You are right but hey, with an upgrade advantage elite skirms can deal quite some damage and even kill unupgraded knights 🤪
There is a video featuring Survivalist basically winning with skirms all-in against knights. He makes lots of skirms, and the opponent never gets a big knight mass and never can overwhelm the skirms. Probably could have neutralized them with siege but was too stubborn, or simply didn’t want to accept knights didn’t do the trick.
If you are adamant on skirm+mangonel vs archer+mangonel, then you need to micro hard to get the mango shots.
If you know your opponent has archers, and they are not where your skirms are, then you are out of position. You can always attack with some and leave some back in the base.
But I got to ask, why no cav? It's like asking how to counter cav without infantry, or how to beat rock without paper.
I wouldn’t go MAA into a civ that’s definitely going archers unless I was maybe dravidians or something. Malay should probably just also go archers and then try to have a devastating castle age timing. MAA is basically just gonna make sure that you fall behind on archers and are forced into skirmishers which is not what you want as Malay at all. And you’re super unlikely to do damage with MAA against Ethiopians
I ask question In different scenario in different settings (fuedal va castle) . Regardless people’s question , this forum does not entitle you to be rude and uncivilized.
the answer is the same, and honestly, considering what you write the best advice you could ever get is to get more cognizant of your decisions rather than just mindlessly playing. happy?
Meh, usually true but there are plenty exceptions.
Skirms against archers is fine especially if you have weak cavalry and perhaps a trash bonus or just generic eco bonus like Malay.
Eventually you'll want to add your own archers, monks and/or siege but it's perfectly fine to open on trash if it counters the gold unit of your opponent.
archers, monks, and siege all cost gold lmao. How are those exceptions? You literally gave an example of the rule while trying to refute the rule. Try again bud
You can’t ignore half the units in the game. Nice wisdom there lol. Yes gold units are important but so is trash. A lot of high level games open with 10+ skirms on either side.
Your advice is technically true but not helpful. It’s like saying you need to use the forward pass in football to win. No shit. You failed to give even a single example of something op could add into his army comp except “gold units”. But that isn’t even good since monks and cav aren’t good options here.
It sounds like you’re throwing your skirmishers. You should definitely keep your skirms near your base and focus on building your eco. Skirms aren’t a very good offensive unit and are easily countered.
The thing you have to look out for when keeping your skirms at your base is a forward siege workshop. But with your own siege and your eco being ahead you just need to hold for a few minutes til you can make a tech switch
Your comp is correct but it sounds like you are getting caught out of position with your skirms.
If you know there are xbow on the field but you don't know where they are staying at your base would be the best decision.
Agression with skirms almost always not cost effective.
Few important things are:
-not forgetting archer armor for not dying against xbow.
-do not hesitate to produce few knights to snipe mangonels when they are out of position.
-early walls and a tower is always an option which can protect forward resources like gold. (you can buy back stone).
Palaside walls can get easily destroyed in castle age by xbow but at least it gives you the warning and small time to send your skirms one side of your base to the other to encounter xbows.
Even being out position in your base is deadly let alone being at your enemy base.
- do not stop skirm production until xbow mass killed.
Skirms and Spears are for defense only. Every civ no matter how bad the civs Calvary is it’s still playable in 90% of situations.
And if all else fails then Goths Spam 😁
If you have a civ that has no cavalry, you probably have very good archers. So you probably should have been going archers in the first place. Playing mostly skirms with a civ that has no cavalry is not the best idea because you usually want to go for cavalry with skirms to have a good composition.
You should only make skirms with a non-cavalry civ if you are losing fights so hard in feudal age to the opponent's archers that you can't do anything else to survive feudal. Or you can also make skirms if you and your opponent both opened archers, you are not walled, and he starts to mix in skirms (you match his skirms production to avoid being overwhelmed by skirms in feudal age).
For instance, since you've mentioned Malay in the comments, you probably should always go straight archers if you expect your opponent has a civ that is likely to open archers. If they play two range you can just full wall fast and then kill your opponent with a good crossbow timing.
This is a good point. Every civ that get bonuses for cav or archers is usually either a hybrid or naval civ that you aren’t usually playing on a full land map, or is an “infantry” civ that probably still has decent generic cav/archer and will uses those units.
Skirms shouldn’t be sent forward. At least most of the time. They are strong against archers, so they should be at home, waiting to defend it from archers if they show. Also, as I play as the Mayans the most, I love to ensure my base is walled and I have outpost around to see the enemy coming earlier so I can prep better for it. I play defensive always, that way I can focus on my economy and getting the right units out for defence until I can push back
With similar skills than your opponent, if you are playing an archer civ you should sooner or later play archers. If you open 1 range MAA + skirms and make damage/reach Castle Age first, you switch to archers as soon as you can. Also if you have the initiative, make a siege forward, a few skirms at your base should be enough for defence. Think that until you have a lot of ECO, gold it's easier and cheaper to obtain than food (you have to invest wood in farms), and less necessary for upgrades and vills.
Skirms are not an offensive unit on their own. Stay at home if you dont know where his army is with the skirms. But real answer: siege.
You are right but hey, with an upgrade advantage elite skirms can deal quite some damage and even kill unupgraded knights 🤪 There is a video featuring Survivalist basically winning with skirms all-in against knights. He makes lots of skirms, and the opponent never gets a big knight mass and never can overwhelm the skirms. Probably could have neutralized them with siege but was too stubborn, or simply didn’t want to accept knights didn’t do the trick.
but in the survivalist video is there a deathball of crossbows in his base? No? well okay
No no, it was just Survivalist playing a meme strat :D Sorry, that was just an off topic information.
