Alright i ran a couple of simulations.
And my results are based on two assumptions:
1. The simulations are run on two equal infantry squads.
2. Cost is not considered.
3. 1hp/Full Hp not considered.
4. The order used is A/D/R.

10/10/10 vs 10/00/20, 10/10/10 wins with 2 range units
10/10/10 vs 10/05/15, 10/10/10 wins with 2 range units
Note: A similar victory was achieved by 10/10/10 even when the build was
varied like 10/7/13 or vice versa.

Now this is where it gets very interesting.
We saw how 10/10/10 killed a pro build.
But if one was to leave cost considerations aside<which is rather stupid>
one gets the following results.

10/10/10 vs 5/5/20, all units on both sides die! So it implies both are equally effective while the 10/10/10 is cheaper to build!

10/10/10 vs 5/00/25, 5/00/25 won by a few units but 10/10/10 was way cheaper to build!

Infact now comparing on the basis of cost.
5/00/25 costs 5500 metal and 2500 oil.
10/15/10 costs 5250 metal and 1750 oil.
10/15/10 vs 5/00/25, 10/15/10 wins by 3 units.

As far as i can make out, making a sizeable damage force, without reducing your armour and reducing your range only a little you can prevail!

this experiment was shocking to me too and i'm going to beta test it on a world now, where i wont play seriously!

Try it without dammage see what results you get youre using 10/10/10 do 21/9 or 20/10 but Range/Armour ratio and compare it to Dammage and range no armour and Dammage and Amour together.

10/20/0 beats 9/0/20
But people are used to using range so they continue to do so

No. Range beats the damage build with ZERO losses if the army building range is a LITTLE bit bigger, leaving damage a terrible option.

That statement is false. We're talking about a quite large amount larger in percentages before they do no damage.

Yes, but you only need tiny %'s to take a big enough hit to turn all their armour and half the damage to mush. Muck around in the simulator for a while

E5


(below) killed with missile


damage still sucks. You can not play a round with out many battles and win. There for with out range winning you fights in the first round , or close to it your army rebuild will be higher and it will slow your growth.

not to mention when you take spies missiles into account your units just die with out doing nothing

In big army armies, range will outperform damage. It always has been this way. Unless the buffed damage.

I remember that back in classic(The 1st-3th year of BD), range units could get a extra range if the got enough exp.
Back in E4A2, BYZ managed to get a pretty big army filled with +1 range tanks.. In the end it died.. but it took a huge amount of units to take it down.

Yet some people think that damage is amazing.

And, range can get an extra range now as well. So can damage. Even armor, though I have yet to see an armor unit with 1+ range.

This

Lets assume for a second you're not totally derping and that the enemy gotspy prot ion cannons blah blah.

Try running 6/0/40 against 10/20/0

Its not an unbelievably large difference in army size but it reduces the losses on the ranged size no negligible amounts