Aztecs Discussion Thread
Re: Aztecs Discussion Thread
I've been doing that and it doesnt quite work like it should be
Also on a side note, fencing school imo should boost skull knight training time, not 40% but something like 20%. Same for cav card for dog soldiers and artillery card for heavy cannons.
Also on a side note, fencing school imo should boost skull knight training time, not 40% but something like 20%. Same for cav card for dog soldiers and artillery card for heavy cannons.
- [Armag] diarouga
- Ninja
- Posts: 12710
- Joined: Feb 26, 2015
- ESO: diarouga
- Location: France
Re: Aztecs Discussion Thread
Fencing school for SK would be very cool haha.
- gamevideo113
- Howdah
- Posts: 1899
- Joined: Apr 26, 2017
- ESO: gamevideo113
Re: Aztecs Discussion Thread
The attack of skull knights is so low that i think turning it into siege attack wouldn't make them perform excessively well against other units. While i don't know if it's necessary, it would definitely add some variety to the aztec army composition.
[Some people aspire to be pr30+, some people aspire to have fun, and some people aspire to play 3v3 Deccan.] - vividlyplain - 2019
Who (nationality) rape ?
stupid logic. noob players can say op?
toxic, Insult, Racism ?
stupid logic. noob players can say op?
toxic, Insult, Racism ?
Re: Aztecs Discussion Thread
There is one major problem with this, the attack dance would no longer buff the arrow knight's pitiful attack. If i may be so bold, an anti-infantry multiplier would suit the unit better as an 'artillery' function unitGarja wrote:Aztecs sort of need a long range unit imo. Arrow knight should deal siege damage on its ranged attack. That way the unit could be used on regular basis and not just as shitty culverin/mortar. Multiplier vs artillery nerfed accordingly. Cost increased to something like 50f 80g. If the change is successful and the unit can be used on a regular basis then can revert mace temple card ot only grant +20% HP.
-
- Pro Player
- Posts: 10278
- Joined: Jun 6, 2015
- Location: Paris
- GameRanger ID: 5529322
Re: Aztecs Discussion Thread
Are you even sure attack dance doesn't boost ranged attacks of "siege" type? Sure it doesn't boost the "siege attack" action but that's another story.
There's no aztec unit that deals siege damage with their regular attack so idk.
There's no aztec unit that deals siege damage with their regular attack so idk.
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 ..
Re: Aztecs Discussion Thread
Attack dance doesnt buff light cannon for iro, also i had a friend mod his game so arrow knights did siege damage and they were no longer buffed by attack danceKaiserklein wrote:Are you even sure attack dance doesn't boost ranged attacks of "siege" type? Sure it doesn't boost the "siege attack" action but that's another story.
There's no aztec unit that deals siege damage with their regular attack so idk.
Re: Aztecs Discussion Thread
Are you sure about that?dansil92 wrote:
Attack dance doesnt buff light cannon for iro, also i had a friend mod his game so arrow knights did siege damage and they were no longer buffed by attack dance
Re: Aztecs Discussion Thread
Absolutely, yes. You can test easily. Load up RE sioux. Ship commanchero shipment (thats the ranged cav outlaw). Put them in melee mode. Melee comancheros are bugged to do siege damage in melee. Build a firepit. Set to attack dance- nothing happens. Set firepit to sige dance attack goes stonks.Lukas_L99 wrote:Are you sure about that?dansil92 wrote:
Attack dance doesnt buff light cannon for iro, also i had a friend mod his game so arrow knights did siege damage and they were no longer buffed by attack dance
Alternatively ship team handmortars to an aztec teammate. You will 100% find that attack dance never changes attacks that use siege damage
- Imperial Noob
- Lancer
- Posts: 958
- Joined: Feb 29, 2016
- Location: Well hello DEre
Re: Aztecs Discussion Thread
Battle of Little Big Horn with falconets on Sioux siege dance is so silly
-
- Pro Player
- Posts: 10278
- Joined: Jun 6, 2015
- Location: Paris
- GameRanger ID: 5529322
Re: Aztecs Discussion Thread
Thing is light cannons (and hand mortars) have a "siege attack" action. Like units sieging a building. So it doesn't prove anything in my book.dansil92 wrote:Attack dance doesnt buff light cannon for iro, also i had a friend mod his game so arrow knights did siege damage and they were no longer buffed by attack danceKaiserklein wrote:Are you even sure attack dance doesn't boost ranged attacks of "siege" type? Sure it doesn't boost the "siege attack" action but that's another story.
