China builds

[Garja]

Dragoons would make china even more op. They are totally fine as they are now.

Dragoons would make them more powerful indeed. They are totally broken as they are now though...

Define broken cuz to me theyre just fine. They have one strat but its strong enough to win most of MUs.

[deleted_user0]

A civ with just one viable strat seems broken to me imo. Also they dont win most mus anyway, its about 5050

[Garja]

ye one strat isnt great but that's frequent in aoe3. They dont win they can win that's what I meant.

[zoom]

well i hope if you''re fisting someone they actually are alive


i kind of like H20''s build, i''ve been learning it a bit and yeah the economy you get from the tower is ridiculous. you can have 0 vills on wood and just make houses houses and after a bit you get enough wood for a TC (assuming you trade units, which i think china should). it''s especially good if you''re facing a semi, since the semi won''t pressure you enough to warrant the need of 10 skirms on age up.

then again perhaps i haven''t played anyone yet who has been pushing into my base between 6 and 9 minutes.

I like Porcelain Tower too. It''s nothing new to me whatsoever. I just don''t think it''s better to go for blindly or always' it''s a trade-off. Most importantly, however, it''s even worse against any aggression as well as for the strength of your early Fortress timing, which is precisely what Chinese rely on in a number of match-ups.

[zoom]

Dragoons would make them more powerful indeed. They are totally broken as they are now though...

Define broken cuz to me theyre just fine. They have one strat but its strong enough to win most of MUs.

To me Chinese are broken in the sense that theyre too strong in one regard, yet even weaker in another, and theres no way of counteracting that weakness without severely outplaying ones opponent.

As much as its a bad thing, having limited options does not render a civilization broken on its own, in my opinion.

[iNcog]

lol huge wood trickle or dumb unit which doesn't do much besides be retard magnets from cavalry, there's no real trade off. the 10 arqs you get on age up are the only point of the wonder

which makes porc tower much better overall. if you can get away with it, which you can against most shit, then do so

[_venox_]

A hussar costs 276.2 VS since I used no market ups for the iron flails and meteor hammers aswell and the upgrade is 733.3 extra VS...
1 meteor + 1 flail have together about 20% more hitpoints (vs ranged) and about 30% more dmg (vs inf its over 60%), disregarding the 5 range and the bonus vs artillery costing only 4% more' This ofc compared to colonial hussars. If compared to veteran hussars the hitpoints are about even and the dmg still 10% higher and over 40% vs inf disregarding the 5 range and the art multiplier, but the veterancy upgrade is worth about 2.5 of the chinese fortress cav.

Most of what youre claiming in your posts about IF/MH is just plainly false (I would suggest looking at their stats again), and Hussars not upgrading is negligible. In fact, when taking into consideration that it also entails their availability from a whole Age earlier, its just another argument in favor of Hussars.

what exactly is false? And sorry were talking about combat, ofcourse in colonial china cant make their strong cavalry but this doesnt make hussars being better in combat...

[_venox_]

lol huge wood trickle or dumb unit which doesn''t do much besides be retard magnets from cavalry, there''s no real trade off. the 10 arqs you get on age up are the only point of the wonder

which makes porc tower much better overall. if you can get away with it, which you can against most shit, then do so

it is 8 arqs and h2o said to train some anti cavalry beforehand so you won''t lose your shit. the point of the wonder is the flying crow too. Overall confusian academy is better if you don''t know what your opponents are up to (colo timing etc..) easier to hold with a bigger army

[zoom]

lol huge wood trickle or dumb unit which doesn''t do much besides be retard magnets from cavalry, there''s no real trade off. the 10 arqs you get on age up are the only point of the wonder

which makes porc tower much better overall. if you can get away with it, which you can against most shit, then do so

I''m not sure if you''re trolling, but there is a massive trade-off. Porcelain Tower is only ever better if you can get away with it and find yourself in a winning position.

