Sage overpowered - Suggesting new Assassin unit

I'd like to discuss the current balance of military units with armies that include sages.

From the battle reports I was able to observe, I have an uneasy feeling about the sages.

Basically, in big battles, every side fight normally, and because sages are put in the backline, they only intervene (= start attacking) near the end of the battle when every front-liner have died and they get in range.

However, their attack power is just way too excessive. With the attack multiplier that can get as high as 1.4 already for some players, the sages can basically Bomb your units with 200 damage per round (with unit weapon lv 3, which is a very cheap upgrade for the amount of damage it provides to the sage).

Not only that, but the damage will "carry over" to the next unit in case the first unit died. This makes any strategy against the sages ineffective. For example one strategy would be to send mass scouts so as to exhaust sages charges, but instead they will just die in bunch of 20.

The problem gets worse for coordinated attacks. Because if several armies attack the same place, eg. with 4 coordinated armies, each with 4 sages, the situation could become a hell, because 16 sages have a total firepower of 16*200 = 3 200 damage PER ROUND. Even if we take strong frontline units, like knights or medieval warriors, there's just too many of them who would die instantaneously (I let you do the math)

It is much easier to coordinate attack than defense, so clearly the sage becomes an overpowered attacking unit, while its primary purpose, I believe, was to be a defensive unit. I really regret picking chariots instead, as there is clearly a too big difference in power.

I have a suggestion to easily counter sages, mitigating their attack power while still preserving their defense usefulness.

Assassins

The sages need a counter unit. Those units could be "assassins". Assassins would be units that focus on dealing damage to those support units (sages, healers, heroes are the only targets). Some key features for those units

• Assassins have a special attack "assassinate"
  • Assassinate has infinite range (or very long, much better than 10 range)
  • Assassinate only has few charges per battle (2-3)
  • Assassinate does moderate damage (so maybe an assassin could take a sage after 3 rounds)
  • Assassinate is a special kind of attack which focuses on strategic units (we may think of adding a unit class "support unit" which would flag the units that can be targeted by assassinate).
    (strategic targets would include sages, maybe healers, possibly heroes, and other special units like these guys)
  • Assassinate works at 10-20% efficiency when attacking a city (assassins are primarily made to defend against sages attacking)
• Assassins are not fighters however. They also have a classic attack, but are much less stronger than any other frontline unit. In 1v1 an assassin would lose to a legionnaire maybe ?
• Assassins can only be trained in small numbers, or training assassins would prevent training other units (=ie. training assassins should be a strategic choice).
• Not really sure about the resource cost, but even high resource cost would be justified, I don't really care as long as I have a way to fight those f*** sages

What do you think of this ?

This is merely a suggestion, but please, I believe the sages are just too OP in offensive battles. Even collec players who invest reasonable amounts in defense would have no way to resist a coordinated army including 16 sages. We can also maybe think of something using that currently unimplemented hero perk "assassin", where the hero itself would be an assassin.

Will loose them in renaissance, so not sure how much it matters.

Will loose them in renaissance, so not sure how much it matters.

People will most likely stay in medieval so they can get stripes from attacking renaissance players.

You can have up to 5 chariots in one town, where you can only have 1 sage per town. 

You could also use wine to have up to 10 chariots.

Stop whining that something needs to change, every time you lose a battle to us.

Basically, in big battles, every side fight normally, and because sages are put in the backline, they only intervene (= start attacking) near the end of the battle when every front-liner have died and they get in range.

Basically in big battles sages cant attack for many rounds and can only attack near the end, until we can edit unit formation. Due to the current random placement sages are extremely weak.

Not only that, but the damage will "carry over" to the next unit in case the first unit died. This makes any strategy against the sages ineffective. For example one strategy would be to send mass scouts so as to exhaust sages charges, but instead they will just die in bunch of 20.

This is a game mechanism, damage carries on to the next unit. What is your point? What you are suggesting is not a strategy since we have this mechanism.

The problem gets worse for coordinated attacks. Because if several armies attack the same place, eg. with 4 coordinated armies, each with 4 sages, the situation could become a hell, because 16 sages have a total firepower of 16*200 = 3 200 damage PER ROUND. Even if we take strong frontline units, like knights or medieval warriors, there's just too many of them who would die instantaneously (I let you do the math)

You mean 16*145, you assume everyone has 40% army attack to sound more dramatic.

Bigger armies attacking same town = sages become even weaker, most likely none will be able to attack enemy units until 50% of total rounds have passed and many frontline units are dead, so you can say sages are overall 50% weaker.

If they get to attack with 50% of rounds left, sages become a 75 damage unit with 45 charges that has 50 hitpoints throughout the fight.

While chariots can attack from the start of a fight, do 50 damage unlimited times, 350 hitpoints, even have 2 range.

TL DR: Your argument is invalid. Quit complaining about whatever you dont like, you are not losing because sages are too strong, your enemies are doing joint attacks on you, it's natural that you are losing.