There's no aztec unit that deals siege damage with their regular attack so idk.
Now if it doesn't affect regular ranged/melee attacks that deal siege damage (like melee comanchero or your fiend's mod thing), then yeah that proves it
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 ..
Re: Aztecs Discussion Thread
Welp considering i have actually tested the commanchero thing, it should behave consistently
-
- Pro Player
- Posts: 10278
- Joined: Jun 6, 2015
- Location: Paris
- GameRanger ID: 5529322
Re: Aztecs Discussion Thread
Yes that's what I'm saying
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 ..
Re: Aztecs Discussion Thread
I mean if you changed their attack to siege then it would change the unit so much that maybe it's better that attack dance doesn't work on it. As a quirk.
Re: Aztecs Discussion Thread
If they were gonna get put on siege damage they'd need a small attack but (probably 12-13 up from 10) and a change to the multi vs artillery, might potentially even need a negative vs cav added, but only if they prove to be too strong
Re: Aztecs Discussion Thread
This i like a lot^Garja wrote:Ok no siege I guess. What about area of damage 1 like culvs?
Re: Aztecs Discussion Thread
I don't see the sense in applying this to the Eagle Runner Knight, exclusively. In my opinion, this should be done for all units that scale on Fortress Age statistics. It just isn't important enough to have made EP7, with so many bigger issues neglected. I'll include it in the poll!dansil92 wrote:I was very pleased to hear about the revert to ERKs back to RE resist and speed. Since the discussion seemed to focus on keeping viability in early fortress, may i make the suggestion that ERKs are given 'colonial' stats and shadowtech to fortress age to their current base stats? This would prevent them overscaling from cards and upgrades while maintaining their current early fortress viability
Re: Aztecs Discussion Thread
I certainly agree. I just don't know that it's worth a change, at this timem, whether in terms of desirability or significance. This seems like the least warranted change I can think of.Garja wrote:I've been doing that and it doesnt quite work like it should be
Also on a side note, fencing school imo should boost skull knight training time, not 40% but something like 20%. Same for cav card for dog soldiers and artillery card for heavy cannons.
Re: Aztecs Discussion Thread
I like the concept, but its implementation seems complicated and risky. The question is whether buffing Aztecs (let alone the Arrow Knight) even more is desirable. The unit seems fine, now.Garja wrote:Aztecs sort of need a long range unit imo. Arrow knight should deal siege damage on its ranged attack. That way the unit could be used on regular basis and not just as shitty culverin/mortar. Multiplier vs artillery nerfed accordingly. Cost increased to something like 50f 80g. If the change is successful and the unit can be used on a regular basis then can revert mace temple card ot only grant +20% HP.
Hey now; at least the Macehualtin can reach 18 range!
-
- Pro Player
- Posts: 8049
- Joined: May 4, 2015
- ESO: PrinceofBabu
Re: Aztecs Discussion Thread
Dont give them siege attack pleaseeeeeeee
Re: Aztecs Discussion Thread
I mean you (me actually) can keep laming the war chief and the other stuff or you can give Aztecs some actual proper unit to fight with in the current meta. 18 range maces are cool but it's hard to get the card I must admit. I mean you can get it rather easily but still likely lose the game.
