Slight buff needed for rams

[phoenixffyrnig]

Following on from this topic, http://www.ageofstrategy.net/viewtopic. ... hilit=Rams (merge if necessary, but this is going in another direction)

Endru mentioned his reluctance to boost speed - fair enough - since then I have been using rams in MP just for the sake of testing out their utility (or lack of), and I'm still of the opinion that rams need a boost somehow.

Admittedly, 1 ram quickly built early game (ie before defences can be built) can be deadly to any unwise general who neglects to have a standing army, but beyond that, they are still rather feeble. Even several rams together still fail to do much meaningful damage to a well defended point. In fact, they are of more use defensively as easily spammable obstacles to slow your opponent down.

Reasons being
a) easily countered/blocked by mêlée foot
b) it's Hobsons choice between too slow (battle mode) or too weak (transport mode)
c) (as in the previous mentioned topic) their upgrades give them very little practical benefit Vs their natural enemies on the field of battle.
d) fire damage treats them as a rather flammable entity, cf ships, whereas in reality, great efforts were taken to make rams fire retardant.
I think the problem is really all of these points combined rather than any one of them in isolation.

Possible solutions...?
1) slight increase to mêlée armour in battle mode
2) decent increase to pierce armour in transport mode
3) decrease fire damage to rams in general, possibly further decrease with each upgrade
4) any other ideas?

[godOfKings]

My personal opinion is u cannot rely on spamming any single unit to win an offensive siege battle, late game rams and siege towers act as 'offensive walls' to block enemy wagon from reaching ur trebs and cannons that r within range of enemy towers, and as long as the rams r not within range of many cannon towers its still kinda difficult to destroy them, the moment u send ur melee units out to destroy the rams they will b killed by the offensive player units hiding in ambush

I m still not sure how much ram needs to b buffed though guess i havent experienced enough defensive stalemate situations yet to thoroughly understand the problem

[phoenixffyrnig]

I m still not sure how much ram needs to b buffed

To answer glibly, buff them enough so that they can function as their purpose intends...as a siege weapon.

[b2198]

Hm, I mostly disagree with this, I've used rams in many stalemate games now, and while the base version is indeed weak, the final upgrade can be spammed to punch through even fortresses. With some amount of rams, you can reach their buildings before those can destroy them, and if they block with units them they are easy targets for your supporting archers. Though I agree on slightly increasing the packed mode's piercing armor, because as of right now, even slingshooters can deal a good amount of damage to them.

[phoenixffyrnig]

And Vs Guardians for example? Or Vanguard Shield Knights?

What I really mean about the ram upgrades is I don't think they necessarily scale with the 3 tier mêlée upgrades because of the blacksmith attack boni and the (normally) 200% bonus Vs Siege Machine Armoured.

Add in a few fire attacks from castles, towers and fire archers, and their ponderous speed, and it seems to me like a lot of 6 turn builds to just soak up some hits and not do much damage

[godOfKings]

As i said, offensive siege isnt meant to b as ez as spamming only rams to win the game, rams have limitations for which u will have to make up for them with other siege units, like trebs for example, how well u can save ur trebs while distracting opp with big hp big hit targets is the true strategy of offensive siege

Remember both cannon tower and ballista tower have lower sight than treb range

Also both shielder and shield knight upgrade costs 6 turns while ram upgrade only cost 4 turns, and no matter how much u glorify ram as an expensive 6 turn unit, it doesnt change the fact u will b able to ez spam rams every 2 turn with enough workers late game

[b2198]

And Vs Guardians for example? Or Vanguard Shield Knights?

Send Siege Towers with maces or flails along with the rams, or poison archers, or herbalist + almost anything, maybe even send elephants along with the rams to deal with those.

What I really mean about the ram upgrades is I don't think they necessarily scale with the 3 tier mêlée upgrades because of the blacksmith attack boni and the (normally) 200% bonus Vs Siege Machine Armoured.

I don't think they are meant to, I mean, those are their counters, they should kill them without much trouble, and more so when upgraded.

