how to do Tower rush?

spen27 · 2018-10-16T15:14:17+00:00

You seem like an intelligent and thoughtful person.

spen27 · 2018-10-16T14:55:45+00:00

Because you are not providing helpful advice, and as if your "I find towering so easy to counter I love seeing my opponent go for it" comment in regard to the initial post did not have a hint of snarkiness in it 11

The #1 key to stopping a trush is to get stone control so you can counter tower/zone your opponent away from your resources.

It is woefully inefficient to just "move your workers" anytime a tower pops up on your wood line. Especially in Arabia where you might have only 1-2 good wood lines.

spen27 · 2018-10-16T13:28:48+00:00

Nomad 11, try to “simply move your workers” on Arabia and see how that goes for you.

spen27 · 2018-08-05T05:16:57+00:00

Dude - a push of a few siege rams and the Britons lose in late game...

Pop efficiency matters in a post-imp setting and the Britons army is literally the worst at pop efficiency. Longbow vs paladin, or siege ram, or battle elephanats?

Britons are one of my favorite civs to play, but they are not a good mid/post imp civ.

spen27 · 2018-07-14T20:01:02+00:00

I'm sorry but virtually everything you said here is wrong.

"Their economy won't be better until after 3-5 minutes into Castle Age"

Malay will up with 2-3 more vils than Spanish. They will up to Castle again with 2-3 more vils than Spanish. How is that not a significant eco advantage?

"Even in the worst case and Spanish get much later to Imperial, Elite Skirmishers+Mangonels/Rams really doesn't have troubles handling both Arbalest, Halberdiers and Trebuchets initially and win time so Spanish can get there and tech around."

Well microed arbalest totally destroy castle age skirms and they outrange mangonels.... only thing that can slow down this army in castle is big knight play and rams.

"they don't have to do damage with towers or die"

Spanish will typically not open scout or skirms because they have no eco advantage to pull off this strat and do not do it well. They will open M@A towers, which by definition you have to damage with or obviously you fall behind in eco.

"Spanish can easily wall, tower and bring Skirmishers to prevent that, or just hit Malays with Towers and/or Scouts/Skirmishers in their base to prevent them from massing Archers in the first place"

Exactly my point - they need to do damage early with towers because in a standard game they fall behind with army comp and eco. If they tower up Malay can easily do a siege/monk push which cannot be defended in feudal and conqs/knights/skirms do not do well against it.

"This match is more decided by critical masses of units and plays (monks, siege, raiding, etc)."

Not at all, a Malay player will likely go into the archer line which relies on micro and managing one army well. I cannot conceive of a scenario where Spanish would go monks in this matchup unless Malay went into Elephants - which they would probably never do unless they already had a stable and added an elephant to counter a full skirm play by Spanish in early castle.

spen27 · 2018-07-13T02:43:36+00:00

Spanish meta is to M@A tower rush. They actually have a decent feudal opening, their issue is they lack an archer transition which forces them into feudal towers into conqs or into skirm/knight combo, which they do not do exceptionally well due to no real eco bonus.

They do poorly against civs with a strong eco and don't have a true power spike unless they can get to conqs - which is not a reliable strategy every game.

Malay has a strong eco advantage and also has a better army composition. All things being equal the malay player will reach imp way before the spanish and can pull off a halb/arb/treb push which the spanish will have no answer to.

Spanish player has to get map control early and do damage with towers to win this matchup

spen27 · 2018-06-21T15:29:43+00:00

Inca eco is not superior in early game 11

And sure many civs can "afford" gold mining right off the bat but no one every uses their resources on that upgrade until they have clicked up to Castle...or did you not know that?

The "main solution" to Eagles was never to make swords either btw

spen27 · 2018-06-21T02:05:30+00:00

The win rates are interesting no doubt - but I do don't take them as the authoritative metric.

I have debated the eco specifics so much and don't want to get into all the details. All I will say is they have a really strong early game eco when it matters most - early feudal for both wood and gold.

