Age of Strategy Forums

In my opinion keeping catapult and trebuchet garrisoned in towers is unrealistic as archers also take same space as giant siege units. So I suggest siege units(except battering rams) can be garrisoned only in buildings and castles but not towers. For sieges there should be a new tower that cannot at...

And no, no one spams knight wagon when pikes kill them in one hit, its catapult and trebuchet( and battering rams may be) that are overused

And also if an opponent can't counter a knight-wagon combo and watches his surprise attack get foiled then it is the opponents' fault for not considering the possibility of such a attack . y should such a beautiful strategy get the punishment instead?

A knight-wagon combo costs 8 turns too so this is a viable strategy against sieges becoming too op in my opinion , I once did a comeback with the same strategy so I can't accept this

But then how do u propose destroying opponent sieges without using Ur siege it is impossible for knight to reach a siege without the siege atking it first and pikes can kill knights in one hit late game

Mighty guy did u mean me? Actually I am playing this for like 5 months but joined the forum recently so I am new I guess. Thanks

In the picture I think there should b some kinds of indication for the Knight's leg

Cavaliers were technically upgrades of Knight in aoe

Instead of caravanserai name it kella or keela (literally means fort in Hindi ) that would seem more realistic for this

Although it is possible to use omni but keeping this combo is also useful sometimes

Actually I don't support because for me sometimes putting cavalry in wagon is extremely useful in defending cause I can easily reach far away sieges that are protected by pikes, even if my knights die if I can destroy the sieges in one turn its totally worth it so please don't implement this idea......

I guess the only way around this problem is to build a tower adjacent to diagonally connected walls to make a pathway for garrisoned units, or simply just make a wall adjacent to the two walls

But wait I just remembered that walls can also be connected diagonally but soldiers can only move along adjacent walls how to solve this problem?

So the idea is all ranged infranty except sieges can be garrisoned in and move along walls and the only way to enter is through gates or a tower adjacent to the wall and sieges ( or any other unit) can enter gate but cannot attack and sieges cannot enter wall from gate also the ability to unlock gar...

Wasn't that the original reason as to why he suggested that sieges can be garrisoned inside gates?

Although I agree that sieges can't enter wall but because of 1 speed they can't even pass through gates so I think they can b garrisoned in gates but can't attack from gates and if gate (or wall) is destroyed garrisoned unit will survive

I see, although its atk is almost completely useless against other ships but its main purpose is to act as a fast transport. May be it cannot garrison wagons or else it would make transport ships obsolete and since its a "light cavalry" should it have some bonus against siege ships?

So it is like the four Egyptian units. OK I guess that will work too.

It is weaker than a chariot because of its one hit destroy effects

The reason that makes raiders so dangerous is that early on it can destroy a 20hp building in just 1 hit (if you calculate damage bonus and burning effect you will see its 20) so workers won't have a chance to repair them. So it could be used as an alternative to Mongolian archer and a player could ...

Description: a unit for pillaging and razing. Use raiders to infiltrate enemy bases and wreak havoc! Active effects: burning weapons Cost: 4 turns HP: 20 Atk: 8 Armour: 0 P.armour:1 Speed: 6 Sight: 8 Range: 1 Spell resistance:0% Bonus: 100% all buildings 200% towers and walls 50% archers and infrant...

So I have got a question, aren't Rajputs a separate ethnic group like the Marathi? This is not a name for any specific type of soldier but rather for an entire ethnic group like panjabi for example so I don't think Rajput is a good name.

I saw this problem not only with me but also other players who withdrew from my game. Their turns didn't end and only after I skipped them did it show that they lost the game. I am pretty sure I got skipped the same way because my skips would always increase a day or so after I withdrew from any mul...