[Jaeger]

lol huge wood trickle or dumb unit which doesnt do much besides be retard magnets from cavalry, theres no real trade off. the 10 arqs you get on age up are the only point of the wonder

which makes porc tower much better overall. if you can get away with it, which you can against most shit, then do so

it is 8 arqs and h2o said to train some anti cavalry beforehand so you wont lose your shit. the point of the wonder is the flying crow too. Overall confusian academy is better if you dont know what your opponents are up to (colo timing etc..) easier to hold with a bigger army

Even vs a hard rush I think its good to age up with porcelain tower. Its either age up with porcelain tower, take a bit more damage, but recover better later, or age up with skirms, take less damage, but recover slower later. I played a game where I lost my TC vs aztec and had 15 vills but I still won because of porcelain tower.

[zoom]

Most of what youre claiming in your posts about IF/MH is just plainly false (I would suggest looking at their stats again), and Hussars not upgrading is negligible. In fact, when taking into consideration that it also entails their availability from a whole Age earlier, its just another argument in favor of Hussars.

what exactly is false? And sorry were talking about combat, ofcourse in colonial china cant make their strong cavalry but this doesnt make hussars being better in combat...

We are talking about how good units are. A unit thats better in combat by far to begin with being available a whole age earlier only makes it all the more ridiculous.

On statistics, a few facts:

Hussar:
Hitpoints: 320 (400 ranged)' hitpoints per cost: 1.6 (2 ranged)
Attack: 30' attack per cost: 0.15
Speed: 6.75
Availability: Colonial Age (does not auto-upgrade)

Iron Flail:
Hitpoints: 292 (~417 ranged)' hitpoints per cost: ~1.2167 (1.7375 ranged)
Attack: 19 (1 splash radius' 28.5 vs ranged infantry)' attack per cost: ~0.07916 (0.11875 vs ranged infantry)
Speed: 6.5
Availability: Fortress Age (does auto-upgrade)

Meteor Hammer:
Hitpoints: 217 (310 ranged)' hitpoints per cost: 1.24 (~1.77143 ranged)
Attack: 29 (5 range' 58 vs artillery)' attack per cost: ~0.1657 (~0.3314 vs artillery)
Speed: 6.5
Availability: Fortress Age (does auto-upgrade)

Ill give Meteor Hammers the pass because while their stats are shitty as shit, having five range is very good for a melee unit and I consider it as compensating for their cost-inefficiency, but for Iron Flails there is simply no saving grace' they are simply whoreshit in every way humanly imaginable. A petty splash radius of 1 does not help you when youre suckling from the fountain of poopie-juice with a fucking straw...

[Garja]

Jesus christ those stats again. China cav (and special cav in general) are way better than hussars. Get over it.
I would trade hussar for china cav with any civ really.

[zoom]

Jesus christ those stats again. China cav (and special cav in general) are way better than hussars. Get over it.
I would trade hussar for china cav with any civ really.

"... and I base this on absolutely nothing".

Yes ?? those stats again. They still haven''t changed you see.

It is worse in virtually every way and against virtually all unit types (artillery being the single exception). What makes you think it''s so much better than Hussars? Your opinion seems completely unfounded to me.

[yemshi]

Iron Flail:
Hitpoints: 292 (~417 ranged)' hitpoints per cost: ~1.2167 (1.7375 ranged)
Attack: 19 (1 splash radius' 28.5 vs ranged infantry)' attack per cost: ~0.07916 (0.11875 vs ranged infantry)
Speed: 6.5
Availability: Fortress Age (does auto-upgrade)

Meteor Hammer:
Hitpoints: 217 (310 ranged)' hitpoints per cost: 1.24 (~1.77143 ranged)
Attack: 29 (5 range' 58 vs artillery)' attack per cost: ~0.1657 (~0.3314 vs artillery)
Speed: 6.5
Availability: Fortress Age (does auto-upgrade)

seriously? maths? + It's Fortress Age
I do also think that the COMBINATION of both is just super good'

[Garja]

Stats don't matter shit honestly when china cav win more games than vet huss.

And also based strictly on stats I prefer china cav just cause their more specific than allaround-good-at-nothing hussar.