Let's begin by addressing one of your last arguments

you are not losing because sages are too strong, your enemies are doing joint attacks on you, it's natural that you are losing.

I am writing this based on several battle reports I have been replaying several times. Battles I considered for this discussion were usually 3or4 v4 battles (meaning 3-4 people reinforcing the same town, and 4 coordinated attackers). Of course for joint attacks without joint defense would be irrelevant to consider.

Yes, enemies do joint attacks, but so do we do joint defense. Only difference is that some of the defenders chose chariots, and have few sages compared to attackers, and the difference in efficiency is huge.

Basically, in big battles, every side fight normally, and because sages are put in the backline, they only intervene (= start attacking) near the end of the battle when every front-liner have died and they get in range.

Basically in big battles sages cant attack for many rounds and can only attack near the end, until we can edit unit formation. Due to the current random placement sages are extremely weak.

Even if they only fight at the end, that doesn't remove their killing potential. An attacking army of 100 units with those sages at the back (100 units means 10x10 so sages can attack) could easily wipe an army of 500 units, assuming same army composition but only attacker has sages. Feels off. Attackers don't even need big armies with sages to wreak havoc. Doesn't really matter if the attackers had first to be brought down to 100 attackers or if they were clever enough to send few units so sages could attack earlier.

Actually, because those units are usually placed at the back, that increases their survivability so much. And the more they survive, the more damage they are guaranteed to deal because they avoid insta-death by being placed at the frontline (more later)

Not only that, but the damage will "carry over" to the next unit in case the first unit died. This makes any strategy against the sages ineffective. For example one strategy would be to send mass scouts so as to exhaust sages charges, but instead they will just die in bunch of 20.

This is a game mechanism, damage carries on to the next unit. What is your point? What you are suggesting is not a strategy since we have this mechanism.

I am saying this mechanism makes it worse for sages. Because regular units are less likely to kill several targets in a row, and when it happens, their subsequent attack is low and absorbed by armor, which isn't the case for sages. Actually you are right, the problem is more general. It is that high damage units become even more powerful because they "bypass" armor

If you want some Math : formula for damage is DMG = ATKІ/(ATK + DEF)

For High attack, we can approximate ATK >> DEF and neglect the defense term. We can also see it this way : the derivative of this expression as respect to the attack is (ATKІ +2ATK*DEF)/(ATK+DEF)І, and you can see that the more the attack increases (assuming a constant armor), the less efficient the armor becomes (alright, you'd actually need the second derivative to confirm that, but trust me or do it yourself)

The problem gets worse for coordinated attacks. Because if several armies attack the same place, eg. with 4 coordinated armies, each with 4 sages, the situation could become a hell, because 16 sages have a total firepower of 16*200 = 3 200 damage PER ROUND. Even if we take strong frontline units, like knights or medieval warriors, there's just too many of them who would die instantaneously (I let you do the math)

You mean 16*145, you assume everyone has 40% army attack to sound more dramatic.

I just had a look at my last battle report. Observed attack modifiers are (for the ennemies) 1.35, 1.39, 1.17; 1.41. We're not that far from the 40% dude, seriously. And the heroes are only lv 25ish and have not yet unlocked better stuff/renaissance stuff.

Bigger armies attacking same town = sages become even weaker, most likely none will be able to attack enemy units until 50% of total rounds have passed and many frontline units are dead, so you can say sages are overall 50% weaker.

If they get to attack with 50% of rounds left, sages become a 75 damage unit with 45 charges that has 50 hitpoints throughout the fight.

While chariots can attack from the start of a fight, do 50 damage unlimited times, 350 hitpoints, even have 2 range.

Assuming we are indeed taking into consideration large scale battle. Espected survival rate of chariots ? Well if the ennemy has greek fire, I'm afraid your chariots won't even get to attack a single time. Because Greek fire special attack will target them always (or siege, but those guys are at the back, so at the beginning Greek fire targets chariots). I believe greek fire are spread through the army, so yes they can attack at the beginning. Also, your chariots have range 2, so basically they are within tower range. They take additional damage and die faster.

In comparison sages are much more likely to be able to use their spells. Because when they get in range, that means there are 9 columns of soldiers in front of them, and we can assume that, at worst, 1 column of soldiers is lost per turn. So they are guaranteed to use at least 9 charges. I'd say that the fact they are placed at the bottom makes it more useful than if they were placed at the battle front. Towers won't start to hit them until they are withing 3 columns of the ennemy, it doesn't matter whether they have 50 HP or 350HP, because no one's gonna hit them. 

The only way to hit them would be to have a clear unbalance of armies, so frontlines units can get to the sages before being killed. Haha, that actually reminds me of what happened during World Wars. Sages are like the artillery and sub-machine guns. The rest of the army is like the soldiers going through the no man's land to their certain death.

TL DR: Your argument is invalid.

Apparently not. I'm waiting for more arguments/counter-arguments coming from you, if you have any.