Teutonic knight vs a fully armored war elephant with sword tusks- 
Teutonic knight vs a half naked dude with a woobly sword- 
Naked guy covered in feathers: 4 pierce armor
The elite infantry with plate armor so good that he doesn’t need shield anymore: 1 pierce armor
AoE II is not really known for historical accuracy. Dynasties of India is not special case or something. Can’t wait to play with new civs.
15 Likes
Yes more such stuff, this thread is for pure fun!
These guys werent naked. They had good armour against ranged weapons I believe
1 Like
Cries in the big a** shield camel riders are wielding… (why are we carrying these shields again?)
1 Like
Yes, Eagle Warriors (and other Aztec warriors) had armour that was very effective against arrows:
Particularly relevant quote:
The garment was so effective at stopping arrows, and even musket shots, Spanish conquerors often adopted them instead of their own, heavier armor.
4 Likes
its dumb but is for balance. i can list 50 more examples how this game is unreal.
is not just dynasties of india logic
This is very false lmao. Here we go again.
And gambesons were much better because they had the riveted steel. (Edit: i meant brigandine)
Also the armor the Spanish wore would still be distributed on the body well enough that it hardly would’ve tired them.
And although the native arrows didn’t penetrate, steel tipped European arrows would definitely go through some cotton
3 Likes