They didn’t just get triple buffs in the past; various civs also got multiple bonuses on top of these buffs, which is way too much, considering their counters stayed the same.
Absolutely not.I still much prefer arbs even against infantry
9 Likes
Because HC was bad in the past before buff and HC is not OP currently.
Hopefully there will be no comparison to Janissaries again.
6 Likes
Another propaganda post to make the Turks stronger? We know you by now, you might as well rename your title to ‘Why Janissaries aren’t the most powerful unit in the game?’"
10 Likes
The only overbuffed handcannons (Hindustanis) were actually nerfed in the patch yesterday.
7 Likes
A unit might get one combat buff, or even two if balanced by missing one tech (like missing ring archer in that case). But more than two combat buffs for a fully upgraded unit is just the definition of imbalance:
Spanish HC: Only one combat buff, perfectly fine.
Turks HC: Only one combat buff again.
Bohemian HC: Apart from the questionableness of being able to train them in the Castle Age, they only got one buff in the end.
Burgundian HC: +25% attack which also applies to the bonus damage. Two buffs but missing ring archer armor, so mostly fine.
Portuguese HC: Discounted, has ballistics and faster projectile. Can’t say 100% unbalanced, still more passable than some other outrageous Hand Cannoneers, but not as fine as the first four examples.
Italian HC: Definition of imbalance. Discounted, more accurate, on top of also having pass-through damage.
Hindustani HC: Has to be the most unbalanced unit. +1 melee, +1 pierce armor, +2 range on top of stealthy accuracy buff. They are permanently outranging their supposed counters. And if your civ is missing Bracer, good luck trying to counter them with elite skirmishers, which will be outranged by 2! They can snipe siege without issue at all too.
2 Likes
It’s your reasoning that is flawed. The balance of a civilization is a whole that depends on a multitude of factors. There’s no point in comparing units while ignoring all of these factors.
It’s like approaching a topic without any context.
6 Likes
I feel like HC need a rework again.
This time because they are too good against non-spearman infantry units.
It doesn’t make sense the Cavalry civs now get a better tool against infantry and Archer civs sometimes struggle against lategame militia spams.
In general HC aren’t overtuned, but the changes to the importance of other infantry units have set new balance issues for the HC.
Perhaps it is arbalest a bit underwhelming but not HC too good?
1 Like
There’s still a short window when hand cannons are stronger than non-elite janissaries, window that mostly affects the Turks as they get chemistry for free which itself is a tech that’s very long to research. Perhabs giving the janissary the shirvamsha’s dodge ability and be affected with arrow blacksmith upgrades will do ? 
2 Likes
Hand cannoneers remain stronger than non-elite Janissaries longer than you think, due to the elite upgrade requiring 1,600 resources, while hand cannoneers are unlocked with a tech that costs only 500. Even elite Janissaries are countered by Hindustani and Italian hand cannoneers.
A generalist hand cannoneer that has already sacrificed its infantry attack bonus and accuracy is still somehow countered by anti-infantry specialist hand cannoneers, while being more expensive and requiring a 1,600 resource elite upgrade.
Maybe Janissaries are fine, and hand cannoneers are the problem. Maybe they should be nerfed until elite Janissaries can counter them again.
At least in super lategame yeah. The Arb timing play is still very strong. But indeed at later stages when the other units are FU Arbs feel kinda weak in comparison indeed.
That’s why so many Arb civs now have super lategame techs that bring them to a higher level and none of these was ever considered OP.
So, would it be an idea to add a general tech for arbs in the lategame? Something like increased ROF or so, similar to thumb ring, but only for Arbs?
If the devs keep reading your posts, one day they’ll get fed up and reduce the Janissaries’ range to 1 and make them fight with bayonets.
1 Like
Tbh I believe that +1 base atk for archer civs would be much more useful than ROF in late game. But this overlaps with Viking UT and most archer UU have that +1 atk.
1 Like
You can’t keep buffing units forever.
Infantry gets buffed —> hand cannoneers get buffs and new unique bonuses —> arbalesters can’t keep up so they get a buff —> infantry/skirmishers need a buff again to keep up with new arbalesters and hand cannoneers —> all the other units need buffs to keep up with arbalesters, hand cannoneers, skirmishers, infantry, etc…
This is the definition of power creep. And it can only be solved by nerfing the problematic unit, not by buffing everything.
Hand cannoneers, even the top-tier ones, are supposed to die to archers and generalist hand cannoneers. If that doesn’t happen or they massively outclass arbalesters, then they should be nerfed accordingly instead of buffing arbalesters.
1 Like
nah arbs are fine. In bf where I can make uu from 4 castles I wouldn’t use standard fu arbs unless I need to. But in other maps or 1v1, they are very good, and much better than standard fu HC. HC are much worse against heavy cav, or even against hussars. They are also harder to micro, overkill a lot, and basically are only better as a quick transition or against high-pa units.
The issue with Hindustanis is that they are designed as a “counter units” civ, but their HC are so good they can play as a generalist backline DPS. But even the strongest HC are not on par with Ethiopians, Britons or Mayans arbs as a backline dps.
1 Like
Actually these are currently prime examples of what’s the issue with Arbs in the very lategame in the current state of the game. If you look at the stats of Ethiopians and Britons you see they are currently below 50 % winrate in the very lategame (45 min + games). Especially Britons were once one of the lategame powerhouses yet still can’t break the 50 % there anymore. Even Mayans who tend to go for their infamous el Dorado eagle flood play just get about 50 % winrate there.
And these are among the best Arb civs, prime examples of your own. Other Arb civs with not so meaningful Bonusses struggle even more - if they don’t get other options there. Look at Koreans for example (and Koreans get a wood discount also for their trash units).
Which is fine because they are also way easier to tech into. I also statet that in general I think HC are fine. For me it just feels in comparison too Arbs they heavily outperform them against the newly buffed militia line which kinda breaks the balance triangle. As it’s usually the Cav Civs that get HC. And the Arb civs rarely transition into HC if they already teched into their “main” unit line.
Who talked about Hindustanis? Ofc Hindustani HC are amazing - they just were nerfed which is fine to me.
We see a lot of HC play these days which shows they are well established. And at the same time it looks like especially against the strong Champion spams the standard Arbs lacks behind - so the question is how to handle this. Because it feels then like the Cav civs get all the tools again as infantry in the midgame is useless and the Archer civs have now weirdly enough Issues against the Infantry civs they were supposed to counter better by balance.
This ofc is all currently a bit fogged by the reality that the pathing still seems to favor the ranged units for some reason. IDK exactly what happened between the PUP and the actual patch release…
A UU that swaps from a gun to a melee weapon when in min range would actually be kinda fun to see.
1 Like
I remember that you dislike introduction of new civs and most changes since DE. So I strongly recommend you to play HD instead of DE where is no new civs and change. Turks Janissaries have 8 range. You don’t seem to play competitive games so HD should be a paradise to you.
4 Likes
It exists already : Fire lancers