You said ‘Armenian Champions become the only champions who can beat Samurai’, when that is in of itself wrong when you only mean a 1v1 battle. The game is not about individual units beating other individual units, it’s how they work together in an army and how effective that particular army in that scenario is. Samurais don’t counter Champions, which is what your statement would suggest.
Already said that you’re wrong regarding Samurai beating Champions, but also… there are several gold infantry UUs that lose to Champions. Because their purpose is not to beat Champions. Samurai’s purpose is not to beat Champions, but enemy unique units.
Sidenote, @SMUM15236 what do you think if similarly Samurai would take negative damage from Unique class units?
That, or cherry picked one video out of 30 tests where 29 of the times the other units would’ve won.
I don’t have the DLC. So can’t say anything from my experience. How is their eco? I thought it would be a top 10. And they can just drop Fortified Church and make WP all the game with spears+skirms to support them.
That has been proposed several times already and I agree on this.
That info about how they generally did against infantry has been out there for ages. I’m not sure how adding one unit suddenly makes all those existing relationships clear for the first time, or worth reevaluating. IMO Jags counter mostly infantry well enough, but are not outside the scope of a mild buff in the face of power creep such as the Armenian UT.
There’s probably some familiarity bias at work, but I think most of this can be chalked up to how people would rather talk about new things than make the 51st thread about a 24-year old unit. Also, the balance patches have been pretty good at addressing most of the community’s concerns. You don’t see tons of new threads saying Conquistadors or Janissaries are OP, because it’s already been said, and mostly been dealt with to the satisfaction of players. Pretty sure people don’t want new DLC civs to be lame like initial release Dravidians or Bengalis, although some might prefer that to them being OP like Gurjaras.
People have had 24 years to figure these out. More importantly, even at low levels they have very simple counters, and are far slower and more expensive than champs. Even so, you’ll occasionally find (usually new) people saying they’re OP in teamgames and should therefore cost more pop or whatever.
I’m not sure where the “gotcha” 's supposed to be with these two. They were OP on release and even after subsequent nerfs are considered S or A tier and are great options despite competing with highly incentivized knightlines. It’s not crazy for people to imagine that a similar looking unit like the Monaspa might also be too strong on release. I do think Monaspa are possibly too strong (for their cost/TT anyway), but I don’t have a problem with the basic design, and the balance issues will come out in the wash.
Yes, nobody has ever made a thread or post about Mangudai being OP.
Clever, but, I think unnecessary. IMO Jags need a small tweak like +1 Melee, +.1 speed, or +2 bonus vs. infantry, but not a new armor class as would be much more fitting for Samurai. I maintain that they’re fundamentally decent in their role, but it’s a niche role given that swordsmen are generally non-meta and Aztecs don’t worry about enemy pikes.
But they’re not OP at all and that video doesn’t really prove anything. Fighting infantry vs. infantry is not a useful test, because that situation basically never happens in a real game. Do the same test vs. arbalest and they’ll still die, just not quite as fast.
Everyone always talks about how underused and underpowered the militia line is. The Devs finally do something to address it and now you’re saying it’s OP? Make your mind up!
Or Aztecs Champion themselves. IMO, Aztecs Champion is the greatest opponent of JW.
Leitis was not OP on release at all. Their gold cost needed to be reduced to make them viable and then they became OP in late game and TG. I still think they should get back the +1PA or changing Tower Shield to +1/+1 and apply to them with another cost adjustment, 60f/65g.
The latest buff of +1PA was totally wrong. Extra speed would have been better fit as they could chase enemy Eagles and Champions better. Even -5f/-5g would be better.
The problem is it’s an Imp UT for one civ, not a general buff to the line. I’m more or less okay with where militia line is at BTW but it’s not hard to understand that a good baseline utility + moderate civ bonuses/UTs is better than poor baseline utility + extreme civ bonuses/UTs. That’s where the gripe comes from - the poor baseline utility.
