To put it into perspective on the skirm thing, the other skirm type units in the game that bypasses the range resist of cav like abus, cannoneers and dervish all have 0.5 multi vs cav instead of the 0.75 multi that normal skirm type units have
2 Likes
If you go with ranged dmg then the jpk will be very weak against artillery with that .75x range resistance and would require a higher base attack to compensate. Right now they are doing just fine against heavy infantry in melee but fall off in efficiency in long treaty games because of how common goon + skirm mass is. Mix in some artillery and the jpk is just too fragile. Jpks are still too slow and have too many counters for it to be efficient in late treaty games. My suggestion was meant for long treaty games where goon + skirm and lots of muskets dominate the meta. My suggestion would change the meta when fighting Aztec making cav more important than ever. For balance I would suggest keeping the jpks dmg at 16 and giving it a .5x multiplier to heavy cav and hand shock infantry but keeping its multiplier 2x against ranged cav similar to skirms. Artillery will still be able to counter it hard because jpks will still have the infantry tag and no range resist. But artillery will now require cav to protect it against jpks. When it comes to the skirms vs skirms battle I understand that the jpk will have 32 dmg rof 3 compared to 18 dmg rof 3 from a skirm but that’s ok because jpks lack a range attack and could not hide behind walls and attack. Skirms can also kite, have speed upgrades and can counter ranged cav from a range. Melee skirms will make the jpk unique in that it can counter other skirms if they don’t micro correctly because of slealth and high dps. Since jpk is a melee unit its ok for them to be a little on the stronger side, they are still no where as good as soldados or ashis and those units can fight their counters very efficiently lol
Yeah just make jpk with 16 melee dmg and .5x multiplier vs heavy cav and hand shock infantry but with 5 speed and it should be fine.
1 Like
in what world should skirms ever be good against artillery, thats literally the hardest counter to skirms. i am legitimately saying jpk as SKIRMS NEED TO BE BAD AGAINST ARTILLERY
this is why urumi are doing ranged damage. the idea of having to guard artillery from skirms is laughable
furthermore, melee damage is bad for a skirm type, it makes them so much weaker against heavy infantry which almost universally has melee resistance. ranged damage would let it do skirm things well. Again, i reiterate, this is why urumi, the existing melee skirm, does ranged damage
1 Like
Another problem with comparing them to urumi is that the urumi does 26 dmg at 1 rof. That’s insane, if you want to make jpk have range dmg then you will have to have change its rof similar to urumi to be as effective as urumi. That’s why I suggest 16 melee dmg with .5x against heavy cav and 1.5 rof so it can at least compete against other units.
because urumi are a 2 pop unit comparable to spahi in that they are home city specific and thus slightly stronger than their counterparts. a jpk as a skirm doing ranged damage in melee would obviously be made to match a 1 pop skirm style unit, so probably about 40% of the total damage than an urumi does, no splash, no crazy rof, a standard unit equivalent
If jpk have range dmg that means skirms will do better against them. They would also be useless against artillery, lose to goons and get kited by speedier ranged units. Jpks can’t kite nor hide behind walls and are vulnerable to ranged attacks, that’s why my suggestion is to make them deal melee dmg so when they do get the chance to get on top of units it will pack a heftier punch. This would make up for not having a ranged attack and the ability to kite. For balance just make it .5x vs artillery and cav. Unless you have a different suggestion. I’m down for making it have range dmg but it would have to have a higher base dmg to compensate for all that extra armor from skirms and artillery imo. You have any suggestions on what range damage and total speed the jpk should have that would be balanced? You have to put in consideration that they don’t have the best speed and have no real range attack. And that right now they can fight artillery pretty well when paired with the stealth ability but that’s very niche imo.
skirms dont counter other skirms, coyote runners do that. you want a cavalry that also happens to be good against goons, not a skirm. you’re suggesting a unit type that doesn’t exist and doesn’t fit into the counter system.
If you go with range dmg then skirms will counter jpks. So why are skirms able to soft counter jpks while having ranged attack and kite abilities but the jpk can’t have a little advantage on the melee side? You’re tripping, jpk is already countered by everything in the game since its a melee unit.
