Of the expansion civilizations, which has the best artillery?

User avatar
Italy gamevideo113
Howdah
Posts: 1899
Joined: Apr 26, 2017
ESO: gamevideo113

Re: Of the expansion civilizations, which has the best artillery?

Post by gamevideo113 »

DracoWolfgand wrote:The Chinese: See, the thing that makes the Fliyng Crow interestings is that they are effectivelly a Heavy Cannon-esque unit that can be unlocked as early as the-Colonial-Age. With that said: They take a long while to mass, and are still slightly inferior to the actual European Heavy Cannons.
I wouldn't say flying crows are worse than heavy cannons, on the contrary, i'd take flying crows over heavy cannons for pretty much any situation except maybe if i was facing a horde of strelets
Flamethrowers and Mortars are... Not TERRIBLE at their respective jobs( Killing infantry units and buildings ), but as usual, not great either. The main disadvantage of the Flamethrowers is that, as you said, their limited range and the fact they are technically classified as a heavy infantry unit( WHY!? ) makes then kind of useless against light infantry, as in opposed to the Falconet, which can butcher light infantry like there is no tomorrow.
I think flamethrowers have a better dps vs infantry than falconets (per cost), but yeah their range sucks tbh

The Japanese: Again: The Flaming Arrows lack of( Well... Okay, not COMPLETE lack of on their case, but very limited ) splash damage cripples their efficiency against infantry severely. They are actually more comparable to the Arrow Knight then to the Falconet in my eyes: Maybe a bit better then it against infantry, but on the overral, they are a building destroyer and artillery killer.
I disagree here. Flaming arrows are quite effective against infantry, of course not as much as falconets but still a very concrete threat
-Also-Though it may be unfair to point it out, its range is still shorter then the Culverin, meaning in a actual matchup between these anti-artillery units, the Culverin pretty much always wins.
Nothing wrong here, culvs are supposed to counter flaming arrows
I agree that the Morutaru is decent at the role it is suppose to take, though, but it suffers from what I decided to dub "The Mortar syndrom" in that, due to it being incredibly over specialized and there being other units that can take its role, you will rarely find yourself actually using then.
Well, i think you should be judging the unit based on the role it is supposed to have, so, by that criteria, i'd say morutarus are a pretty strong unit

The Indians: Siege Elephants are indeed actually pretty good: Essentially the Indian replacement for Horse Artillery, perhaps even being superior to it due to its higher hitpoints. Like Horse Artillery, it can take a niche role as a artillery unit that can actually use hit-and-run tactics. Sadly, it also suffers from most of the same problems as Horse Artillery, though... Meaning: It is expensive and, relatively to its cost, doesnt actually hit quite as hard as other artillery units. PLUS, as you mentioned it is considered a light cavalry unit for some reason, meaning it actually-Can-Be used by countering Skirmishers.
Siege elephants are nothing like horse artillery; horse artillery is a improved version of a falconet, siege elephants are actually supposed to be a culv/mortar mix, pretty much like arrow knights. I don't you should compare horse artillery with siege elephants

pecelot wrote:Japan's strength is also about having excellent shipments: two 2-falcs equivalent in age 3 that can even be shipped to a Daimyo; you've lost a ,,falc" war? not to worry, begin another!
You forgot to mention that, as japan, you don't lose the falc war in the first place :uglylol:
[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 ?
User avatar
Poland pecelot
Retired Contributor
Donator 03
Posts: 10459
Joined: Mar 25, 2015
ESO: Pezet

Re: Of the expansion civilizations, which has the best artillery?

Post by pecelot »

you obviously can lose an artillery war as Japan for numerous reasons, I think falcs should actually beat FAs in a 2v2
No Flag DracoWolfgand
Skirmisher
Posts: 116
Joined: Nov 30, 2018

Re: Of the expansion civilizations, which has the best artillery?

Post by DracoWolfgand »

I still think Flaming Arrows are unexceptional against infantry at best. In terms of cost-efficiency, Yuno Archers have a much better damage output. The only thing Flaming Arrows have on Yuno Archers( Where it comes specifically to how good they are at countering infantry ) is range. But while that is hardly irrelevant, there are plenty of situations where you would prefer a shorter-ranged unit with a higher damage output then a longer-ranged one with less damage output.