They had 2 PA, making them straight up greater than or equal to knights/cavaliers in every aspect of combat. Lower base attack than now, but higher ceiling due to the civ having Blast Furnace and the attack buff being good for 5 relics. Their initial higher gold-to-food ratio made them somewhat easier to use in midgame (like how the Magyar Huszar cost rework will make them easier to use midgame despite having a much higher gold cost than before). They’re still great lategame and in TG, but the older version was stronger.
I get it as a sort of free gambesons for the unit, but I agree, more speed would have been better.
I still believe 50f/80g Leitis was way more balanced than 70f/50g Leitis (pre blast furnace removal). Also the strong aspect of Leitis that you described came from relic bonus and blust furnace, not necessarily from Leitis base stat.
Yeah free gambeson which helps but on wrong direction. Also fun fact other 2 similar cost UU (until massive April patch) Samurai and Kamayuk both have 80 HP and +12 attack bonus for Elite while JW have 75 HP and +11 attack bonus. Even standard version has 5 less HP, 65 for JW vs 70 for Samurai and Kamayuk. And still they are the most expensive one among these 3.
Leitis at that times was a bad UU for their gold cost, lower PA and HP + Castle req made them worse in comparison to Lith Paladins back then, Lith Palas also were able to reach 23 attack with all upgrades + 5 relics and that was overpowered for TGs, also was making Leitis as something with zero point to made. after the cost and training time changes they were OP in Imperial but that was fixed with the PA nerf, after that FE realized that Lith Palas were too good in melee with the relic bonus so blast furnace was removed and Leitis attack adjusted to make the Leitis the high attack cavalry unit that kills in melee but is weaker vs ranged units, while Lith Pala can still be a bit stronger in melee and also deal with}h ranged but is more expensive to upgrade and create.
Leitis is in a fine spot nowdays.
Also since when Leiciai are great in TGs?, their lower HP and PA makes them quite bad where Arbalests are around.
They were outshone by paladins, yes, but that doesn’t mean that they weren’t OP - just that they weren’t the most OP thing about the civ. Kipchaks were broken on release, but nobody remembers because they weren’t as broken as Steppe Lancers. Revert the changes for the Leitis (but not Paladin) and I think they probably become OP, especially in TGs.
I agree. Definitely one of the better UUs though.
But regardless of what you think about the Leitis then or now, the origin of this tangent is that there’s a lot of evidence that goes against the claim that people only or uniquely critique untested new DLC units, or that nobody thinks that cavalry units are ever OP.
Yes and that was also the reason, but go a try to search any game before the Winged Hussar arrival where Leitis was being used… clear answer is not, pros where always going Knights+Monks, then Relics and go all way into paladin with 21/22 attack.
Cmon, Kipchaks at DE release were one of the major things contributing to the insane Cumans OPness, they had better HP, better speed because Cumans had Husbandry + a flat 10% faster speed as bonus, faster ROF and zero frame delay, If a Cuman player wasn’t going Steppe Lancers, then was massing OP kipchaks. Leitis on the other side was at 80G for lower stats than Paladin in exchange for a bit better melee attack, I mean Boyar at the time was a semi-clone to the Leitis (very strong in melee but worse taking arrow fire) and had the very same cost (50f 80g), was Boyar OP back then?.
Leitis was never OP to the same level as kipchak, but I thought it was a semi-relevant comparison given how you excused Leitis strengths on the basis of a stronger or more accessible unit available to the civ. And I grant I’m probably overstating this, but this is what happens when the discussion focuses on nitpicking and fact-checking every tangential point made for sake of comparison rather than focusing on the main point, of which all the comparisons are only secondary and illustrative, however imperfectly. But it wouldn’t be the official forum if we could stay on topic for more than a few posts.
They still get shredded by arbalest and cavalier, so relatively unusable in team games. If they were so OP, you would see them being used in team games, but everyone is still playing the typical knights / crossbow / unique unit meta. I guess it’s still early days, but I haven’t seen a single person going champions.