Add in a few fire attacks from castles, towers and fire archers, and their ponderous speed, and it seems to me like a lot of 6 turn builds to just soak up some hits and not do much damage

Well, considering how spammable they get with a lot of builders, I'd argue the opposite, fire alone is not enought to deal with them in most cases. But this spammability matter is something that Endru was discussing recently, in the "Laborers, Palisade Gates and Wooden Bridges" thread, so that might be a valid point in the future.

[phoenixffyrnig]

And if something needs that much support to fulfil its role, is it good enough at it's job? What about small maps with barely any TCs? There is some middle ground between a highly spammable OP en masse unit and being unable to function in it's own right without support.

Good points though guys, good debates. I do have a proven track record of OP suggestions and attack bias, so I appreciate it when we can bat ideas back and forth.

Well, considering how spammable they get with a lot of builders, I'd argue the opposite, fire alone is not enought to deal with them in most cases. But this spammability matter is something that Endru was discussing recently, in the "Laborers, Palisade Gates and Wooden Bridges" thread, so that might be a valid point in the future.

Is this the increase in build cost you refer to? The more I think about it the more I like this idea (even though it will hurt my strats).

Also both shielder and shield knight upgrade costs 6 turns while ram upgrade only cost 4 turns, and no matter how much u glorify ram as an expensive 6 turn unit, it doesnt change the fact u will b able to ez spam rams every 2 turn with enough workers late game

Four, I think for defender and guardian upgrades, (just a correction, I get your point, Im not using an accounting error to counter you - that's a politician's tactic )

So are your main objections to do with spammability of a high hp unit, or that you think it's already balanced, fellers?

[godOfKings]

Spammability of a high hp unit getting stronger will make it more op etc.

[Endru1241]

Pure defensive boost for unburdened is not really a way to go - they can be in TC, so I'd like to avoid them being usable as defensive units there.
They are also not designed to resist ranged weapons too much.
Their quite high HP (cavalry level) is already enough.
HP is also good defense against fire. Even regular unupgraded ram survives full 5 turns of 3 fire arrows burn.
Or in other example - castle has to concetrate all 3 of it's attacks for 3 turns and still make 1 attack on 4th to kill basic not upgraded ram.
I am sure it doesn't need any buff here, considering ,that it's getting repaired 30 HP by laborer in times of need.
And the fact that nobody does that only proves how spammable they are.

But - I have already done (in the already send pack - it's not yet in dev though) change for anti-mounted units - to stop them being too easily affected by buffs and allow future balancing of game start anti-mounted damage.
It's split as much lower bonus (not exceeding 150% and generally lower) + weapon effect with the rest of damage affected by ability power.
I am still considering making similar thing for anti-building units.
It could be great way to make higher damage on the start of the game (so that e.g. swordsmen could deal at least some 35 damage or so) and not as high on end game (not affected by buffs that much).
With that end-game buffed melee units should have not even reach two-shotting rams.
But in turn I also consider making all worker buildable things needing more mend actions - for rams it would be mildest 6->10 turns according to my current most probable balance scheme.
Siege tower would go 6->14, so much more extreme.

[phoenixffyrnig]

... Must be just me and my antipathy towards tower spam...

Cheers for info tho

[Endru1241]

Btw. Towers will be affected by longer build too.
I only plan to leave factories and non-war infrastructure untouched.

[makazuwr32]

I'd say that castles also must take longer to build.

[Endru1241]

I'd say that castles also must take longer to build.

Why?
They are limited in number, so 16 worker actions is not so bad.
I am not planning your AoF planned level of resilence for structures, so I don't think there is a need to make them too hard to make.

Besides my initial calcs are not anything revolutionary.
For towers:
3 ->4
4 ->6
6 ->8
9 ->12
5 ->7
10 ->15
12 ->16
So that castle without any change would need the same amount of turns as spammable fort.

I just signified, that siege machines won't be alone in lengthening their build time.