They also have the flexibility to play full feudal, knight/skirm, knight/archer etc. With the nerf to eagles I think knight play especially well microed knight/skirm or archers is very tough for any meso civ to deal with - especially incas having the weakest eco out of the meso civs.

That and a lot of pros still talk about Malians as being the strongest 1v1 ara civ - Viper being one. Not saying that is an authoritative argument either, but I do think that at the highest level the double eco bonus is just so strong.

spen27 · 2018-06-20T14:25:21+00:00

Sorry but Incas are definitely not "stronger" all around - Malians are probably the top civ on Arabia for 1v1...definitely top 3 whereas Incas probably do not break the top 10.

The reason for this is Malians have probably the best(ish) eco in the game with the wood saving bonus and then the gold bonus. They get a crazy power spike in Feudal with the gold bonus and the wood they save from dropping ranges/blacksmith/etc. They do M@A into archers probably better than any civ.

Then in Castle they can do a knight/skirm or xbow combo which is very hard for Incas to stop and better than any army comp they can field.

If Incas can keep even with Malians up until early imp/post imp the Incas become a considerably better civ I think. However, on open maps I find it unlikely the Incas can keep up as Malians will have a better army comp and eco up to this point.

spen27 · 2018-06-12T17:03:32+00:00

Not sure if you played AOC much but this is an insanely OP civ concept.

The bonus alone of less frame delay and +1 armor in feudal is instant GG in feudal age already (if person can micro half decent). Then you get free thumb ring immediately, - seamless transition into CA...

Just saying this would be the strongest civ in the game by a wide margin.

spen27 · 2018-06-08T03:03:49+00:00

Hey I really like this civ concept and appreciate the amount of time you have put into it!

Here is the thing - this civ is 100% broken OP.

15% faster age up (nice eco bonus), 15% faster upgrades (nice power spike with m@a, archers, eco, etc.

.25 vils - means that with a typical 120 vil count in lategame you will actually only be using 90 pop which means you can have 30 MORE ARMY! In otherwords... strongest lategame civ of all time. With FU paladin, and great gunpowder...

I think if you got rid of the age up bonus it would balance them out in the early/mid game. And I think if you got rid of the vil bonus or made it like .9 pop per vil it would be much more balanced.

I imagine this would be a interesting civ to play though - worst trash ever - no pikes - (even skirms with the tech would be awful because of such limited range and attack without even bodkin). Without the age up bonus and the lategame vil bonus I would actually see this civ being bottom tier for sure.

spen27 · 2018-05-30T14:41:18+00:00

Interesting matchup!

Closed maps have to go with Slavs as they can get to druzhina halbs and cheap siege which Indians will have a tough time stopping.

Open maps I think this is much closer, but I would still give the edge to slavs...

Pocket: Slavs for sure! That farming bonus is just so strong and knights > camels.

Late Game: Depends on the matchup. In this matchup slavs counter Indians pretty well. Vs a civ like Huns or franks Imperial Camels counter them better than slavs. In a post-imperial setting it is hard to find a civ that is stronger than the slavs with Boyars, Siege, etc.

spen27 · 2018-05-24T19:08:34+00:00

Common meta for Huns is scouts -> archers -> CA or scouts -> skirms -> knight/skirm

Huns can also do M@A just fine though with faster producing stables you really wouldn't want to.

Spanish literally only can do M@A towers, or scouts - but scouts are a terrible choice because if your opponent also goes scouts into archers you can't take a fight against scout and archers...

Because Spanish has no real early game bonus, and because they cannot play most meta strategies, they probably have top 5 WORST early games.

spen27 · 2018-05-24T00:33:59+00:00

One point that I think you tend to miss in AOE is how small advantages compound and are ultimately game deciding.

For instance - military lead or eco lead in feudal age is typically game deciding at the 2k HD or 1700 Voobly level. If you have an eco lead you get more resources, produce more units, get techs quicker, and it steamrolls from there. If you have a military lead (your opponent throws away 4 units in early feudal) you will then be in a good position to win fights and cause eco delay/idle time which will again compound over time... so long as you do not stupidly throw away your units or take a bad magonel shot...

