Kipchaks, by design, fall of in imp because they are such a good castle age unit.
1 Like
That is exactly why I would change this UU, kind of pointless to have the option for an extended Feudal age with 2 TCs if your UU is worthless in Imp. Otherwise the civ just sucks, as you can not really play to the full strength, since you either pick civ bonus or UU
This is about as useful as the 10% bonus speed on Eagle Warriors was for Incasā¦ not really all that valuable
What? Cumans arenāt only Kipchaks or 2 TCs in feudal age , they have the fastest cavalry in the game (Thus their paladins are really good in team games).
2 Likes
Is funny how people complain that Cumans= Kipchak when Mongols without Mangudai are nothing.
2 Likes
Canāt disagree on that for sure. Iām not a fan of the way Mangudai work, and I always rush mongol players asap to try and deny stone piles, because they are stupidly strong in Imp
EDIT: although for me that largely boils down to how easily they can snipe trebs without taking significant losses, making Mongol castles insanely hard to push
1 Like
Stuff happens between feudal and imp.
Paying for +10% speed on a 60 HP 9 attack unit is quite a lot worse than having +5% speed for free on a paladin.
The point was that you canāt really have a synergy between your civ bonuses, you pick one or the other. Itās usually better when all your bonuses synergize towards one thing, or at least not force you to pick between them.
You can consider the cost of this civ bonus to be the lack of a more useful one in its placeā¦
Well, feudal TC and faster moving cav and CA (ie.the kind of unit you would boom into) do synergize. If anything itās the feudal TC and the feudal siege workshop which donāt synergize, in that sense that you canāt realistically do both.
Teutons would want to have a talk with you 11
There is a difference between buffing the speed on one of the slowest units and buffing the speed on an already fast unit. Itād be like adding more melee armor to TK
There are several differences between speed and armour:
- first armour needs to be compared to the attack of other units. Teutonic knight armour is good against most units, but doesnāt feel so good anymore against an elite war elephant. Speed however, is enough by itself: more speed is always better. At no moment you ever told yourself āDamn I arrived there too fast, shouldnāt have taken husbandryā donāt you?
-Secondly armour can only be increased or decreased by one, while a speed can have a continous value (ie. it can be 1.5, not just 1 or 2).
Those two points mean that adding one to one armour is good, while adding one to 5 armour is worse. But for speed, itās different, because it can be increased using a percentage, and the bigger the base value, the bigger the increase is. So yes, your paladin already has a lot of speed, but 5% of this high base speed will be a much more meaningful increase than it sounds as a result.
Thatās also why the OG Cuman bonus (ie. cavalry goes 10% faster and the civ had access to husbandry) was completely bonkers and pretty much anyone who was around on DE release would never want to see that ever again.
This was exactly what Iām getting at. The Paladin is already a fast unit, so making it faster doesnāt add much to its utility. It can already run away from its most deadly counter (halbs/pikes) without that bonus, so the extra speed doesnāt add as much value as something like extra HP or extra armor would.
Which is why I mentioned the extra armour on TK as a reference, itās already so high, that the devs knew that a further buff on it would not be as meaningful as buffing another stat on the unit.
Now I know that a unit that can run away from your fights is very annoying, because it is, but the Cumans have weak defensive tech tree, so if the Cuman player runs away from the fight, you can just wipe their base
Well it makes it better vs cav archers, can catch them. So I would argue the 5 % inc is quite strong here.
1 Like
I would like an agressive discount on either the siege workshop or the rams, if they could punish FC more easily, and make their enemies spend more resources in feudal they could be mucho better
This is a goal to follow, but I dont know how to achieve this with ramsā¦
- celts and aztecs have faster siege creation
- celts attack faster
- portoguese and slavs have cheaper siege
- bulgarians and chinese ram upgrades are cheaper
- malians siege workshops are cheaper, and slavs ones provide pop space
- other civs UTs add armor (teutons), HP (celts), speed (mongols), blast radius (ethiopians)
The only ram aspects that are not used are these:
- attack or attack bonuses
- pierce armor
- villager repairing rate/regeneration
- garrison ability
- line of sight
- wood-only discount
Pierce armor is redundant. More base attack could make battering rams better at arrasing buildings and defending against villagers but to kill a villager they should stop hitting a building. More attack bonuses are redundant and may be OP in feudal. Better villager repairing rate could make attacking with villagers and rams more reliable. Same with regeneration, but ram regeneration is weird. Better garrisoning (more capability, or more strength/speed per unit garrisoned) could make them better in feudal bur requires an army. Line of sight is useful to avoid enemy onagers but wont punish FC a lot. Wood-only discount would be great for feudal ram-rush but actually I want this for koreansā¦
2 Likes
I would remove the whole Feudal Siege workshop thing, you canāt make any army in Feudal that can meaningfully help a ram survive under TC fire. And making a ram to take out barracks and mining camp would be pointless too.
Also remove the cavalry speed bonus, and remove steppe husbandry unique tech.
Give them ability to research husbandry, and replace lost Unique tech with +1 range and +1 pierce armor unique tech for Kipchak + Archery range units
I am surprised you ask for steppe husbandry removal and not for cuman mercenaries.
Steppe husbandry can be more attractive after many buffs. They can buff the tech effect (faster training, without reaching the 400% of DE releaseā¦), or buff the units it affects to (steppe lancer, better fast cavalry bonus, etc).
I have had some success with late feudal rams in team games. It helps to amass a little ram army and upgrade them to capped rams upon reaching castle age. It helps to break enemy walls very quickly and allow my teammate to raid that foe.
For early feudal, I agree they usually are very risky to use, so better skip them. The only reliable strategy I can think with them is the tower-ram rush, but cumans have no eco bonuses for that, so it is very expensiveā¦
2 Likes
I think in most cases you can achieve the faster training by just adding more buildings. I can see that this tech can still be situationally useful, but the civ has so little going for it, that it should drop situationally useful techs and get something better. Not having bracer on a CA civ just puts it at such a massive disadvantage against any range civ 
At least give them a tech to compensate for the range loss. I know that one range might not sound like a big deal, but other Civ CA can kite your CA, and in any engagements, you lose a bunch of your units even before you can fire your first shots.
I think you can probably notice how Persians never make CA, despite having everything but Bracer to do it.
Cuman mercenaries I actually like, because it allows team mates to create a quick raiding party in team games.
Siege Engineers is a generic tech.
Moreover, Celt ones achieve that to a good extent. For a 200 attack, 5 or 10 building armor doesnāt matter.
It is a property of villager, not that of a ram.
Like this one. Helps a lot with aggressive stance.
Easy boy, easy. An early access to siege workshop can just mean putting down 1 or 2 SW after clicking upto Castle Age. It saves so much time.
Thatās one of the worst reasonings Iāve ever heard for a bonus. You usually donāt want to build your forward buildings early, to give the opponent less chance to scout it.
What they need is access to mangonel / catapults in feudal. Then the early siege workshop makes sense.
1 Like