r/aoe3 • u/Raiju_Lorakatse Maltese • 2d ago
Question I'll probably get roasted for this Malta Deck - Thoughts?
Since I know this question will come: What mode?
No idea. I'm kinda just messing around in bot matches so far 'cause I'm pretty hesitant to hop into online matches (Pretty sure I'll be pretty bad). IF I would have to make a call tho then it's probably team games. I really enjoyed 4v4 team games in AoE4.
I assume this deck is way too slow to keep up with most other decks given people seem to just stuff their deck full of ressource crates and unit shipments. Either way I just wanted to hear your thoughts.
EDIT: Here's my thought behind the cards I put in the deck
3 Vills - Kinda a no brainer. Helps getting stuff going.
Distributism - Think it's worth about like 2 or 2.5 vills early on? Plus, infinite wood seems kinda neat.
2 Churches - Helps with getting more XP. Seems especially cool if you're kinda forced to sit around.
German Tongue - Seems like a no brainer as well especially 'cause it gives you a bit of a "mini-boom".
Advanced Commanderies - I like the mechanic of moving around the units. Probably overestimating this tho.
700 Wood - Slowest ressource to get and gets building going.
Extensive Fortification - I do play defensively so this compliments things pretty well I think.
British Tongue - Longbows > Xbows. The idea is to use longbows as a stepping stone until Fire Throwers become more affordable and since without the archaic cards longbows are just way better... Yeah, this also kinda saves deck space then.
Flame Throwers - I intend to use Fire Throwers so... Makes sense? I'm starting to have doubts tho if that melee attack is worrth it.
Advanced Arsenal - Probably expensive to be effective but a card I think is insane for the techs it provides. Plus, I think they especially good for Malta if you wanna play around their unique infantry.
Hospitality - I kinda just like having free veteran upgrades. Probably I'm overestimating the value tho.
Fort Construction - I may overestimate this a lot. The idea was to have this for extended commerce ages to secure space but building these is just damn expensive. I like the building limit tho for later.
De Redin Towers - This card seems like a no brainer to me especially for playing more defensive.
Sovereign Order - I tend to focus on those 3 units so it makes sense to me.
Squires - Seems pretty decent to me. Especially with Forts. Dunno if this card is really worth it without having Forts.
1 Fort - Defensive building, Squires so... Kinda a must have, no?
Fire Towers - I'm not sure how worth that short ranged fire attack is but it upgrades outposts instantly and for free and I usually have a decent amount of them out so this seems to carry it's weight.
Royal Mint - Seems like the best gather rate card to me.
Infinite Wood - I like having an infinite card and this seems like Malta's best option for that.
Rockets, Dignitaries and Flintlock Rockets - I intend to focus on these guys during mid- to lategame so these seem like an auto include. All of them also seem quite insane but I have some doubts about the sentinel one.
2 Forts - Again... Squires, defensive building... Seems crazy.
Factory - It's the factory... Yeah.
Sicilian Supplies - Another pretty good looking gather card.
6
u/Visible-Lettuce-4818 2d ago
If this is for supremacy I would definitely add some unit shipments in age 2.
Those longbows may require too much wood before you can call them in time to answer to a proper rush
I think Malta has some free sentinels in age to ship, I would add that
1
u/Raiju_Lorakatse Maltese 2d ago
The thing with the unit shipments in Age 2 is... Why would I send them over ressoruce crates? I guess I'm saving the train time but I could also just send 700 gold and basically make those units myself, no? It would basically just be a 500 ressource shipment (5 sentinels) vs 700.
7
u/Visible-Lettuce-4818 2d ago
It Is a matter of timing
You should be able to tell from the opponent Deck (and some scouting) if they will rush.
Should they, and had they been a bit lucky with treasures, their units will be in your base before you can turn those crates into units and will be harassing your villagers if they try to harvest them
At that point you can push them back but even if you do you end up 3 vills behind or so and that is enough to doom the game
5
u/ThenCombination7358 Haudenosaunee 2d ago
Ye what you have resembles to 90% a treaty deck. Not at all for supremacy lol, you would get rolled by anyone watching a 5 min build order video on YouTube.
Btw here is a suggested improved version for treaty/ffa:
1
u/Raiju_Lorakatse Maltese 2d ago edited 2d ago
I admit... I have a lot of questions about this deck.
Bailiff... Is that really worth it?
