Again, thanks to everyone on the cordial discussions, especially on this controversial topic. Some responses based on the current discussions:
But is this not problematic from a game design perspective? Portuguese Musketeer is a Royal Guard unit buffed by at 3 Home City cards. Yet, few Portuguese player would make Musketeer once in Age 3. I think this says something about the utility of Dragoons.
I think this recent game sort of follows your idea: Dutch finally have Musketeers!!! Aiz shows the power of Dutch’s new card ‘Blue Guards’ - YouTube. However, I would say that until the South Africa (28:00) revolt added Imperial War Wagons, Blue Guard + Artillery generally performed worse than Dragoon + Longbow + Artillery.
Unless it is Sweden with their 15-Range 30%-RR Caroleans (or some other special cases), most Musketeers are often not useful late game. They die to artillery very fast and LIs (especially with Counter Infantry Rifling) fairly fast, and don’t have the mobility of LC. Comparatively, LCs are almost always useful when operating in a skirm-goon+art composition.
Good catch. Although, I would argue that it s easier to one-shot a dragoon with 12 skirms than 11 muskets, as the former have extra range, while the latter might bump into each other while trying to get in range.
If Musketeers can melee down 14-range Dragoons, something probably went very wrong for the Dragoon player micro-wise.
In any case, the problem is more 14-Range Dragoons groups two-shotting artilleries with ease. Here is my math:
Veteran Dragoon Attack Against Artillery
(22*1.2)*2 = 52.8
Dragoon Shots to Kill a Falconet
200 / (52.8 * 0.25) = 15.15 or 16 shots.
Musketeer Shots to Kill a Dragoon
Someone else in this forum did the math and concluded that 11 Musketeers can one-shot a Dragoon. This should be the same with Veteran Musketeer and Veteran Dragoons.
So let’s assume that there are 20 Musketeers + 2 Falconets against 10 Dragoons + 10 Skirmishers:
-
Given that 10 Dragoons reach the 12-range mark (Veteran Dragoons can tank 2 Falconet shots, so there shouldn’t be any losses), unless the 20 Musketeers + 2 Falconets can guarantee killing 2 Dragoons every 3 seconds, they will lose at least one Falconet in 6 seconds. This can be a close fight, although it depends on the Musketeer staying very close to the Falconets.
-
With 14-range Dragoons, they can likely fire on the Falconets first before the Musketeers can even return fire. So if the Musketeers cannot kill at least 4 Dragoons in the next 3 seconds (likely impossible), they will lose one Falconet. Unless the Dragoons directly charge into the Musketeer range, at best, only 2-3 Dragoons would be lost, so the trade is about even. However, this fight would strongly favor the goal of the Dragoon+Skirm player.
Now note that this does not consider what happens if:
- Skirmishers also starts focus firing on the Falconet in coordination with the Dragoon.
- The Dragoon+Skirm player decides to sacrifice most of the Dragoons to guarantee 2 Falconet kills, turning the fight into Musketeers vs Skirmishers.
- With greater number of units from both players, Musketeers are more likely to overkill (shoot too many shots) on the same Dragoon than Dragoons overkilling on the Falconets.
Summarily, by itself, 14-range Dragoons are not too impressive against artillery. However, in the context of the overall counter system, two-shotting a Falconet tip the balance significantly in their favor.
If this scenario is still not convincing, consider the case of 20 Musketeers + 2 Falconets vs 10 Dragoons + 2 Falconets. This should make the advantage of Dragoons more apparent.
Musketeers and Hussars are the last units you want to use Z-move. (That is attack move, right?) For Musketeers, knowing when to switch between melee and range and what to attack determines battles. For Hussars, the snaring mechanics strongly punishes the loser of melee battles. This means simply using attack move is a good way to lose all your troops.
Early game (Age 2 or Early Age 3), I would agree that Hussar and Musketeers are better. Late game (Age 4 and onward), I don’t think that holds true. This is because:
-
In the late game, outlying hunts and gold mines are often depleted or heavily contested. Thus, most Settlers either work near TC/Outposts, or have certain sections walled-off. Dragoons can sometimes get a shot-off, whereas Hussars cannot catch the Settler.
-
Hussars are good raiders in Age 2 partly because there are no LCs. Once there are significant number of LCs, Hussar raids becomes a lot more risky. Having a faster-ranged-counter-unit chasing after your Hussars puts a damper on raids.
-
The tankiness of Musketeers does not do much against CIR Skirms and Falconets.
-
Villager HP generally do not increase over the ages, whereas military unit attacks does. This means that the Dragoon malus against Settlers does not matter as much after a Guard upgrade and a combat card or two.
Note that with raiding and probes, you are trying to draw the enemy in and force them to engage on your terms. Thus:
If the enemy pull back against your poking skirmishers, they are ceding ground and map control. Unless they plan to take back that ground back or recover it some other way, that is advantageous for you.
Snaring punishes the loser of melee fights. If your Hussars engaged with the enemy army while your main force cannot reinforce, then that is bad for you.
Agreed. HI have a number of issues in the late game.
- Most importantly, anything Musketeers can do, Dragoons can do better (90% of the time). Thus, I think nerfing the LC range should help somewhat. Specifically, the player must pick between longer-ranged but slower defensive anti-cav and shorter-ranged but faster offensive anti-cav.
- I think CIR (Counter Infantry Rifling) make Skirmishers too effective against Musketeers and HIs. I would recommend toning down the effects of CIR.