I completely agree with this statement. Nevertheless, I’m not sure giving elephants to Indians would break them. Indians are in a pretty bad spot right now. They’re only pick when there’s fish for villagers to gather. Yeah, vils are cheaper, but again, if you’re on 3 tcs, there’s not that much food left for elephants.
Maybe I’m wrong, but I don’t think it would make them OP. Again, i think balance is far more important than historical accuracy, so I would have it tested before
That’s a sensible opinion. But for some reason there is no open beta for balance patches in DE…
But anyway, if people really want to see Indians using elephants in sweaty Arabia 1v1 , why don’t they ask for a rework of the Elephant archer? It would be deleting the niche of the unit in BF/Team games, but at least there would still be Ballista elephants, and it would be so much easier than reworking whole civs.
Yeah, that’s other idea. I would really like the elephant archer to become viable. I think it should have more range. Since is countered by basically everything, more range could put it at a safer distance from counters… And plus, you know, you are firing from like 6 metters from the ground… Surely you can outreach farther than foot archers 1111
Does your FC build order ever change? Or Scout rush? Every civs got same basic building set. Unlike AoM. Like I said there are some balance alteration overall playstyle remains unchanged. There is no different civset playstyle unlike AoM. It’d been different if you have something like you make Melee and Cavalry from one building. Your civ has mobile buildings. You can’t just start the game and follow the same build order style.
Hope my previous comment answer.
Not every civ got weak Koreans Knight. Still doesn’t explain what you were trying to say.
I came from WololoKingdoms scene. Tbh, it doesn’t feel as strong as they used to do.
Don’t bring Unique Unit here and that is completely different history.
Now about Elephant it gets countered by a lot of unit than you think. Scorpions are the most underrated counter for Elephant and it is something many doesn’t know to begin with. Then comes Monks. Which Knights can run away from them but Elephants can’t. Also every Elephant civs besides Malay got Heresy. As a result it’s going to be disadvantage for you. Halberdiers and Camels are there. Also Archer hit and run is there. Most situation will go to Knight’s favor but they are better slow push unit than Knights.
DLC units had their issue as well. Their upgrade cost was very cheap and they went some serious change. BE went some serious changes in HD days just so you know. SL right now with current balance got their own spot and it’s good. Mongols recieveing Steppe Lancer now which was never intended to the game. So not sure what’s keeping Indians behind.
Talking about the usefulness of Battle Elephants. Barely doubt their cheap vils can do any difference by having Steppe Lancer.
Elephant Archer doesn’t really give valid reason not to give Battle Elephant. Khmer could’ve represented well with Ballista Elephant only. Why give them? Both of their Elephants are stronger than usual. Indians Elephant Archer is just fully upgraded and nothing more. Even of we give them FU Battle Elephant. Barely changes anything.
I can agree with that as well but here’s my take.
Would you like to see Europeans using Camels? Something that is nowhere close to the culture that is game trying to do? Indians suffers this issue like a lot. Never really get it who gave the idea that Indians are Camel civs. It is understable that back in those days when FE team was just a modder didn’t came to these more options than we have now. But it is really the time fix these options a bit. I can’t just accept some weird design choices for the sake of game balance.
I’m argentinian. Incas is the closest we get to a civ of our own xD (pretty decent civ, I have to say).
Now seriously, I get what you mean. I guess India make more sense with elephants, altough they should have both options. But is important to understand that, altough you may want your civ to be faithful to your rich history asa coutry (logical thing), balance is more important for everyone
Look, in northern India, Camels are and have been in use. Indians also already get an elephant unit, the Ele Archer, although one could argue it could use a buff (it is viable in DM and teamgames however). Indians have a clear, unique identity with their Imperial Camels. They are fun to play that way. You might say the shore fish bonus is situational. It is. Most civ bonuses are. Japanese fishing ships are not a boost on land maps. Franks berry bonus is nerfed on Scandinavia, where there are no berries. Indians can be a strong civ with the current balance. They do not need Battle Elefant. This is the thing of the South East Asian civs. Balance changes just for “accuracy” do not make sense. If it were that way, Aztecs shouldn’t get the militia line (because they did not have iron swords); Goths and Italians should never play each other (they are not from the same era); and there would be no monks (religion just doesn’t work the wololo way)
tl;dr: If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it (I believe that applies to the Mongol steppe lancer as well)
I get it that civs are much closer to each other in AoE2 than in AoM. However close doesn’t mean identical: ie if you brainlessly apply a classic FC build to say, Malay, you’re in troubles.
Indeed, because most of them get much better knights.