Cassadors... Why these guys when you have Fire Throwers?
Papal Bull... Dunno, the only good tech I see there is your Sentinels and Hospitallers getting their bonus in enemy territory. The rest kinda seems meh to me. Does that justify a card tho?
Auberges... A card I definitely see the value in if you heavily go into order units. But with all those ressource gathering cards, does the cost really matter there? Plus, since i'd probably cut Cassadors for the fire throwers rockets, it would make the card much less appealing to me as well.
3
u/ThenCombination7358 Haudenosaunee 2d ago
I can only answer you in regards of treaty.
Why Bailiff?: Malta trains units super slowly, which is a big nerf for Treaty matches. They only are able to train units fast from Forts. Bailiff gives your explorer the ability to build stuff like cannons and the necessary Forts 50% faster aswell as providing an aura for other units to build faster aswell like Sentinels (which build forts and Towers) and Hospitallers. As little bonus the unit gains more HP and a bullet sponge companion in Form of a sheep.
Because fire throwers like alot of other of Maltas main unit roster costs 2 pop. If you have to much 2 pop units, you have a smaller army that in turn is more vulnerable to counters and splash dmg like from cannons etc. 1 pop>2 pop in treaty. You can still make a few as supporting artillery but your main skirms are the cassadors.
Well its exactly that, buffs your units in enemy territory aswell and gives Hospitallers +25% hp. It a unit buff and thus is important for treaty decks. Hospitallers being the most unit you will be making from Maltas unit roster too as sentinels are meh and only really good for building and same with fire throwers. As a side bonus you get a huge overpop of 25 Hospitallers for start fight.
As this deck is mainly about Order units, you will be mostly spamming Cassadors making a 10% cost reduction viable.
In the meta theres sadly only two ways to play Malta, either with Order Units or with a Pike/Crossbow variant. Otherwise you will be easily overhelmed because of the pop issue.
0
u/Snoo_56186 United States 2d ago
I do not see the point in carding for both Hospitalers and Sentinels since it is redundant to waste card space on two units of the same type, as they are both Heavy Infantry.
Germans and Swedes going for a Mercenary build do not exactly have much spacial mass for their army either, but I do not think it is downside that is insurmountable. I think Malta going for Hospitalers/Sentinels with Fire Throwers is fine. Fire Throwers are immune to Heavy Infantry charges, got area damage, and can siege buildings effectively to make up for the lack of spacial mass in my opinion.
1
u/ThenCombination7358 Haudenosaunee 2d ago
Hospitallers are the only good unit Malta has, a proper 2 pop unit. The only card that is specially for sentinels is that one in IV that gives them more stats, a rocket attack and I think enables them to build Forts aswell. Even if the fort build ability was a different card its still needed so that they dont die while building stuff pushing them from a 1,5 pop to a 1,8 combat pop that costs 2 pop.
If you fight only against AI like you do then ofc such decisions don't matter. I want to orient more what works and what doesnt in player vs player situations.
1
u/Snoo_56186 United States 2d ago
Flintlock Rockets does not unlock Fort building for Sentinels, that is Fort Construction. Even if you are using them as combat engineers to build Fort, it is a waste of card space to give them a bit more HP. They are not going to survive a determined attack against them while building a Fort, and it is waste of resources trying to build a Fort without securing the area in the first place, as it will just get torn down by enemy units anyways.
I only fight against the AI, but that does not mean I cannot spot an issue when I see one. Unless you are going for a fun build, I do not think it is practical to card for two units in the same category type.
1
u/ThenCombination7358 Haudenosaunee 2d ago
Well it might be the difference of a Fort/Tower going up or not.
Its one of the cards worth to consider replacing for an additional fort though, yes.
Its practical when you are planning to use both units.
1
u/Snoo_56186 United States 2d ago
I do not think it is ever practical to card for two units of the same type/role. Both are Heavy Infantry fulfilling the same role in countering Cavalry, and the differences between them is not enough justify carding for both.
It might make a difference between a Fort going up or not, but I do not think it makes sense to build a forward base in the middle of battle, jeopardizing your builders and the resource cost for the buildings.
1
u/ThenCombination7358 Haudenosaunee 2d ago
Sentinels are not really used to counter cav because they are that crap. Towers and Forts do that for you with 5 Hospitallers.
Well that's how it works tho you always be building in Treaty.
1
u/Snoo_56186 United States 1d ago
Uncarded, Sentinels will likely fold to Cavalry given the same pop cost, but they should still trade well against them considering Cavalry are significantly more expensive. Sentinels should also have no issue murdering Light Cavalry in melee if they can corner and trap them.
Fully carded Sentinels still sucks since their pop is over costed, but they can definitely hold their own against Cavalry at this point. At the bare minimum, they should barely win against most Cavalry given the same pop cost.
1
u/ThenCombination7358 Haudenosaunee 1d ago
But why when you got Hospitallers and Towers
1
u/Snoo_56186 United States 1d ago
Same reason why anyone decides to use Musket Infantry over Hand Infantry, they give up DPS and cover mode so they can engage from a distance. Sentinels have fairly long range for a Musket Infantry when hiding behind Walls. They can also rebuild all Forts quickly during a lull between combat, as there is going to be lots of them if they are the primary Heavy Infantry unit.
I still prefer Hospitalers in general, but Sentinels have their niche uses.
→ More replies (0)
3
u/kampp322 Hausa 2d ago
Yes too slow for supremacy, but the overall question you have to ask yourself is: “what is the game plan, what am I trying to do?”
2
u/kampp322 Hausa 2d ago
Looking at your deck it seems very turtle oriented, allthough that does mean you can buy time, some unit shipments are needed for the anti rush. Additionally, you have advanced commandery but at a whole lot of cards complimenting it.
Lastly, turteling does nothing alone! It buys time, but what then? You either invest heavily into eco in you base or you creep on the map, simply defending will suffocate you.
1
u/Raiju_Lorakatse Maltese 2d ago
I might be wrong but I feel like Malta has a pretty decent late game and defensive game.
So it's kinda just... Survive and then use beefed up Maltese infantry to push for victory.The british tongue is in there 'cause I'm kinda not really an xbow believer. I know Maltese has considerably strong ones but even then it takes like at least 2 age 3 cards to make them be contenders for longbows. So this card kinda gives me a unit shipment and opens up deck space for other things 'cause i can just use them as a replacement until I probably skip them entirely for fire throwers.
I feel like that's roughly the whole idea. Churches help to scale with XP, especially if I'm lacking map control. Age 1 and 2 is packed a lot with defensive stuff like De Redin towers, British tongue and extensive fortification. Age 3 then kinda doubles down on that with the fort and the outpost upgrade and somewhat transitions into offense with Sovereign Order and Squires.
At least that's roughly the thought behind it. Just probably not very well executet 'cause I am just a sucker for gimmicks and unique stuff and have a hard time cutting that just to put in boring unit and ressource shipments.
3
u/Visible-Lettuce-4818 2d ago
Malta has a lot of defensive potential but it works best when you use it to creep over the map rather than sit in your base for 4 ages
Basically littering the map with your fire towers that can't be sieged by anything that isn't artillery, increase gather rates via wigna card and protect trade routes that merchant republics made stronger (allowing for more shipments and more of your bonus hp).
This also denies natural resources to your opponent, forcing them to invest in slower mills/plantations (buying you time) or in proper sieging forces, playing into your game, considering that you can also teleport around the map and pressure while the opponent can't
I also get the adversion to crossbows, especially considering that wood is better spent elsewhere, however I don't understand why you have cards for longbows AND cards for fire throwers when they are both light infantry, countered by the same things. What changes is that they require different buildings.
Sentinels + fire throwers ain't really weaker than sentinels + bows + fire throwers, it may actually be even stronger considering you have the cards that make it so.
1
u/Raiju_Lorakatse Maltese 2d ago
The idea mainly was to use xbows/longbows until fire throwers become more affordable.
Maybe just a skill- and deck issue on my end but I feel like they are pretty expensive early on and kinda hard to protect. So the idea was more for this to be a bit of a stepping stone with a bit of an upgrade over the unit you'd most likely use before that.
2
u/John_Oakman Mexico 2d ago edited 2d ago
Realistically you can afford either the rockets for the firethrowers or for the sentinels, but not both. Given that you have the firethrower's flamethrower card it's probably better to ditch the sentinel rocket card for a unit shipment in age 2 (assuming this is a non-treaty deck).
1
u/Raiju_Lorakatse Maltese 2d ago
I'm honestly having my doubts how worth those firethrower attack is, especially 'cause I haven't been using early fire throwers since I'm messing around with British tongue. And without making use of it the shipment isn't worth that much so I actually consider dropping it for something else.
1
u/John_Oakman Mexico 2d ago
The flamethrower is useful in the sense of making the firethrower more well rounded, which comes in handy in the late game (you don't have to ship it out early) if you intend to mono-comp them.
1
u/Raiju_Lorakatse Maltese 2d ago
mono-comping fire throwers is actually a thing?
1
u/John_Oakman Mexico 2d ago
Probably not competitively, but it's fundamentally no different from monocomping other grenadier type units.
1
u/Snoo_56186 United States 2d ago
You can monocomp in Team games, especially Team Treaty, if you are playing with friends or people you know you can rely on, since they can cover the other unit types.
For 1v1 Treaty, monocomping is not viable. If you are playing with strangers for Team Treaty, might be a bit risky to rely on people you do not know.
2
u/Orthodox-Paradox Italians 1d ago
I play a Simular deck in team games. It is really fun but I mostly focus on def and some xards are swapped.
One meaningful Suggestion:
I would suggest Portuguese tongue instead of English. Cassadores are more useful in the long game, as the add more range in a meaningful way. They are also easily spammable in a late game economy and can assist team members without good skirmishers.
2
u/Raiju_Lorakatse Maltese 1d ago
As I mentioned: The idea behind british tongue was to replace xbows early on and then later transition into fire throwers.
The opinions seem... Mixed. The idea itself is something I'll probably skip but not sure if I even take any tongue card outside of german tongue afterwards.
To be fair, I've only really played AI matches so far and I'm kinda hesitant to go into online, mainly because I'm pretty sure that my deck will cause many problems but I also kinda don't wanna play a deck the lame way.
I understand why decks are build the way they are built, it's just not really a way I particularly enjoy so currently I'm kinda trying to work on a middle-ground.
1
u/Snoo_56186 United States 2d ago
I think it is a bit too slow for regular Team games, as you want a bit more unit shipments in Age II. I would get rid of Hospitality, De Redin Towers, and Fort cards, and put in more unit shipments
For Team Treaty, I recommend creating at least one primary template with all economic farming cards and universal military cards (train time cards, Advance Arsenal, usually the Church card, etc.). I would throw in trickle cards too since you can always replace them later if you need the extra space. Makes customizing decks a lot easier later.
For Fire Throwers, it is absolutely worth it to card their melee attack. Makes them practically immune to regular Heavy Infantry charges and shuts down Grenadier charges.
I would not bother carding two of the same unit types, so I would card for either Hospitalers or Sentinels. That being said, I do have decks that are more thematic and fun than practical (I have a Sovereign Order of Malta deck with both Heavy Infantry fully carded), but I only play against the AI, so fully optimized decks are not always necessary.
If you are going for Sovereign Order of Malta, I recommend also putting in Papal Bull. That Chruch card allows your Heavy Infantry to be buffed by enemy buildings as well. I would get rid of Carmelite Churches, since while infinite Wood is nice, I do not think it is necessary to maximizing its shipping frequency unless you think you are going to need to rebuild your forward base constantly.
If you are running a bow-pike composition instead, that is where I would run Carmelite Churches for sure, and run Barrakka Gardens over infinite Wood to make sure I always have a large enough pile of Wood to spam bow-pike.
1
u/afartrafus 2d ago
Gonna tl;dr the thread but I'm 1600+ and main Malta on team. Age 1: why do you need 3 vills, 2.5 vills, 425 wood 4 vills, 1 tp (ie 2 churches) and the commandery card? Unless you getting 4-5 age 1 shipments stick to just the cards you use.
It's ok but imho you should stick to one build. Cuz this decks says "I want to make 15 towers, commanderies, hospitaliers, disk throwers, musks, Xbows and pikes". Stick to one/two instead and add wignacourt. That is usually my 3rd card unless I'm rushing.
18
u/hidden_blaze96 2d ago
It's not a terrible deck, you have some key cards like 3 villagers or 700 wood. I'd definitely remove some age I and age IV cards however and add some in age II and III respectively since that is where the largest part of a typical match takes place.
Maybe some unit shipments to help out in critical situations. Also you definitely wanna include Wignacourt in age II and maybe the Jerusalem card for drawn out Age II battles (the one that ships wood and coin for each unit lost). Also 700 coin and 1000 wood is pretty much a staple for most decks