Mangonels are countered by Mangonels or Knights.
Iām pretty sure Burmese can use those themselves.
1 Like
Arambai + mangonel is the combo. It is the same as Spanish with conquistadors.
Plus, at imperial, burmese have siege engineers.
Maybe compensate by giving Burmese a slight buff. The unit is slightly nerfed against usual units, but hugely nerfed against Huskarls, Eagles and buildings.
Maybe the movement speed is increased. At present it moves as fast as an Elite Eagle Warrior and Boyar, where in the past it moved as fast a Knight.
I agree with not giving Leather Archer Armor - this is an identity of the civ. I would better like their elephants and infantry being used more commonly. While meta revolves around crossbowmen and knights, Burmese Knights are mediocre, Archers above average (thanks to a passive wood bonus) and crossbowmen after mid castle age below average (lacking TR).
Countering archers can be done by using elephants. Uptil the Castle age UT, their elephants have nothing special.
Suggested changes:
- Civ bonus added: Elephant units +1p armor.
- Howdah: Elephants attack 20% faster.
- Manipuri Cavalry: bonus damage reduced to +4 or +5.
- Chemistry affects Arambais.
1 Like
The problem is that when you look at skirms, having the armors is important as much as having the attack upgrades, maybe even more, since they donāt counter archers so much with their bonus damage but more with their high PA, outlasting archers.
Franks and celts at least have other way of countering archers (knights and siege respectively), but what do burmese have? BE? They are lackluster in this regard.
A civ that have only one archer armor as uniqueness should at least have another way to counter archers, like turks scouts.
I donāt think this is true at all.
The range + atack is always more important for a ranged unit. Sicilian skirms are better than teuton skirms. Atack > armor for ranges.
How about reworking the Arambai like this:
Reduce the attack further 10 and 12 for elite.
Add a new bizarre mechanic, their darts do damage over time (like inca jungle bows of aoe3), can drop slowly the unit HP if it directly hits.
Attack/range upgrades are important only when skirms act as a support unit to just deal a bit more damage. But if you need a unit that simply soak up arrows, then armor becomes sa much important, if not āarguably moreā.
Sicilians skirms are better than teutons skirms because at least they have bracer (both lacks the last archer armor), but when you need something that simply absorb arrows, then they are about on the same level (but for teutons isnāt a problem, since they have paladins and SO).
I get thay some civs are more vulnerable to others, but how burmese are supposed to counter archers civs?
False. Teutons have the last armor upgrade
You are right, I confused with franks. Then teutons skirms are worse at being a support unit, but a lot better at soak up arrows.
It is unfair to see that near all who is against adding 2nd archer armor to burmese just because it is the identity of the civ with regardless the unqiue unit is actually nerf a lot.
This main purpose of this patch update is to improve the problem "siege archer "
- Saracens remove +2 building attack in later age
- Mayans remove Obsidian Arrows
- Arambai lower from 17 to 12 AT, where the pierce armor of most building is ranged from 8 to 10
However, the identity of burmese is the āWood versionā Conquistador but with fragile life, low accurancy and higher attack rate.
Yeah burmese is strong with their monk and infantry, you still make many option to play this civ.
Unfortunately, the reality is that nearly no one use Burmese in both open map and closed map at all.
A.
Using infantry? Even japanese is nearly the strongest infantry civ, infantry in most cases is not the first priority
option. The most common civ that would use infantry i can think of is just Goths since the econ bonus, producing speed and the high pierce armor.
B.
Using monk?So why dont just use Aztecs?
C.
Using cavalry, eleghant just because there is only a free upgrade on lumber camp?There is a lot better cavalry civ no need to be mentioned. Kmer is always the best eleghant civ becaues of the moving speed.
Here comes to problem, the biggest signature of burmese is just the fastest moving siege āArambaiā.
Why dont just think of any plan to make the Burmese signature usable again.
Gonna copy my post about arambai:
Honestly the unit concept is utter 100% trash, a conquistador like unit that massed do the same as a Siege Onager with mobility is silly and broken, plus having insanely low armor so basically get terribly wrecked by any ranged unit, hell even the Persian trashbows laugh at them.
In what world you would make them over Conquistador which offers you much better armor and HP plus goldless BS upgrades.
Yeah i am used to be a Burmese player but now i play spanish instead.
In previous patch, the most famous Burmese strategy is the double castle Arambai.
The absolutly edge of this stategy is
- Easily massed because it is wood costed. No need to farm.
- Lesser upgrade needed when compare to archer. Can eaily beat even camel archer, mameeluke without upgrade. This is quite non-sense
- Knight killer
- High AT with high attack speed, make it become the fastest moving siege
- No need up to imperial but can beat paladin.
Now Arambaiā AT is deprived, no more moving siege, no more knight killer, but still got beaten by massed archer, what is the usable point?
I can think of severa way to make usable at least in somehow:
A. Improve the accuracy, now it is just 20%/30%, at least make it 40/50% since Arambai cant make any range, attack, thumb ring upgrade. 50% accuracy for Elite Arambi is just as same as cavalry archer without thumb ring, i think it is pretty fair.
B. Change Manipur Cavalry to a castle age tech. Arambai is originaly designed to be a moving siege, just give it back the AT stat vs building with cost needed.
It is not reasonable to deprive its speciality without any compensate plan
C. Make Parthian Tactics applicabe on Arambai instead of adding 2nd armor directly.
Make more initiative courage player to up to imperial age. I am curious who would use Burmese cavalry archer for a long time. Now just make it become reasonable to invent if it can be applicable on Arambai.
Cavalry archer can be upgraded to 7+4 At with 4+3 range in normal civ. It is quite fair for Arambai to upgrade Parthian Tactics in imperial age. This can also conserve the signature of Burmese āNo 2nd armorā
Finally, i would say even make the above burf, Burmese would no longer as hot as in closed before.
I hope the developer can adapt my suggestion. So i can have option other than conquistador to play