I’m not suggesting that it should be a cav unit, I’m suggesting that it should be given other unique traits since it LACKS A RANGED ATTACK therefore makes it inferior vs other skirms. If you think you have all the answers then what’s the perfect jpk in your opinion?
And you didn’t even read my suggestion, you’re just here to disagree. If you have good ideas for how to make jpks strong but balanced then I’m all for it but don’t come at me without ready first. I said aztec late game treaty sucks partly because they can’t trade efficiently vs large masses of infantry that’s why I suggest the jpk be extra strong vs other infantry to help with this.
have you ever read my 30 page guide to aztecs? do you not understand what im saying with the counter system? im reading your suggestions, you’re just wrong about how to approach a unit in aoe3. if a unit counters skirms it is either an artillery piece or a cavalry unit. a melee unit which is intended to counter skirms is by definition a cavalry or coyote type unit. there’s no way around it. saying its a skirm is wrong, skirms counter goons and heavy infantry, they specifically counter anticavalry. Making a skirm that also counters skirms, muskets, melee infantry, ranged cavalry and artillery is essentially a cheat unit. It’s not possible to make that balanced. It doesn’t fit in the counter system. I’m not trying to be contrarian here, its just you are quite clearly not understanding the implications of your suggested design, a counter-everything unit. I have many ideas on how to improve aztecs in the lategame (and have been long known specifically for my lategame aztec) but giving them a unit to just straight up counter everything isn’t the answer
1 Like
Then what’s the answer? and no I haven’t read it. A link would be nice. Jpk may sound op on paper but in practice it’s a different story. And no the jpk wont counter skirms or artillery unless you let them get on top of you. That’s why there’s a thing called “micro” in this game, micro your units away from danger just don’t bum spam them. If a large number of jpks show up just send in the cav and save your skirms for the back line and add some artillery and your good. This would make it fair since you have to micro jpks or else they just get destroyed by artillery and all other ranged units.
I’m talking for treaty and late game of course. Obviously this jpk would make Aztec mid game very strong without balance. I understand that, but in the late game battlefield, melee units will always be at a disadvantage.
part of the trouble there is how wildy effective aztec anticav is. can’t really make a unit exclusively countered by only heavy cavalry and expect that to to well.
imo the solution could go one of 2 ways. either a urumiLite™ melee skirm with melee ranged damage and such, but i think that would difficult to balance, even though it would feel thematically correct.
The real solution I personally would suggest and its probably pretty controversial would be to turn jpk into a coyote/shock infantry, made to mirror the spanish lancer in role. It would be strong against all infantry, weak against all cavalry (ranged and melee), not particularly good vs artillery, but not terrible either. Lancers function sort of like a hybrid between cavalry and artillery in this way, and i think jpk could do that too. Stats could be something along the lines of
190 hp
20rr
10 melee damage
3x vs infantry
6.25 speed
this would make it roughly half a lancer. They would be countered at range by goons and in melee by cav. they would be less efficient against musket types than vs skirms, but still able to hold their own, and then absolutely crush skirm types. in melee with artillery they wouldn’t be fantastic but they would at least shrug off the damage a bit. Temple shipment could be modified to mirror the lancer multiplier card. My intuition is that a unit like this would help round out the aztec army against skirms, but wouldn’t entirely replace coyotes, since you’ll want those if you need to raid, take down artillery (when are coyote gonna get 1.5x vs cannons, seriously), or scrappy fights with other cav.
1 Like
That’s actually a good idea just too low of stats imo because lancers get affected by unction and have the royal guard upgrade. I feel like 205 hp, 20 rr, 15 dmg x2 vs infantry and 6.25 speed is better. Since 2 jpks cost more than 1 two pop lancer, it should have slightly better stats imo. Just add x1 multiplier vs infantry to the temple card.
attack ceremony is pretty strong, but sorry those were intended as base stats being shadowteched by 25%, so that way they aren’t ridiculous if you unlock them age 2
I wish they would implement this to the jpk, it’s a really good idea.
Just hope they buff Aztec late game tho so I can play Aztec treaty.
You can, I do it having good results in team games (that most times each member goes 1v1).
Changing JPK wont change them a lot, the biggest issues of them are economy and counter skirmishers from range; so, we keep with the same problem.
I would give AK a bonus vs skirms OR AoE cause currently I dont use them most times, I uses mortars instead