What I mean is that SL are pretty much inoffensive in the vast majority of situations. You really can’t unbalance a civ (except maybe meso?) by giving them SL, since their knights, in the current balance, will almost always be a better option. You can’t say the same of Battle eles.
Welp, that they feel weaker, I don’t doubt it. But they are still a good unit. The base BE was also strictly buffed, since now that they train faster they are easier to use for an early attack.
I fully admitted than monks are better against elephants that they are against knights. I also said that indians didn’t have problems with them, because of FU hussars, and good enough monks to convert their elephants back (khmer monks lack block printing)
Oh yeah I forgot. But besides dedicated siege civs people rarely put 1000 food and 1100 wood in a gold unit when they could just spam halbs with that.
That’s basic balancing. Also, you will notice the Elephant archer is deemed good enough that the Indians lack Heresy and get Halberdier (no, it’s not because of the Imp camel, or else the Malian, Berbers and Saracen who also have top tier camels wouldn’t be stuck with pikemen)
Elephants still roflstomp them in pop-efficiency situations
Camels do not counter elephants at all. Their bonus damage vs cavalry is way too low to be a threat to the elephants’ huge HP.
And these balance changes were still made with the same 4 civs in mind.
Because SL are weak and outclassed by knights, while elephants aren’t.
I’m not speaking about Indian getting SL. I was pointing out the fact that unlike what you said, the villager discount is really important in castle age. And it would definitely help elephant production, and a food bonus+BE is what you give to a bottom-tier civ like old khmers, not what you give to a good civ like indians.
Khmer were designed around getting both, not Indians.
Welp, you know what? Mangudai aren’t FU. War wagons aren’t FU. Gbetos aren’t FU. Many more UU are also “merely” FU.
It just give Indian access to a melee tank, that is a really good unit that fills a role no other Indian unit can. Does it really sounds like “not changing anything?”
Cuman do. Byzantine do. Sure, it’s because they also have Asian territory, just like India has desert territory. Also, there is things in this game like Mayans and Inca getting eagle warriors, even tho they NEVER had the idea to dress as an eagle to fight.
Look at the other civs created by FE and tell me which one would have been a better camel civ?
Welp, try to play Inca and Mayan without eagle, nor siege weapon then? Or try to beat Britons if they receive bombard cannon and organ guns? What about Spanish that gets FU arbs? Chinese that get full tech tree? You’re already accepting much “weirder” design choices for balance’s sake.
Not that much. Gonna be honest here. Camel was never the core of the army. Elephant was. I got your point but make the balance in a right way. Don’t call Meso civs a Cavalry civ. It’s just awkward for the most part.
Khmer are probably top 5 civs now. No where near a weak civ.
And Steppe Lancer made two civs in mind only. So, that 4 civs only rule doesn’t apply.
And Mongols were never supposed to get Steppe Lancer.
Mongols got a very decent raiding unit with extra HP which is almost close to a Knight. That does change a lot of things.
You didn’t get my point. Do you really like to see Franks, Britons having Camels? Second line doesn’t even make sense.
What?
I do have complains about them but from core civ design they are still true to certain amount. I didn’t said once that I am accepting it. Some weird balance decision can be acceptable but not those serious stuffs.
You are dodging my main point time to time.
SL was never meant to replace Knight-line. I even pointed out.
Still why Indians got Halberdier? Indians camel does outperform Berbers and Saracens at certain situation.
This thread seems a duplicate of Indians Civilization
Seems like this needs to be merged.
Indeed, because now they get both a food bonus and battle elephant. This combination made them go from absolute worse (if you really come from wololo kingdoms you should know this) to really good. Doesn’t it make obvious that Indians would go from good to OP if given the same treatment?
Welp, like I keep repeating it, the steppe lancer was nerfed so that it’s worse than no bloodlines knights, even with a huge +30% HP boost. That’s why it’s an exception to this rule.
Let’s put it another way: If you can choose between creating a knight with bloodline or a knight without bloodlines, for the same price, you would choose the first, right? Now, you have to choose between a bloodlines knight and a unit that even with bloodlines + 30% HP is weaker than a bloodlines less knight, you would still choose bloodlines knights, right? That’s what happens to the SL: even as Mongols, you chose the knight. And it’s not like for their prices CA and LC are better options as well.
Now what if Indians get both Camels and BE? You have to chose between a melee tank or a anti-cav unit to attack. Chances are you will chose the first. It’s like chosing between Champions and pikeman as your main troops when you’re Mongol: there is no hesitation. But the deal is that by design, Indians musn’t get a strong cav unit (or else they would have basic knights like Saracen)
Welp, basically I provide you with European civs getting camels, and you just decide that they are less relevant than other European civ for no reason. Noice.
