So why are you fine with people going archer into xbow into arbs but not with people going archer into CA?
Because foot archers are well and able to be countered with mangonels and possibly skirms and other common methods while cav archers tend to dodge such things like the plague.
Mayan plumed archers are fine as they are however.
Even briton foot archers are snipe-able if you surround their routes with more than 3 mangonels.
Mangonels are still dangerous to CA, and both skirms and cav archers counter them still.
Never the less, the extra speed renders the enemy forced to either counter or ignore said cav archers, and for those ill equiped for eco defense can afford neither if the cav archers choose to ignore all attempts and harass where optimal against both military in key positions and eco where open and available.
Especially when coming out of feudal scathed from early enemy foot archer attacks.
tell me this heal - if cav archers are so dang broken you feel the need to nerf them, why does literally none of the statistics back this up? why does tournament play not back this up? why does ladder play not back this up? why does the meta not back this up?
oh wait. i think i just figured it out guys.
Heal mains teutons - who hate cav archers. that’s why he wants them nerfed. that’s the only logical reason to nerf them this way.
Actually, I’m fond of cav archers, halbs and siege onagers do their jobs wonderfully there.
What I’m not fond of is the broken ability to consistently age up quickly while spamming military and switching army composition on a dime due to similar cost. It’s enough that foot-archer types have siege to rely on with the eco they’re already focused in. Cav archers is a little too much icing on that cake within the eco setup that allows early feudal spamming of foot archers and aging into castle age quickly. Especially in terms of aggression into aging up and further consistent aggression which is then improved upon.
except archers into cav archers isn’t that big of an army comp switch, now if you were talking archers into knights, yeah that is. but archers into cav archers? not really. and going archers into cav archers is very perilous because they hinge on so many upgrades to actually do anything, there is no reason to nerf cav archers at all.
They tend to need the same upgrades foot archers do. They’ll do something with just their speed and maneuverability.
If anything there’s an argument for increased accuracy.
except unlike archers, they need thumb ring asap because of the huge miss chance. they also need blood lines, and other such upgrades. believe it or not, but cav archers are less cost effective then just going mass archer, which is faster to mass and cheaper. there is a reason most civs go xbow and not cav archer in early castle age.
so again - there is no reason to nerf cav archers. not unless you plan on nerfing the 3 other units that see much more common use in the castle age then them.,
Cav archers are not broken and in fact could use an accuracy castle age buff.
And while foot archers are ‘cheaper’ cav archers are easier to manage and keep alive while being cheaper to maintain a mass once made, which makes them a prime candidate for being food and gold based for long term engagements as well as ‘reduces’ their actual long-term cost upgrade-wise to boot by saving with their better less costly maintenance.
If anything the argument shouldn’t be why I’m attempting to ‘nerf’ cav archers, which it’s not a nerf to cav archers and I’d like to see an accuracy buff there, but instead the argument should be why am I attempting to buff them for my own style of play.
And how does this effect archer civs without good cav archers? Not at all.
How does this effect cav archer civs with decent early game or even great late game foot archers? A healthy dose of balance in the form of ‘want to switch up?’ ‘Change your eco setup’.
While all at the same time buffing their long term for cav archer plays.
Tldr: I desire to use cav archers, but I hate the wood cost.
Eagles/Archers/Knights/Lancers are generally fine aside from minor pathing issues and attack move/patrol abuses. (And some arguments to buff steppes)
this is where you are wrong, it is in fact a nerf. a big nerf at that. you just don’t understand. Youre looking at it from a wood is converted into food and thats more efficient use of resources. But whar you’re missing is that mosf cav archer civs use hussar line as a meat shield and youre forcing them so heavimy jnto food that they realistically cant go for this comp until their boom is almost done.
It’s still a nerf for literally everyone else
It’s also a buff for huns and mongols players who focus on knights and other food type units by also allowing cav archers/mangudai to be a main part of their current eco investment.
Persians would also see great success with this as would Tatars and a good many other cav archer type civs, such as Turks, for instance.
This allows for a great variety buff for many civs with cav archers to be added in to their food and gold based tactics.
It’s balanced by spearheading their units to be paid by food mainly which will limit the spam ability early on, never the less they shall be spammed correctly and with great ability in the late game especially because of their great ability to survive once produced and then maintained via low needed amounts of archery ranges or castles depending on the cav archer variant.
No that would be a nerf, as kts+CA is already super heavy on gold, so if you make it heavy on food too it’s just not sustainable. And you need wood for farms anyway so it’s not like such players can’t afford CA currently. And this wouldn’t help the Persians because CA are only situational for them and certainly not Turks who would rather spend their food on light cav or janissaries.
Which is the reason they don’t need to be more spammable in the late game since you replace them less!
No, this is not a buff. This is nerfing the unit to the ground and no, you can’t sustain both CAs and KTS in early/mid castle if they both cost food.
CAs are balanced and no, you encountering difficulties against people playing archers into CAs doesn’t prove they are not balanced
The actual effect is that the military numbers may not change, but the composition may very well do so. 40% cav archers, 60% knights or something along those lines. That’s probably easier to take into account rather than blindly thinking, oh, we’re going for two full armies of different units of similar cost rather than correctly thinking - ‘alright, the army numbers will be around the same, but the composition will be healthier and more varied in how it will take fights’.
And yes, that is extremely doable.
And I would fear this rightfully so.
And I want to face it in battle.
And no, I do not think cav archers are badly balanced(they need a buff), I believe that early archer play into cav archers is badly balanced particularly due to being able to age up consistently regardless of spammed archer numbers on top of being able to change compositions on a dime without changing the eco’s focus.
And again, I like fighting cav archer types, it’s good practice, and they’re getting easier and easier for me to defend against.
Difficulties is your assumption, not mine, your flaw I suppose that you seem to be pushing onto me.
Late game. I playing as Huns in a team game with trade. My army mostly gold knights, will cost food and gold. Horse archerc cost wood and gold. That’s a nerf.
It means I have to I have to pay only food for my key late game units. Which a bad thing. Since it will be very costly. Hun no house wood bonus also will be badly affect.
Your eco composition would be changed up with more farmers which are easier to defend(defensive buff) and your wood would run out much slower(long-term resource buff even if your lumberjacks are killed only to be replaced quickly more easily due to low numbers needed.)
The reason you want this nerf since horse archers melt your healing fortreess? Where you spam very expensive monks and teutonic knights. Only for horse archers civ to laugh at them, and fill them with arrows?
Are onagers now going to cost food instead of wood eventally?