old han vs territorial
old han vs territorial
old han vs territorial
full upgrade at War Academy at age4
old han+ old hanreform
and territorial + territorial card
pike hp210 dam14 changdao hp198 dam24
archer hp180 dam10*3 aq hp160 dam23
not different
but use
old han 318f 225w
territorial 285f 255c
different
uninstall game
full upgrade at War Academy at age4
old han+ old hanreform
and territorial + territorial card
pike hp210 dam14 changdao hp198 dam24
archer hp180 dam10*3 aq hp160 dam23
not different
but use
old han 318f 225w
territorial 285f 255c
different
uninstall game
Re: old han vs territorial
Whats the problem exactly? Do you think old han is too weak now?
Re: old han vs territorial
sudmakmak don't uninstall and get ready for the LCM Tournament!
"Prestige is like a powerful magnet that warps even your beliefs about what you enjoy. If you want to make ambitious people waste their time on errands, bait the hook with prestige." - Paul Graham
-
- Pro Player
- Posts: 10282
- Joined: Jun 6, 2015
- Location: Paris
- GameRanger ID: 5529322
Re: old han vs territorial
Plz all like the OP
LoOk_tOm wrote:I have something in particular against Kaisar (GERMANY NOOB mercenary LAMME FOREVER) And the other people (noobs) like suck kaiser ... just this ..
- [Armag] diarouga
- Ninja
- Posts: 12710
- Joined: Feb 26, 2015
- ESO: diarouga
- Location: France
Re: old han vs territorial
I also think that it should have been 75% instead of 50%, but we'll see how it goes.
Re: old han vs territorial
They're fine. One card for essentially guard (or imperial?) pike/Chu vs idle rax time and resources for industrial arq/Chang, makes sense. Old Han reforms should be for when you need fully upgraded units quickly, eg in an FI/if you need to make sudden unit switch for resource reasons etc (run out of gold). It doesn't need to make them stronger than the units which should replace them.
Re: old han vs territorial
They not fine>? why because old han reform mean.
China units have more weak units in game but for late game. other civs later game have more op every civ
if weak units(china) can't vs other civs at late game
they will every bad. so so
they build old han reform card. for vs lateg ame.
if
pike hp210 dam14 changdao hp198 dam24
archer hp180 dam10*3 aq hp160 dam23
not different
but use
old han 318f 225w
territorial 285f 255c
different different different different different different different
if nerf old han = territorial ????? wtf stupid logic op . old han use wood. lol stupid
mean late game . china will useless.
China units have more weak units in game but for late game. other civs later game have more op every civ
if weak units(china) can't vs other civs at late game
they will every bad. so so
they build old han reform card. for vs lateg ame.
if
pike hp210 dam14 changdao hp198 dam24
archer hp180 dam10*3 aq hp160 dam23
not different
but use
old han 318f 225w
territorial 285f 255c
different different different different different different different
if nerf old han = territorial ????? wtf stupid logic op . old han use wood. lol stupid
mean late game . china will useless.
Re: old han vs territorial
old han > territorial and costing wood is an advantage.
Also china units from fortress and on are not weak at all.
Also china units from fortress and on are not weak at all.
Re: old han vs territorial
Garja wrote:old han > territorial and costing wood is an advantage.
Also china units from fortress and on are not weak at all.
I think . they will lose at age2.
Re: old han vs territorial
This is based on my best guess and not any real comparison or testing, but I'd rather go for Territorial & Forbidden armies now.
I think what we should do is change the Mongolian army to 2 Keshik & 2 Steppe Riders and have the shipment affect them too, renaming it "Traditional Reforms". We could also try reducing the cost increase from 25% to 20%, if it still isn't viable.
I think what we should do is change the Mongolian army to 2 Keshik & 2 Steppe Riders and have the shipment affect them too, renaming it "Traditional Reforms". We could also try reducing the cost increase from 25% to 20%, if it still isn't viable.
Re: old han vs territorial
Garja wrote:old han > territorial and costing wood is an advantage.
Also china units from fortress and on are not weak at all.
Do you really think Old Han is better than Territorial??
Re: old han vs territorial
Well they have more hp and chukos also have more attack. But wood cost and big unit shipments is the main reason I would opt for old han. Otherwise territorial + op cav
Re: old han vs territorial
Garja wrote:Well they have more hp and chukos also have more attack. But wood cost and big unit shipments is the main reason I would opt for old han. Otherwise territorial + op cav
OH has more hp than T and CKN more dmg than arq??
Re: old han vs territorial
zoom wrote:Garja wrote:Well they have more hp and chukos also have more attack. But wood cost and big unit shipments is the main reason I would opt for old han. Otherwise territorial + op cav
OH has more hp than T and CKN more dmg than arq??
not all . hp = hp +10or-10
but damage ckn than little but hp = hp
but different = cost food wood or coin
Re: old han vs territorial
I mean Arq has 97hp, 14dmg (20 range) and 30% RR; CKN 95hp, 15dmg (16 range) and 20% RR. Chang 144hp, 15dmg and 20% MR; Qiang 105hp, 7dmg and 10% MR. I don't understand how anyone could think that OH is better than T.zoom wrote:Garja wrote:Well they have more hp and chukos also have more attack. But wood cost and big unit shipments is the main reason I would opt for old han. Otherwise territorial + op cav
OH has more hp than T and CKN more dmg than Arq??
You confuse me...
Re: old han vs territorial
lol 20 hp difference and you call it equal?
Also chukos have 20% more damage than arqs with one extra card remaining.
Dont chukos have 30% like aenna and maces and lbows?
Also chukos have 20% more damage than arqs with one extra card remaining.
Dont chukos have 30% like aenna and maces and lbows?
Re: old han vs territorial
Garja wrote:lol 20-30 hp of difference and you call it equal?
Also chukos have 20% more damage than arqs with one extra card remaining.
Dont chukos have 30% like aenna and maces and lbows?
pike hp210 dam14 changdao hp198 dam24
archer hp180 dam10*3 aq hp160 dam23
?????
10 20 30%%
I play this game i use card.
Re: old han vs territorial
Garja wrote:can u math or?
I start game .
play vs com . and i save srceenshot
pike hp210 dam14 changdao hp198 dam24
archer hp180 dam10*3 aq hp160 dam23
because this patch noob.
I test units
. u can test vs com
pike hp210 dam14 changdao hp198 dam24
archer hp180 dam10*3 aq hp160 dam23
= me = me
Re: old han vs territorial
30 vs 23 damage difference is huge to be clear. And pike do more damage than swordsmen vs cav.
Old han is still stronger. But they are not OP now. Its a good change.
Old han is still stronger. But they are not OP now. Its a good change.
- princeofcarthage
- Retired Contributor
- Posts: 8861
- Joined: Aug 28, 2015
- Location: Milky Way!
Re: old han vs territorial
Isn't it better to have coin cost rather than wood cost? Territorial army should win cost effectively . Haven't logged into Ep2.0 yet but if stats posted by OP resists give by zoi are true Territorial army is probably a better choice
Fine line to something great is a strange change.
-
- Ninja
- Posts: 13004
- Joined: Apr 28, 2020
Re: old han vs territorial
Garja wrote:lol 20 hp difference and you call it equal?
Also chukos have 20% more damage than arqs with one extra card remaining.
Dont chukos have 30% like aenna and maces and lbows?
more damage, but less range and less range resist. also arqs have shadow tech in fortress.
the qiang pikes have less attack i guess but more vs cav, i think. not sure exactly what the multipliers are on these units. but they again have less resist.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests