I ve noticed how stupidly expensive and pop hungry are, on top of having two cards (Tame Elephants and Profesional Handlers) giving very low boosts needed for the late game, while I get they are insane in fortress (especially the Mahout Lancers, my favorites), 7 pop (6 for Howdah) is too big for Industrial/Imperial, and the discount from Tame Elephants is kind of weak IMO.
So what about merging these two cards into one (Like Profesional Tamers or something lol) and putting these two effects buffed (15% cheaper and -2 pop to all Elephants, not just Siege Elephants) to make them more accesible in late game (making them more usable in treaty, where Indians are kind of weak), and maybe give new cards to improve them in different ways? (Like a card for a charged attack to Mahout Lancers and Flail Elephants called “Musth”, for those who don’t know, is the state where male elephants become wayy too agressive vs everything and has been known for Indian Eles for 3000 years, that should give enough motivation to use them in Industrial, offesting their poor pathing at least, and giving to Flail Eles a good role. and other to Siege Eles and Howdah a bit of firing rate speed, called Gajnal Cannon).
Combining Tame Elephants and Professional Handlers cards into 1 new card to have cheaper Elephants to train that take up less population is a change I would like.
I always thought the population cost of Indian elephants was unfair as a howdah, however warwagons are much more effective in cost, hp, dmg and population I prefer to have 6 zamburak than to have 1 howdah or to have 3 sowar instead of just 1 mahout, but each game can be worth the opposite
This proposal is super broken, apart from fusing the card, you also improve it so that it gives 2 less pop, this is ultra broken.
In a late game of TR the elephants lose some power but it is a totally minority late game of TR for the tremendous buff that this merits in team supremacy games and perhaps certain 1v1 games.
No one is talking about treaty. The post talking about industrial age. Why do treaty players always sljust assume every post is talking about treaty??? So dumb
Having it reduce pop by 2 would likely create treaty issues (and probably bigger Sup ones). Even just talking about Treaty for a moment, it’s a valid concern. Having said that, treaty does go lower than 1v1 on the priority list. So, is that a good change for 1v1? I’m still probably on the no side. I think there’s a better option.
Have the Elephant cost reduction card enable a few elephant upgrades in the castle. One which replaces Professional Handlers (-1 pop for say, 300f 300c) and one replacing the Elephant Armor upgrade (for, let’s say, 500w 500c). This would save India 2 card slots (a boost to both Sup and Treaty) and let you pay less than a shipment for a couple of upgrades (a tempo boost that shouldn’t be an issue in Sup). Ages for the new techs stay the same as the cards they replace.
but to actually address it combined is fine -2 pop is probably busted
Mahout at 5 pop is more pop efficient then maxed out gendarmes in HP and also have more armour, both ranged and melee
Howdah at 4 pop is better also more efficient then war wagons
so it is more likely a person is not on treaty because 2 thirds are not according to you. again dumb logic from treaty player, claiming a third is majority, with no data to back up
He never claimed a third was a majority. Only that a third play treaty. If that’s true (idk the numbers), than that’s still a substantial portion of the player base.
As I said earlier in this thread, Treaty is a secondary concern that should be placed behind 1v1 in most cases (and since the two modes use almost entirely different cards in many cases, it isn’t too likely to be an issue). I suggested an idea earlier in this thread that would likely be better for both 1v1 and Treaty.