Camels generally arent good?

True. They are just two different units patrolling to each other.

TBH, so far his patrolling to fight has even worse pathfinding than SOTL. Pretty much like MikeEmpires.

3 Likes

Again it shows the best coach is not the best player and vise versa

1 Like

Eh, I agree that they’re pretty lightweight as far as hard data, but that’s not really what people watch Hera (or any pro, or really anyone except SoTL or maybe T-West) for. The video doesn’t purport to be a definitive analysis, and I’ll appreciate anything that shines light on the Gurjaras’ continuing to be stupidly OP (although at this point it’s mostly a matter of their UUs). Obviously SoTL is the gold standard for in-depth numerical analysis, whereas pros’ videos focus more on their gameplay, commentary, or insights that they’ve gained at a high level.

Also, Hera is very responsive and accessible regarding feedback, and this is kind of a new type of video for him. If more than a couple people posted in his comments that they’d want to see more hard-hitting data analysis, I’m sure he’d be down to dive deeper into that domain.

As an aside, I do think it’s funny that occasionally pros are unaware of semi-basic game info, such as unit stats/matchups, or whether a civ gets a certain tech. Reminds me of the trope of Sherlock Holmes being an expert in anything related to solving crimes, but lacking some basic knowledge outside of that.

1 Like

Saying camels “generally aren’t good” can be considered an accurate statement, but it’s also a misleading statement if you don’t know what goes into a unit being “good.”

Camels, on paper, are not bad units. They are cavalry, with a similar (but lesser) durability to other cavalry, with an anti-cavalry bonus. Therefore, on paper, you have the advantage of speed, a relatively durable unit, population efficient, that also beats your opponent’s cavalry options. So, cost aside, they are good units. They aren’t broken, they don’t beat your opponent’s cavalry without drawback, but they have a role and they fill it effectively.

“Cost Aside” is the crucial caveat. Gold is plentiful in early castle, Food is not. Camels are not Knights, and the differences in turnover of units with Camels is much higher than with knights, which makes the cost, albeit lesser for Camels, much more difficult to sustain whilst keeping up economically. Camels, like other cavalry, have the benefit of speed helping them to take good engagements. If your opponent plays well and dissuades engagements with good map control and positioning, however, it’s a lot of resources to spend on a unit which doesn’t trade well in the long-term against a mixed army. Further, transitions happen, and when you go Camels and your opponent makes an archer switch or a siege-pike switch, it’s an expensive investment.

Once you consider the cost and the very clear purpose of the camel and it’s obvious shortcomings outside of that particular use-case, it’s a hard statement to refute. You don’t want to go Camels in most cases, even sometimes against clear cavalry options because of the ease of the transition thereafter, ergo, Camels generally aren’t good.

7 Likes

Wait, does that mean that discounted camels with berbers makes them an exceptional unit?

I want to remind that we had a thread about Camels already years ago:

Though the thread went in different directions and I also don’t agree to 100 % of some of the statements I made there.

I think one Issue with camels is that they directly counter the strongest unit in the game AND can force the fight against them. This leads to the odd behaviour of all civs with meaningful camel bonusses having one exceptional tool against the biggest military powerspike in the game, the knight. Especially boni to the damage output (per investment) are critical to view as the common answer of knight civs is to add either monks or pikes both of which increase in effectiveness the slower camels áre capable in killing their destined target (knights). So if the camels kill knights 33 % faster the addition of the counters has way less impact in the battles cause you need more counters to effectively threaten the camels.

And from this perspective it makes perfect sense that hera specifically targets gurjaras and hindustani camels as they are the ones with the highest damage output vs the knights.

They may be much better with the discount, but the discount also applies to the Knight, so they aren’t a markedly better option in their own tree despite being more efficient than usual in the grand scheme of things,

But yes, Berber camels are generally considered to be very good as far as Camels are concerned.

1 Like

Camels can be used to deal with pure knight or to counter camels when you need mobility when you want to boom but same as trash units they are not designed to being aggresive with, as it get destroyed by tcs.
so they are situational but usefull

1 Like

No, but it is a video style Hera is attempting now, therefore the (hopefully constructive) critique. The video is pointless if all it tries to do is simply say ‘gurjaras still OP pls nerf :(’

Indeed, been leaving comments myself, hopefully to some success!

2 Likes

I agree with this. Not camels too bad but is Knight line too good. Imagine a world where there is no knight line and the scout line have 0 PA, people will still use camels for its superior fast movment speed. And milita line will be consider as heavy infantry which good at melee fight with its slow movement speed. For game balancing given the same pop space and same cost, cavalry with high speed should lose in a melee fight against infantry with lower speed. Ofc this is Middle Ages and knight do dominant and thats why people usually think that camels are bad in this game

Do you think malians cavalry is better than the berber ones? With farimba the cav has plus 3 attack total.

1 Like

Pretty sure SOTL’s made two videos on that question, I think it’s a preferential or situational edge no matter how it’s sliced, but I think Berbers not needing to invest anything extra to get their bonus is preferable.

3 Likes

I think for the cost they should either be slightly better generalists, or counter Knight Line harder.

4 Likes

berberians are better in castle age and malians are better in imperial game

1 Like

They already win 1v1, cost for cost, and in time efficiency. What more do they need? Any harder of a counter and it becomes what we see with gurjaras and hindustanis. Why make cavalry against them?

3 Likes

Hera is not the first one who mentioned how generic camels are bad, there was many people mentioned before how generic camels are bad considering how they are just counters and barely do the job and cost gold and food and need to be FU to be good.

Of course if you will buff the generic camels you will take in consideration to balance the civs who have bonuses to camel line.

Many greetings

2 Likes

I think the current camel design is just not good for strong bonusses to them.
They counter knights in basically all aspects which is somewhat ok. Idk if this is really necessary but we also have units like rattans etc that counter archers in all aspects.
But this kind of design countering one of the main classes (and the biggest powerspike in the game with it) makes this kind of strong bonusses just not a realistic option. We currently live in the state of the 2 main classes (and CA in the lategame) and all civs are basically either classified as archer or knight civ. This means a unit that basically shuts down one of these units completely just can’t have so strong bonusses cause it shuts down half of the civs…
I am also against civs being completely designed around camels tbh exactly for that reason. I think there are better ways to tune down the knight powerspike a bit.

Also there has to be the question if camels should be designed either more gold heavy than knights to compensate for the counter mechanic (so making camels drains you faster out of gold) or change the camels a bit (especially reducde their speed) and reduce the gold cost so they become more of an “upgraded pikeman” design.

I just think the current camel design is really in this awkward spot, it’s trying to be a compromise between these “extremes”, but this makes it only worse for balance.

I think both directions are ok. But I think it needs to be decided in which direction it should go. Either better generalists with an associated higher gold ratio or changed a bit (tune down speed or base attack) and reduce the gold cost.

1 Like

We already have Gurjara and Hindustani camels that counter cavalry harder than other camels, and better generalists? we already experienced the old Indian Imperial Camel how unbalanced was in TGs when you try to make them better generalists.

2 Likes

camel are still bad units for the price in general really. People would go for knight or Xbow most of the time, I bet that if gujara and Hindustani had knight, people would 99% of the time go for knights. However, Making them a better general units for other civs is definitely tricky because they overbuff camel for gujara and hindustani.

1 Like

This is the dilemma of current camel status. If increase their PA they can beat knight + xbox combo. If increase their armor they can beat Militia line. So I think increasing their countering power on knight which be better, which is although addressed by gujara and hindustan by their win rate.