I compared Siege Elephants with Horse Artillery mostly because of their speeds, but I guess I kind of see your point on Siege Elephants taking a role close to the Culverin/Mortar... With that said, I feel comparing Horse Artilleries to merely a "Improved Falconet" would be misguiding. Its speed lets it be used in ways the Falconet couldnt be used, -However-It is costlier then the Falconet too while having a attack that really isnt any better. I guess that, if I had to use a comparisson, I would say that it is... Kind of like comparing Dragoons to Musketeers? In that, while they counter similar units, they go different ways about it and there are circunstances where you would prefer to use one over the other? Not sure if I am being clear...
User avatar
Italy gamevideo113
Howdah
Posts: 1899
Joined: Apr 26, 2017
ESO: gamevideo113

Re: Of the expansion civilizations, which has the best artillery?

Post by gamevideo113 »

pecelot wrote:you obviously can lose an artillery war as Japan for numerous reasons, I think falcs should actually beat FAs in a 2v2

Letsh agree to dishagree :flowers:
DracoWolfgand wrote:I still think Flaming Arrows are unexceptional against infantry at best. In terms of cost-efficiency, Yuno Archers have a much better damage output. The only thing Flaming Arrows have on Yuno Archers( Where it comes specifically to how good they are at countering infantry ) is range. But while that is hardly irrelevant, there are plenty of situations where you would prefer a shorter-ranged unit with a higher damage output then a longer-ranged one with less damage output.
That's actually not false at all, what i meant is that, when looking at the flaming arrow as an anti-infantry artillery unit, its performance, while not on par with heavy cannons or falcs, is also definitely not as bad as light cannons or culvs. Therefore i would consider it a decent anti-infantry tool. Does Japan have better anti-infantry units? Probably, but e.g. yumi archers are a very different unit (that can possibly be preferrable) which imo shouldn't be compared to artillery units. Personally i wouldn't consider producing flaming arrows to counter infantry ill advised, even if japan has better tools. On the contrary, making light cannons to just counter infantry is not a great idea imo.

I compared Siege Elephants with Horse Artillery mostly because of their speeds, but I guess I kind of see your point on Siege Elephants taking a role close to the Culverin/Mortar... With that said, I feel comparing Horse Artilleries to merely a "Improved Falconet" would be misguiding. Its speed lets it be used in ways the Falconet couldnt be used,
I don't agree much with this last statement, after all the are both cannons and you can't really hit and run with any of these (unlike siege elephants, which you shouldn't use against infantry anyway)
-However-It is costlier then the Falconet too while having a attack that really isnt any better.
falconet has 100x3 vs infantry, HA gets 125x3. HA does indeed have a better attack
I guess that, if I had to use a comparisson, I would say that it is... Kind of like comparing Dragoons to Musketeers? In that, while they counter similar units, they go different ways about it and there are circunstances where you would prefer to use one over the other? Not sure if I am being clear...
imho if you have the resources for it i don't see any reason why you would go with falcs instead of HA. The only drawbacks are that HA uses 1 more population and has less HP per cost. overall i don't think you are wrong, i just think you are overestimating the difference between falcs and horse artillery :smile:
[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 ?
User avatar
United States of America Amsel_
Howdah
Posts: 1855
Joined: Jan 29, 2018
ESO: The_Amsel

Re: Of the expansion civilizations, which has the best artillery?

Post by Amsel_ »

I'm going with Japan. Flaming arrows are able to rival falcs, while still fighting like falcs. India and Aztec might have some nifty anti-artillery, and China might have good siege, but Japan really takes the cake. Not only can they compete with Euro civs, they can beat them. The fact they can be shipped multiple times might contribute to seeing Japan's artillery as so strong. If they had to produce a castle to build them then they might be a lot less impressive.
User avatar
India TNT333
Lancer
Posts: 530
Joined: Sep 13, 2018
ESO: TNT333

Re: Of the expansion civilizations, which has the best artillery?

Post by TNT333 »

China
Hand mortars r cheap, 1 pop and deal high damage too buildings and when massed is very useful
Flamethrowers r age 2 mobile artillery that can easily destroy infantry
Crows r 500 siege damage rockets that's all
"We are kings or pawns" Napoleon Bonaparte
User avatar
Poland pecelot
Retired Contributor
Donator 03
Posts: 10459
Joined: Mar 25, 2015
ESO: Pezet

Re: Of the expansion civilizations, which has the best artillery?