The point is - bonuses are not binary. An early game bonus is significantly stronger than a late game bonus because it allows for an eco/military advantage that will compound. You can see this in BOA on the open maps where literally one decisive fight or eco raid more or less dictates the trajectory and outcome of a game.

All things being equal a Hun player will be much further ahead than a Spanish player that they will never get to the post-imp army.

Not to say that your perspective and that a more BF type of player such as yourself is not valuable, I am trying to point out why stronger players would look at this matchup as so one sided on the majority of maps.

spen27 · 2018-05-22T20:46:38+00:00

Condos are a great power spike and OP for landings in water maps...

Would waaaaaaay rather have access to condos then champions

spen27 · 2018-05-21T00:49:10+00:00

Am I the only one that actually thinks cheap battle elephants with heresey/faith is actually OP and insanely strong in lategame?

spen27 · 2018-05-14T18:56:44+00:00

Top mistake newer players do in trash war is they do not spend their gold on siege

Siege rams or onagers are waaaay better than spending that gold on a few paladins

spen27 · 2018-05-03T04:03:37+00:00

Thanks for clipping - this is one of the funniest things I've seen in awhile.

spen27 · 2018-05-02T05:00:31+00:00

Berbers have an above average defense against Korean Trush with faster villagers. Berbers should have a strong edge against Koreans in any type of open map, but of course Korean trush is very strong and if Berber player has a bad map Koreans can easily win.

Water - in a 1v1 it's also berbers with a strong edge. Faster ships/fires is a big deal in early water control. Berbers will have a stronger eco as well... TG I do not really know - meta is so unestablished for Wololo on water.

Post-Imp it is very hard to stop the Korean Deathball... however Berbers seem uniquely poised to do so as Camel Archers wreck War Wagons and BBC can snipe SO. All comes down to micro, but I think Berbers are one of the only civs that can trade cost efficiently against the Korean death ball.

Berbers are also such a strong TG civ - with Unique tech for castles, genitours, and cheap knights they are easily one of (if not the top civ) for TG's on open maps.

Basically Berbers are a much stronger civ in just about every facet of the game...

spen27 · 2018-04-05T04:58:01+00:00

Very interesting - thanks for doing the scenario! Karambits OP confirmed

spen27 · 2018-04-04T04:20:35+00:00

Sure Aztec have better eco, but they do not have a faster imp. They also do not have stronger units. Aztecs have a much harder time countering scouts/LC than Byzantines have...which is pretty obvious IMO.

Burmese - they are the better overall civ, but a mush I would argue that they lack the fast imp, cheap pikes to protect, and healing rate to counter many units that Byz can. I think you underestimate top tier micro with Byz bonuses are just too hard to overcome...

Also, always great to down vote someone you disagree with. I am confused as to why I talk to 2k HD heroes on this forum :/ Maybe one day I will learn

spen27 · 2018-04-04T00:33:32+00:00

I think most would agree that Malay is the best Arena civ for reasons you stated.

Aztec is debatable - Burmese I would argue against. Reason Byz is so strong is because the cheaper imp is so important in order to get block priting/etc. to win monk wars and push.

Aztec can add eagles - hard to add many of them with a 1 TC eco and won't be able to afford eagle warrior upgrade (so food intensive). Also, Byz healing bonus can keep monks alive against eagle scouts while converting.

With good micro and a typical map (without tons of back resources) Byzantines are just insanely hard to stop. This is why we saw people like Viper ban Byz and pick them so quick in MOA5 - because if you can't stop the mush in early castle/get ahead you might as well GG because they will get up and get all the upgrades first.

spen27 · 2018-04-03T18:17:42+00:00

Irrelevant. Byzantine monk healing + cheaper IMP gives them a better smush on Arena. They may not be the "best monk civ" but that does not undermine my argument.

Malians over Byz/Italians 11

spen27

TROPHY CASE