Its a non sense, i saw them killing hussars, courassiers, upgraded regulars (musk), DRAGONS… It’s just me or what? x2,5 against infantry its enought to kill every infantry unit like a lancer and his base damage is too. also they have that OP charge attack its stupid AGGGGGGH.
Let them have that OP multiplier but not againt everything, it should be at least against light infantry. Or am i wrong?
You’re wrong, they are pretty much lancers so they beat all infantry but don’t do as well vs other hand cav. Just think of them as a lancer, so avoid fighting them with infantry and kill them with dragoons, block your infantry with hand cav if necessary.
Yeah Ive seen this been abused in FFAs multiple times
well depends on the hand cav, they do have a bit of a multiplyr vs hand cav so some civs basic huss still will loose vs 3 carded chinacos
the range on lance plus burst damage means they can fight in 2 ranks which does tip the scales towards them in many matchups vs say port huss kanya or dutch huss which is very basic.
but yeah vs french or british huss or spanish unction huss its very much slated against the chinaco
I think you just had a game which I happened to spectate. edit: i checked, it was
The problem is not sololy on the charro. The France, US have too few units. The US regular was just Veteran when fighting their charro at Guard with full card upgrade. Most importantly, the Ports is at 160pop vill AND fishing boat, aka, his IMP dragoon is just at max 20, the whole game. your team combined goon are even less than a single opponent charro.
Actually they trade very well with HC. A bit too well. And they can also scale better than most other civs HC. Only Lakota, brits and ottos can outpace them.
Yeah didn’t realize they had a multiplier vs cav.
Yeah, we had a thread where I showed that they beat British fully upgraded hussar because they can attack from the back row.
Yeah from looking at the stats I guess they are a tiny bit more expensive than huss, with the huss having more hp but chinaco a little extra attack and of course more range. I’d imagine 1v1 they lose though as brit huss for example would have an extra 15% hp card. Also quite hard to fit all 3 upgrade cards in deck as mexico with only 21 cards.
the only thing they really need is the lance charge attack card to be really curbstomping. its really what allows them to dominate
I think they can still win 1v1 since they get the first hit and have the charged attack. In groups they for sure beat the strongest Hussars in the game.
All they really have to do is get rid of the x1.25 vs hand cav multiplier, and they should be fine.
if we take IMP Lifeguards full card upgrade vs IMP Charros full card upgrade
LG: 800hp 72 atk
Charros: 681.5hp 58.75atk x 1.25 = 73.4375 with area charge 2aoe for same atk, so take above additional 2xhit damages in group conditions first encounter is a guess.
such it is about 9hit+2charge for charros to down a LG and 10 for LG to down a charros.
i dont think that is enough to justify taken out the 1.25 multiple. it is unfavorable for them to be traded with hussar in age 2 and 3 before charge. and Full card Uhlan in same cost can do even better but no one said it is broken. but i can see it is down to 1.0 for charge attack only.
one thing i think Charros is more favorable in Heavy Cav fight is that the additional atk range. I dont think it helps fighting in 2ranks. the hitbox of the unit is slightly bigger than that. but it helps them to circle enemies better. to the end, it is down to more fundamental issue of the bad pathing algorithm in game
The role of lancers is to be exceptionally good at killing infantry with the drawback of being worse at everything else. They should be beaten by the worst Hussars, not trouncing the best Hussars in the game.
Your numbers seem right, but for reference, here’s the full comparison versus the best Hussar.
It was tested by multiple people in this thread and Chinacos win convincingly in groups.
Uhlans aren’t lancers. They don’t beat the best Hussar in the game AND have a x2.5 multiplier versus infantry. Lancers have a drawback to balance their anti-infantry strength, and that drawback is losing to generalist heavy cav. Chinacos have no business having a multiplier against them.
your words are right IF ONLY they added hussar for Mex, just like spain have both lancer AND hussar. no, charro should be as half a hussar for them, by half i ment in age 2 and 3 the charro will loss HARD against hussar, in age 4 with cards they are on pair.
for what i bring up uhlan are 3 reasons. 1. they do better against hussar in cost. 2. they do better against said infantry than hussar in cost. 3. Germany have no hussar. so, by your logic, no unit should be better than killing infantry without a drawback against hussar. Should uhlan be nerfed? No, this is civ difference to adopt.
the number should be fixed to what i reply about, with full card they are at same hit number against hussar.
so, back to op condition and many others post on NERF that or that. it is important to rewatch the gameplay as a whole. the op team got raided in early to mid game by uhlan, meanwhile their own hussar raid is unsuccessful. the Mex player boom hard unharmed that he age4 in 12min and only produced 15 skim in before. fight happened aout few min next to Mex age4, long enough for the massing and full card and Guard. at this point it is Veteran Regular, few Galting and half of the pop of Dutch Ruyter against both the remaining uhlan, charros, and some others skim.
it isnt no chance to come back. the Port at op team boomed even crazier that he have 160 eco pop including fishing on both sides of Scandinavia and he got to age 5 fastest with IMP dragoon upgraded. BUT he then the whole game only max 40pop of goon against 140pop charros.
so, tell me. is it the unit wins the game, or the eco or the strategy loss the game? i am not saying Mex is not broken in late game. you can verify that with treaty players. but it is down to eco and early game approaching.
edit: “in group conditions first encounter is a guess” and dont misunderstand that line. i was meant to qunaitfy the aoe2 charge attack to standard hit. it is usually about x2 on aoe2 attack did as i remember?
you should do better micro
Uhlans and charros fill vastly different purposes though.
Mexico doesn’t need a bonus vs cav in charros, they have very good anti cavalry with both the soldato and the peasent. The fact that charros trade well with hussars is a cause of concern.
truth to be told, when I play mexico, I always spam them. There is no reason to build anything else until the enemy can field dragoons, and even then I can force them to take bad trades by harassing their villagers or forcing them to fight instead of kite by charging artillery or other vulnerable targets. The fact is, the only viable counter for these fellas is the dragoon/cav archer.
Doppelsoldner would like to have a talk with you on that logic
sure, as I said above. Give Mexican standard hussar, just like Spanish have BOTH lancer AND hussar, and then take out the charro x1.25 multi. otherwise, for the same reason you presented, Mexican only viable counter for these fellas hussar is the dragoon, because “even with soldato and the Insurgente, then the opponent can force them to take bad trades by harassing their villagers or forcing them to fight instead of kite by charging artillery or other vulnerable targets”
They don’t need a hussar. What would the hussar fill in for Mexico?
Bro, please just follow though your own logic. your feel wrong that “dealing with” a cav is only dragoon. just check with what charro strat is in age2 and 3, ESPECIALLY without x1.25multi. They loss hard against hussar.
So, tell me again. If I am against Mexicans with your said nerf the multi, am I going to force Mexicans to take bad trades by harassing their villagers or forcing them to fight instead of kite by charging artillery or other vulnerable targets. BECAUSE I know their heavy cav trade is shit?
If not, tell me again you thoughtin vice versa position playing against Mexicans now.
Why do they need to do well against hussars? Uhlans also lost to hussars.