[zoom]

Iron Flail:
Hitpoints: 292 (~417 ranged)' hitpoints per cost: ~1.2167 (1.7375 ranged)
Attack: 19 (1 splash radius' 28.5 vs ranged infantry)' attack per cost: ~0.07916 (0.11875 vs ranged infantry)
Speed: 6.5
Availability: Fortress Age (does auto-upgrade)

Meteor Hammer:
Hitpoints: 217 (310 ranged)' hitpoints per cost: 1.24 (~1.77143 ranged)
Attack: 29 (5 range' 58 vs artillery)' attack per cost: ~0.1657 (~0.3314 vs artillery)
Speed: 6.5
Availability: Fortress Age (does auto-upgrade)

seriously? maths? + It''s Fortress Age
I do also think that the COMBINATION of both is just super good'

"Seriously? Maths?"

This is the level of argument we''re dealing with here. Powerful stuff...

Exactly ?? Iron Flails and Meteor Hammers are unavailable until the Fortress Age which only makes them worse!

The combination isn''t good' Meteor Hammers are good. They could just as well have Flail Elephants standing in front of them. On the other hand, Meteor Hammer hitpoints and speed are both pathetic.

[Durokan]

One of china's cav is splash damage which is really good, the other has range so it paths really well. Hussars have alot of pathing issues being a melee unit with a large model. Walking time is idle time, and china doesn't have that problem for the most part. Just adding my thoughts, haven't looked at the stats of the units yet.

[zoom]

Stats don''t matter shit honestly when china cav win more games than vet huss.

And also based strictly on stats I prefer china cav just cause their more specific than allaround-good-at-nothing hussar.

If that is true they aren''t as relevant, I agree entirely.

That''s a fair point, except literally the only thing Chinese cavalry is better against is artillery. Hussars on the other hand are anything but "good-at-nothing".

[zoom]

One of china''s cav is splash damage which is really good, the other has range so it paths really well. Hussars have alot of pathing issues being a melee unit with a large model. Walking time is idle time, and china doesn''t have that problem for the most part. Just adding my thoughts, haven''t looked at the stats of the units yet.

Please refer to: http://eso-community.net/post/15592

It has one shitty splash radius and is worse in absolutely literally every other regard (even damage against ranged infantry and hitpoints per cost against ranged).

[Garja]

Stats dont matter shit honestly when china cav win more games than vet huss.

And also based strictly on stats I prefer china cav just cause their more specific than allaround-good-at-nothing hussar.

If that is true they arent as relevant, I agree entirely.

Thats a fair point, except literally the only thing Chinese cavalry is better against is artillery. Hussars on the other hand are anything but "good-at-nothing".

I think you have not watched enough china discple ff back then.
Also huss are bad, the only civ that is gonna use huss in age3 is brits and just cause they have no alternative and often they age with 15+ spare huss to upgrade.
Dutch very likely prefer to make cannons. Same thing for ports.
All other civs have unique cav, aka better cav.

[iNcog]

One of chinas cav is splash damage which is really good, the other has range so it paths really well. Hussars have alot of pathing issues being a melee unit with a large model. Walking time is idle time, and china doesnt have that problem for the most part. Just adding my thoughts, havent looked at the stats of the units yet.

Please refer to: http://eso-community.net/post/15592

It has one shitty splash radius and is worse in absolutely literally every other regard (even damage against ranged infantry and hitpoints per cost against ranged).

you forget the chinese ninja in cover mode

as well as all the free, cheap units that china has

in terms of stats they arent great (not even sure if i agree with that), but they have so much excellent synergy with the rest of chinas army that its fine

they also have a ranged resist upgrade

[Garja]

Also he forget the 41% rr upgrade that alone makes those units op.

edit: you mentioned it

[momuuu]

How much of an effect does 1 aoe have? Like, when iron flails are attacking a generally packed group of skirms (or any units for that matter), how much damage are they expected to do?