Design-wise noble hut units should be proper units but aside from ERK the other ones are meh. JPK have great HP/attack (and multipliers) but they're just big pikes in the end. Would be cool if AK become some sort of a skirmisher/artillery unit to use on regular basis. At the moment it's not terrible to fight skirms with AK but they basically take forever to kill them. I guess it's mostly because of their akward animation (they restart the setup + focus fire and overkill etc.). So either slightly boost the damage somehow or make their animation better. It's probably slower than cetan animation or similar to that.
Design-wise noble hut units should be proper units but aside from ERK the other ones are meh. JPK have great HP/attack (and multipliers) but they're just big pikes in the end. Would be cool if AK become some sort of a skirmisher/artillery unit to use on regular basis. At the moment it's not terrible to fight skirms with AK but they basically take forever to kill them. I guess it's mostly because of their akward animation (they restart the setup + focus fire and overkill etc.). So either slightly boost the damage somehow or make their animation better. It's probably slower than cetan animation or similar to that.
- [Armag] diarouga
- Ninja
- Posts: 12710
- Joined: Feb 26, 2015
- ESO: diarouga
- Location: France
Re: Aztecs Discussion Thread
Garja is right on this.
I didn't want to abuse the WC on the first EPs, I HAD TO do that. It was the only way to play Aztecs because all your units but erk are garbage in age 3. Even with fast age up or autoupgrade, it would barely be a good idea to go age 3 against the good age 3 civs.
But honestly, Aztec isn't a fortress civ, so buffing the 3rd age isn't the solution for 1v1 (although it's necessary for team play where training erk is the only way to play). The best way to fix Aztec is to buff colonial play by either buffing the coyotes (because they're awful, even with upgrades), or the pikes (it's a great pike for sure, but still a pike...).
I didn't want to abuse the WC on the first EPs, I HAD TO do that. It was the only way to play Aztecs because all your units but erk are garbage in age 3. Even with fast age up or autoupgrade, it would barely be a good idea to go age 3 against the good age 3 civs.
But honestly, Aztec isn't a fortress civ, so buffing the 3rd age isn't the solution for 1v1 (although it's necessary for team play where training erk is the only way to play). The best way to fix Aztec is to buff colonial play by either buffing the coyotes (because they're awful, even with upgrades), or the pikes (it's a great pike for sure, but still a pike...).
Re: Aztecs Discussion Thread
Well im once again gonna bring up turning skulls into an advanced Coyote Runner with the light infantry & coyoteman tag and remove the anticav multi. Could potentially give it an anti-infantry multiplier like lancers.
Im of the opinion that overbuffing coyotes is just going to... over-incentivise colonial laming in matchups with bad anti-coyo units (glares at ashigaru).
Other things are arrow knights getting a more yumi-like animation so they dont derp so hard. Could make jpk no longer counter cavalry and remove the heavy infantry tag, just make them a melee anti-musk and anti-pike. They already kinda suck vs cav so not really a big deal imo
Im of the opinion that overbuffing coyotes is just going to... over-incentivise colonial laming in matchups with bad anti-coyo units (glares at ashigaru).
Other things are arrow knights getting a more yumi-like animation so they dont derp so hard. Could make jpk no longer counter cavalry and remove the heavy infantry tag, just make them a melee anti-musk and anti-pike. They already kinda suck vs cav so not really a big deal imo
- chronique
- Advanced Player
- Posts: 2060
- Joined: Jul 4, 2015
- ESO: poissondu44
- Location: France
Re: Aztecs Discussion Thread
Is somethink good if aztek can do more than 1 jpk BB age 2?
-
- Crossbow
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Dec 16, 2018
- ESO: Pocahotass
Re: Aztecs Discussion Thread
reminds me of the real days of TWC when u didnt need a warhut, just 4 tlaloc in age 2 that outranged the enemy TC and 21 JPK from BB.
Also while were at it you should change that card that gave ERK bonus vs vills to something ERK-related again. I mean the civ is designed to be relying on loads of erk.
Also while were at it you should change that card that gave ERK bonus vs vills to something ERK-related again. I mean the civ is designed to be relying on loads of erk.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests