Spanish Monks vs. Spanish Missionaries

[James3157]

One might assume that Spanish Missionaries are overall better than monks because of them being unique to the Spanish civilization and faster than monks despite not being allowed to pick up relics, but starting from the Castle Age (not Imperial Age) there is a Castle tech that adds a benefit for both the both the monk with easier to convert and for the missionary a +1 range. Would monks be more practical for converting knights with this special tech for easier conversion and units further away (such as units on the other side of a river or forest for example) while missionaries are more practical for converting slower units and perhaps exploration? It is important to keep in mind as well that both units cost the same amount of gold to get from the monastery. While Imperial Age research from the castle is expensive it could also be potentially useful as well at the same time for the Spanish for both the monks and missionaries.

[James3157]

One might argue that comparing Spanish monks with Spanish missionaries is like comparing apples with oranges, but I am pretty much divided over this. Besides faster exploration, Imperial Age research from the castle, monastery research, and not being able to pick up relics (contrary to monks) in what ways are missionaries better than monks? For monks it is obvious with more noticeable range (especially before the Imperial Age unique tech from the Castle is researched) and can pick up relics, but the benefits a missionary has over the monk do not seem to be as obvious. Scouts (including light cavalry and hussar in addition to scout cavalry) for example can also explore maps and not just missionaries where missionaries cost gold and perhaps harder to replace than scouts as well, but scouts only cost food.

[Fido]

They're not good for conversion strategies. Since the Spanish common strategies tend to primarily revolve around cavalry, they're only really good for being mobile healers. A monk will still outperform it in every other regard.

Being a monk that can (sort of) keep up with cavalry to heal them is, quite literally, it's only use case.

[James3157]

Originally posted by DANGER ☠ POSSUM:

They're not good for conversion strategies. Since the Spanish common strategies tend to primarily revolve around cavalry, they're only really good for being mobile healers. A monk will still outperform it in every other regard.

Being a monk that can (sort of) keep up with cavalry to heal them is, quite literally, it's only use case.

Because of faster traveling missionaries might in fact be more reliable at healing than monks especially when traveling with fast units, but not every civilization is as focused on cavalry units as the Spanish when it comes to playing against AI or human opponents. Also, the tech tree says that knights at least (including Cavalier and Paladin) are weak vs. monks leading me under the impression that if the Imperial Age unique tech is researched from the castle it might be easier at least in theory for a monk to convert a knight or similar unit that is upgraded than it would be for a missionary even with a +1 range. Also, not every civilization includes Heresy either and it is also very expensive as well to research.

[Fido]

Originally posted by James3157:

Originally posted by DANGER ☠ POSSUM:

They're not good for conversion strategies. Since the Spanish common strategies tend to primarily revolve around cavalry, they're only really good for being mobile healers. A monk will still outperform it in every other regard.

Being a monk that can (sort of) keep up with cavalry to heal them is, quite literally, it's only use case.

Because of faster traveling missionaries might in fact be more reliable at healing than monks especially when traveling with fast units, but not every civilization is as focused on cavalry units as the Spanish when it comes to playing against AI or human opponents. Also, the tech tree says that knights at least (including Cavalier and Paladin) are weak vs. monks leading me under the impression that if the Imperial Age unique tech is researched from the castle it might be easier at least in theory for a monk to convert a knight or similar unit that is upgraded than it would be for a missionary even with a +1 range. Also, not every civilization includes Heresy either and it is also very expensive as well to research.

Monk's and Heresy's importance, or negligiblity, is very much depending on the civ you're playing, and the civ your opponent is playing. If you're playing Byz and running Cats? Hell yeah, convert your own units back, they're expensive. If it's a late Byz game and you're running cheap trash? Who cares if an Elite Skirm or Halb gets converted.

Against the Teutons, you probably want to have heresy. Decent Teuton players always seem to be fielding some monks, especially since they have plenty of time to convert between the glacial winks of time their troops take to engage the target (barring Paladins, which are both very good and more conversion resistant).

[James3157]

Originally posted by DANGER ☠ POSSUM:

Monk's and Heresy's importance, or negligiblity, is very much depending on the civ you're playing, and the civ your opponent is playing. If you're playing Byz and running Cats? Hell yeah, convert your own units back, they're expensive. If it's a late Byz game and you're running cheap trash? Who cares if an Elite Skirm or Halb gets converted.

Against the Teutons, you probably want to have heresy. Decent Teuton players always seem to be fielding some monks, especially since they have plenty of time to convert between the glacial winks of time their troops take to engage the target (barring Paladins, which are both very good and more conversion resistant).

I think that Heresy might be useful when playing as the Spanish and especially on multiplayer.

[Boshiken]

"The Missionary generally outperforms the Monk in most ways

greatly improving the Monk's defensive abilities both for army support with healing friendly forces to actively converting enemies and fleeing from counterattacks and with Bloodlines, they can have more hit points. The Missionary fares much more poorly on the offensive, lacking range, so for situations where they are already protected, the regular Monk performs better.

For the Spanish, the Missionary gives the Spanish far more tactical flexibility for their Monks, especially while on the offense and during the late game when the Relics have already been collected."

[Heimdall313]

Monks are better in literally every way, the only thing Missionary have is mobility. A small group of Missionaries with Theocracy can quietly remove villagers and use them to drop a tower on a gold mine, or to quietly remove trade units as well if you want to be cheeky in a team game.

Otherwise, Monks do everything you need to do and the Spanish have particularly good ones. Missionary are funny as hell with Elephants on the field, allied or otherwise. Snatch your buddy's converts back, or if you're fighting them, Paladin + Conquistador struggles on Battle Elephants so a group of 2-4 Missionary with Theocracy is absolute torture on a Vietnamese Elephant + Rattan block.

They're good units they just have a tight niche. They'd be interesting if say, Mongols or Huns had them.

[meleander]

Originally posted by James3157:

One might assume that Spanish Missionaries are overall better than monks because of them being unique to the Spanish civilization and faster than monks despite not being allowed to pick up relics, but starting from the Imperial Age there is a Castle tech that adds a benefit for both the both the monk with easier to convert and for the missionary a +1 range. Would monks be more practical for converting knights with this special tech for easier conversion and units further away (such as units on the other side of a river or forest for example) while missionaries are more practical for converting slower units and perhaps exploration? It is important to keep in mind as well that both units cost the same amount of gold to get from the monastery. While Imperial Age research from the castle is expensive it could also be potentially useful as well at the same time for the Spanish for both the monks and missionaries.

You have 2 important technologies:

1. Inquisition: Increases conversion speed for Monks and Missionaries. Missionaries +1 range.
   
2. Redemption is a technology in Age of Empires II that can be researched at the Monastery. Once researched, it allows Monks and Missionaries to convert enemy siege weapons and most buildings.

Based on those technologies I would say it like this - missionary is better as a hit & run unit. You go quietly to the side, then quickly convert some buildings - best if those are production buildings, but if you convert an eco building and vills will start traversing like half the map to drop res, then you basically cripple enemy's eco without them realizing what is happening (as vill count won't change).

[James3157]

I thank you all for the helpful advice. Some useful information in determining whether to use monks or missionaries while playing as the Spanish. In general the AI may not be as smart as a human player from multiplayer, but still good to know.

[joaosantos92]

Monks to pick up Relics. Missionaries for everything else.

[James3157]

Originally posted by joaosantos92:

Monks to pick up Relics. Missionaries for everything else.

But Inquisition from the Imperial Age also benefits monks as well. Missionaries get +1 range, but monks get easier to convert; although, I do get that perhaps some people overall prefer playing as the missionaries as opposed to monks while playing as the Spanish which is understandable.

[meleander]

Originally posted by James3157:

Originally posted by joaosantos92:

Monks to pick up Relics. Missionaries for everything else.

But Inquisition from the Imperial Age also benefits monks as well. Missionaries get +1 range, but monks get easier to convert; although, I do get that perhaps some people overall prefer playing as the missionaries as opposed to monks while playing as the Spanish which is understandable as well.

yeah, but almost no one uses monks, as they are a counter :D

So like I wrote up, they are better to harras, as you go in, get some eco/production buildings, and run off :D

[James3157]

Originally posted by meleander:

Originally posted by James3157:

But Inquisition from the Imperial Age also benefits monks as well. Missionaries get +1 range, but monks get easier to convert; although, I do get that perhaps some people overall prefer playing as the missionaries as opposed to monks while playing as the Spanish which is understandable as well.

yeah, but almost no one uses monks, as they are a counter :D

So like I wrote up, they are better to harras, as you go in, get some eco/production buildings, and run off :D

I just want to correct myself and say that Inquisition can actually be researched from the Castle Age and it is not limited to the Imperial Age. I made a slight mistake with Inquisition, but not a mistake with easier to convert for Monks not being included for missionaries after I double checked on this from the tech tree. It has been a long time actually since I have last played as the Spanish (from the Conquerors expansion pack even before HD came out officially), but this comparison is towards future reference when I start playing as the Spanish again later on from campaigns.

[James3157]

Not sure how often I will use monks besides picking up relics, but when I start playing as the Spanish again (although not sure when since there are so many campaigns even from just basegame) I probably will be using missionaries. Especially since no other civilization can use them.

[Fido]

Originally posted by James3157:

Not sure how often I will use monks besides picking up relics, but when I start playing as the Spanish again (although not sure when since there are so many campaigns even from just basegame) I probably will be using missionaries. Especially since no other civilization can use them.

I often play Byzantines, and let me tell you, some civs definitely should encourage you to make monks as utilities, supports, even stopping smaller raids. Not investing anything into monks as Aztecs is even considered somewhat of a miss, though not necessarily detrimental. But you'd be leaving a high-value card on the table.

The Spanish have high utility for missionaries behind conquistador and paladin charges, the aforementioned Byzantines have twice the heal rate, which makes them essential for replenishing the health of gold units and trash waves alike. Teutons have twice the range, making them a safer bet to heal with on the front lines, since there's a greater archer buffer.

Meanwhile, as Lithuanians you want to make at least 3-4 monks anyway, to get as much relics as you can to enhance your cavalry with, might as well put those to use post-capture.

But even when it comes to converting, they are a great counter to several unit types, especially elephants! Cavalry is usually a risky bet, but paladins at a high-value convert, and even if the enemy have Heresy (it removes an expensive unit from the game, better than it still being there at all), and gold melee, or unique units. Converting Samurai is always fun, because you can usually get one hit off, and samurai hit other samurai *hard*.

Neglecting monks is overall a bad idea. Not a game-losing idea, but even if your monks save you 1 knight over the course of a minutes-long engagement, that's an extra knight you can field in the next one. And the rest of 'em will be fully healed up again. That's of immense value!