I will help you then: by your logic, Eagle warrior should be Aztecs only. Mayas were gone for centuries as a civilization when the Aztecs reached central America, while the Incas lived thousand of km away. Let’s compare that with the Indian: thanks to Google maps, anyone can measure the distance between Cuzco and Mexico, which is of 4 727,25 km in a straight line (ie.the actual foot travel distance is actually longer), and between Thanjavur and Delhi, which is of 2 003,90 km. You start to notice something?
Welp, then I will help you again: between Indian, Magyar, Slavs, Italian, and Incas, who is the best civ to become a camel civ? Remember that before the Forgotten there was only 1 camel-focused civ, and that adding one was a good idea.
Some are less true than Indian camels. A part of India did use camels. Not ever in the Inca empire someone dressed as an eagle to go kill people, nor did anyone built a siege weapon. No one in Spain ignored what a crossbow is. Others, like Britons being focused on the Welsh only for instance, are like Indian being focused on Rajahstan.
Then go ahead and open a thread proposing all these changes. Strangely, people will be able to see the problem just fine.
Oh, I actually misunderstood by what you meant with
If you mean by that no bonus = we can add more then why don’t you give Slingers to Mayan then? Their foot archers are FU, nothing more.
That’s theory. In theory, SL should also be a usable unit. Experience after their nerf and the fix of melee pathing showed that they are neither usable, nor do they have any application where knights aren’t better. I used to defend the SL but it’s no longer possible to do so.
Just as I stated: because of the Elephant archer. You will notice that all 5 other factions who get elephant units also get halberdiers. All civs who get paladin get halbs. However, civs with bonused camels are stuck with pikemen. Only exception are byzantine, but it’s because their discount would be useless without access to halbs, and their camels are super bad, and Indians, whose heaviest mounted unit happens to be an elephant.
I was thinking about this, and I guess it should be tested. Is Indian bonus as strong as khmer one? Possibly, I’m gonna go full spirit of the law on this. If I do it, I’ll share the results with you
Oh, that’s nice. I already know that the Khmer bonus is worse than aztecs before wheelbarrow, that it’s equivalent before handcart, and then handcart make them equal to the rest but Slavs. However there is the “no waiting for drop off” gimmick that does make the food available slightly earlier, and it gets a chance to compete with the Slav bonus in huge late-game T-90 farm clusters.
For indian values: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxYLvnDl36I&list=PL6co4ILAvwIDNC8TfoJSIRFNn01f2x_4V&index=14
According to these numbers, the Indian dark age basically saves you the food cost of 1 BE, and the savings over Castle saves the cost for 2 more. However, whether the food bonus proves to be compatible with BE, it still doesn’t adress the concern about what the BE gives to Indians: if even basic knights like those Sarracen are too much for the Indian, isn’t there a good chance melee elephants will fill the niche?
Well, no. It wouldn’t fill the role of the knight, neither that’s the idea, I guess. I see the idea of giving them BE for giving indians more than one option to play (yeah, I know, they have CA going for them) at the end, you either play Camel or elephant, so I don’t think it would be that broken. Plus, even if their bonus is better than khmer one, khmer still have +3 attack on elephants.
I think that, while camels are really good on imperial age, elephants could be better on castle (due to indian bonus) on the other hand, indian bonus runs out once you stop to create vils (imperial age), so their late game wouldn’t be tha much more powerful than others. Anyway, if tou allow them to free boom, they are really powerful already on camels
I hardly doubt it. You can make 2/3 extra Battle Elephants at best. For Camels you can make 5/6. Also take gold cost into account. Elephants is not really that strong as a lot of people claims it to be. They are unit-line choice and have their own roles. Indians Camels are bit of Knight-like but it never filled Knight’s role.
Game represents Indians as whole. Check their civ descriptions and names properly. They are umbrella of Indian subcontinent which could’ve been a DLC even to cover the whole history.
Doesn’t make any sense. If so then why Magyars, Huns are lacking this? How it became a rule even? It’s upto devs to add.
They are too good to fit anywhere without shifting the balance a lot.
Same with the Britons then. Why do they focus on “longbow Britain”, and not “knight Britain” or whole Britain in the first place. Still same with the Incas then, the Aztecs are mentioned nowhere in their history section, for a good reason.
Likely because such SL would be even worse.
Still no Battle Elephants for Indians??
I’m shocked they dont have Battle Elephants to be honest.