiplier vs vils... As I said I sometimes pick them, while never using them against vils. It's extra scouting, easier treasuring, killing explo, denying tp etc I already explained that, idk what you don't understand here tbh. They are worth 99.99% of the time since in 99.99% of your games you will fight, and then it's an extra unit basically... The toma has quite good dps vs cav at range (32 attack where a musk has 23, to which you have to remove 20% or 30% cuz range resist). The huaminca is a pike on steroids... Yeah sure, 48 siege, with quick calculus you find this guy needs only 2 min 39 seconds to siege down a tp lmao, really not worth picking it. Plus it is faster than an explo and will snare it, with 15 attack where a nat scout has only 5 (which is enough to make people want to nerf the nat scout snare...). Nootka isn't a good as huaminca but it still has 30 siege... And can snare the explo as well. The cherokee rifleman is a very good skirm, and in colonial... Pretty sure you can repel 5 musks sieging a building early by just attacking them with this guy. Do I really need to use more examples or it's clear enough ?