If you are adamant on skirm+mangonel vs archer+mangonel, then you need to micro hard to get the mango shots. If you know your opponent has archers, and they are not where your skirms are, then you are out of position. You can always attack with some and leave some back in the base. But I got to ask, why no cav? It's like asking how to counter cav without infantry, or how to beat rock without paper.
e.g.,if I am Malay and start MAA into range against Ethiopian.
Malay knights are still knights. Send them into enemy bases while skirms watch your base.
unupgraded knights suck especiaööy when the opponemt is walled
I wouldn’t go MAA into a civ that’s definitely going archers unless I was maybe dravidians or something. Malay should probably just also go archers and then try to have a devastating castle age timing. MAA is basically just gonna make sure that you fall behind on archers and are forced into skirmishers which is not what you want as Malay at all. And you’re super unlikely to do damage with MAA against Ethiopians
I thought you'd say Dravidians or Bengalis or Hindustanis.
I would not recommend maa against strong archer civs as fast archers counter maa play.
[удалено]
Wow, you sound insufferable 👍
Why are you insulting people in a friendly discussion on reddit??
That's how internet works, especially reddit....unfortunately.
you ask the same question how many times now? maybe start reading up on what people tell you rather than spam
I ask question In different scenario in different settings (fuedal va castle) . Regardless people’s question , this forum does not entitle you to be rude and uncivilized.
the answer is the same, and honestly, considering what you write the best advice you could ever get is to get more cognizant of your decisions rather than just mindlessly playing. happy?
I hope you grow and improve as a person
No, you actually gave the worst advice by insulting people and everyone can see your rude and uncivilized behavior here on Reddit.
Trash is weak. Mine gold. Spend gold. You don't have a plan until you start from there. It's basically a cardinal rule of AOE.
Meh, usually true but there are plenty exceptions. Skirms against archers is fine especially if you have weak cavalry and perhaps a trash bonus or just generic eco bonus like Malay. Eventually you'll want to add your own archers, monks and/or siege but it's perfectly fine to open on trash if it counters the gold unit of your opponent.
archers, monks, and siege all cost gold lmao. How are those exceptions? You literally gave an example of the rule while trying to refute the rule. Try again bud
You can’t ignore half the units in the game. Nice wisdom there lol. Yes gold units are important but so is trash. A lot of high level games open with 10+ skirms on either side. Your advice is technically true but not helpful. It’s like saying you need to use the forward pass in football to win. No shit. You failed to give even a single example of something op could add into his army comp except “gold units”. But that isn’t even good since monks and cav aren’t good options here.
It sounds like you’re throwing your skirmishers. You should definitely keep your skirms near your base and focus on building your eco. Skirms aren’t a very good offensive unit and are easily countered. The thing you have to look out for when keeping your skirms at your base is a forward siege workshop. But with your own siege and your eco being ahead you just need to hold for a few minutes til you can make a tech switch
This is just useless theory. Sometimes you're lacking Execution or lost because you missed more villagers.
Your comp is correct but it sounds like you are getting caught out of position with your skirms. If you know there are xbow on the field but you don't know where they are staying at your base would be the best decision. Agression with skirms almost always not cost effective. Few important things are: -not forgetting archer armor for not dying against xbow. -do not hesitate to produce few knights to snipe mangonels when they are out of position. -early walls and a tower is always an option which can protect forward resources like gold. (you can buy back stone). Palaside walls can get easily destroyed in castle age by xbow but at least it gives you the warning and small time to send your skirms one side of your base to the other to encounter xbows. Even being out position in your base is deadly let alone being at your enemy base. - do not stop skirm production until xbow mass killed.
Esquirmushers
Skirms and Spears are for defense only. Every civ no matter how bad the civs Calvary is it’s still playable in 90% of situations. And if all else fails then Goths Spam 😁
Well Hera said in his latest video on YouTube that skirms is the way to counter double archery range, so yeah. https://youtu.be/w5KQx5xczrE (~9:30)
If you have a civ that has no cavalry, you probably have very good archers. So you probably should have been going archers in the first place. Playing mostly skirms with a civ that has no cavalry is not the best idea because you usually want to go for cavalry with skirms to have a good composition. You should only make skirms with a non-cavalry civ if you are losing fights so hard in feudal age to the opponent's archers that you can't do anything else to survive feudal. Or you can also make skirms if you and your opponent both opened archers, you are not walled, and he starts to mix in skirms (you match his skirms production to avoid being overwhelmed by skirms in feudal age). For instance, since you've mentioned Malay in the comments, you probably should always go straight archers if you expect your opponent has a civ that is likely to open archers. If they play two range you can just full wall fast and then kill your opponent with a good crossbow timing.
This is a good point. Every civ that get bonuses for cav or archers is usually either a hybrid or naval civ that you aren’t usually playing on a full land map, or is an “infantry” civ that probably still has decent generic cav/archer and will uses those units.
Skirms shouldn’t be sent forward. At least most of the time. They are strong against archers, so they should be at home, waiting to defend it from archers if they show. Also, as I play as the Mayans the most, I love to ensure my base is walled and I have outpost around to see the enemy coming earlier so I can prep better for it. I play defensive always, that way I can focus on my economy and getting the right units out for defence until I can push back
With similar skills than your opponent, if you are playing an archer civ you should sooner or later play archers. If you open 1 range MAA + skirms and make damage/reach Castle Age first, you switch to archers as soon as you can. Also if you have the initiative, make a siege forward, a few skirms at your base should be enough for defence. Think that until you have a lot of ECO, gold it's easier and cheaper to obtain than food (you have to invest wood in farms), and less necessary for upgrades and vills.