[Durokan]

Here are some screenshots and some numbers

Age 3 Huss, no upgrades/cards
[img style="max-width:100%'" alt="" src="http://i.imgur.com/IGDx5gb.png"]

Age 3 Flail
[img]http://i.imgur.com/tOgoWpb.png" style="max-width:100%'" alt=""]

Age 3 Hammer
[img]http://i.imgur.com/AO9AvLd.png" style="max-width:100%'" alt=""]

Something important I would like to note, no chinese player (ff) would ever be caught dead in the fortress age without their British consulate. In addition to giving a strong shipment, (9 redcoats) it gives land units 10% increased health. It makes the units slightly stronger and slightly more cost efficient. This is something that may have been overlooked, and is why I will be comparing fortress age units with the british consulate up for china. Keeping the same format as your post, here is my age 3 analysis. I will be using .84f/s .6g/s .5w/s as my gather rates. The villager second (vs) are rounded to the nearest whole number.

Age 3 Flail, Brit Consulate - 240f - 286vs
[img]http://i.imgur.com/6TvKcmp.png" alt="[/img]
ranged health 492.7
att vs ri - 33, vs hi - 15
HP/VS - 1.325
RHP/VS - 1.722
ATT/VS - 0.077 (varies from 0.052 to 0.231)
Speed - 6.5

Flails do splash damage against dense formations, potentially doubling their damage output for a total ranging from 15 to 66. 22 damage is misleading as it can vary heavily based on combat conditions. Given their specialized condition, they will do incredibly large damage for their cost, but given the wrong ones, they will do very low damage.

Age 3 Hammer, Brit Consulate - 175g - 292vs
[img style="max-width:100%'" src="http://i.imgur.com/74Cd5FC.png"]
ranged health 366.6
HP/VS 0.966
RHP/VS 1.253
ATT/VS .116 (.232 vs art)
Speed - 6.5

These guys tear apart artillery, and can do it without getting body-blocked by HI on top of them.

Age 3 Huss - 120f 80g, 276vs
[img style="max-width:100%'" src="http://i.imgur.com/IGDx5gb.png"]
ranged health 460.8
HP/VS - 1.391
RHP/VS - 1.770
ATT/VS - .130
Speed - 6.75

Hussars are very strong general purpose cavalry. They are similar to muskets as they are a strong generally effective unit. They lack specialization, which is fine for euro civs.

All 3 cavalry have very similar costs, though the edge goes to hussars. Hussars are also tankier per cost. China's cav is similar to a strelet/musk composition, my reasoning being the weak cav can draw overkills, while the tanky cav can sponge lots of damage keeping the low hp units alive, adding to the cost efficiency. China's cav is also less susceptible to ranged volleys while running back and forth like cav normally does in a fight due to their increased ranged resist. Take note of the Flail's ranged HP. China's cavalry is used differently than hussars. They have a bulky front line with a weak back line health wise. The back line is protected by the shorter ranged cavalry up front. They can fight multiple cavalry deep due to their range. Hussars on the other hand can only fight one deep and are less tanky than china's front line. Both compositions in general scenarios will do similar damage but china can do it from a range, slow more units due to the splash 1 attack, and under ideal conditions will do much more damage. In addition, China's cav will do more damage than hussars because of the fact that hussars have problems with pathing. The ranged advantage is also huge because they get to strike first in a fight.

It is also important to note that china's cav shreds artillery. This is incredibly important because china has infantry vulnerable to cannonfire. China does not have the same composition as most other civs, except for Germany or Russia. (skirmlike inf + melee cav) Their skirms will kill the HI. This makes the -% damage against heavy infantry negligible. Hussars are less specialized, and as such are good alone, but this game does not revolve around single unit compositions in supremacy. A specialized 3 unit composition, arq flail hammer, is more effective against many threats. This discussion is more about Huss vs China's Cav so I will not talk about the big picture anymore, but one should keep it in mind.

Summary:
China has more specialized units, and in their unit composition their cavalry is extremely effective. Giving hammers and flails instead of hussars to the British or French would hurt their compositions because they are not as specialized as China's. They are incredibly good for China's comp though. Hussars are better as a general unit, but China's cav are not general units, they have a specific purpose.

[Durokan]

How much of an effect does 1 aoe have? Like, when iron flails are attacking a generally packed group of skirms (or any units for that matter), how much damage are they expected to do?

between 33 and 66 against skirms. between 15 and 30 for HI, 22 and 44 against cav