Post by pecelot »

I disagree to agree to disagree :mad:
User avatar
Italy gamevideo113
Howdah
Posts: 1899
Joined: Apr 26, 2017
ESO: gamevideo113

Re: Of the expansion civilizations, which has the best artillery?

Post by gamevideo113 »

Why would falcs win vs flaming arrows? They have less range :hmm:
[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 ?
Vietnam duckzilla
Jaeger
Posts: 2497
Joined: Jun 26, 2016

Re: Of the expansion civilizations, which has the best artillery?

Post by duckzilla »

If I see it correctly, flaming arrows and falcs have the following stats:

Falc: 100w/400c/5pop for 100 dmg / 3 area / 200 hp/ 4 rof / 26 range
F.A.: 100w/300c/4pop for 75dmg / 2 area / 175 hp / 6 rof / 28 range

Multipliers are pretty much identical.
Falcs seem to be stronger due to 1) higher base dmg, 2) better area of effect and 3) higher rate of fire (+50% dmg over time). The only stats in favor of flaming arrow are the slightly higher range, not worth that much given the low base dmg, and lower cost.
Whatever is written above: this is no financial advice.

Beati pauperes spiritu.
User avatar
France P i k i l i c
Howdah
Posts: 1271
Joined: Nov 17, 2015
ESO: Pikilic
Location: Dijon, France
GameRanger ID: 7497456

Re: Of the expansion civilizations, which has the best artillery?

Post by P i k i l i c »

Yes falconets are most cost effective but in falc-FA wars I think you can abuse the +2 range AND the mobility of FA to "hit and run" falcs, because FA don't "unpack" like falcs
Consider not the one who speaks the truth, but the truth that is said

:hmm: AoE logic :hmm:
User avatar
Canada dansil92
Retired Contributor
Posts: 2231
Joined: Nov 3, 2018
ESO: dansil92

Re: Of the expansion civilizations, which has the best artillery?

Post by dansil92 »

I would definitely say the only real reason why flaming arrows are viable in supremacy is simply because japan can ship 4 in fortress. Its that simple. 2v2 against falconets if they can abuse the range they lose. 2 falcs take out a flaming arrow with enough splash to usually take out the second one. 2 flaming arrows do not take down 1 falconet in one shot so they have to fire twice. When japan has to train them they are pretty garbage in terms of cost effectiveness. THAT BEING SAID in team games or treaty, etc. Ashigaru flaming arrow is extremely difficult to go up against considering the extra population japan can devote to military
Image
Australia Hazza54321
Pro Player
Winter Champion 2020 x2Donator 01
Posts: 8049
Joined: May 4, 2015
ESO: PrinceofBabu

Re: Of the expansion civilizations, which has the best artillery?

Post by Hazza54321 »

industrial crows are amazing, 1 shot most artillery units and have 28 range
User avatar
Italy Garja
Retired Contributor
Donator 02
Posts: 9729
Joined: Feb 11, 2015
ESO: Garja

Re: Of the expansion civilizations, which has the best artillery?

Post by Garja »

and 3 secs firing animation
Image Image Image
User avatar
United States of America Papist
Retired Contributor
Donator 03
Posts: 2602
Joined: Mar 29, 2015
ESO: Papist

Re: Of the expansion civilizations, which has the best artillery?

Post by Papist »

Garja wrote:Id say iro becuse they have the best cannon and still some siege/support kindn) of artillery in age3.
Since they are presented as an artillery civ they also have several cards for it.
On the pther hand Japan has very cost efficient and practical artillery while China is also supposed to be proficient with artillery and in fact it is pretty decent.


"Rams are fucking op"
The function of man is to live, not to exist.
No Flag deleted_user0
Ninja
Posts: 13004
Joined: Apr 28, 2020

Re: Of the expansion civilizations, which has the best artillery?

  • Quote

Post by deleted_user0 »

Papist oos

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests

Which top 10 players do you wish to see listed?

All-time

Active last two weeks

Active last month

Supremacy

Treaty

Official

ESOC Patch

Treaty Patch

1v1 Elo

2v2 Elo

3v3 Elo

Power Rating

Which streams do you wish to see listed?

Twitch

Age of Empires III

Age of Empires IV