Dravidians should get Knight line

Most things you are talking about have been addressed in the “dravidians are terrible” thread, so feel free to look it up.

I’ll go over these things briefly. First, urumis are only good total-resources wise. This is fine in castle age, but consider post-imp where you are pop-capped. If your opponent has 40-60 paladins, you’ll need 80-100 urumis. This is almost impossible, considering that urumis are can only be produced from castles, and you need 120 vils or so working.

Ignoring armour is a “it depends” trait, like most bonuses in aoe2. It is the best trait only against high armour units like boyars, teutonic knights, or even paladins. Sometimes, it is better to have high armour, faster attack, or cheaper production. Most units have around 4 melee armour, so it is roughly as good as garland wars.

Now the biggest point; castle age is the age that matters the most, in most games. This is especially true in open maps. Gurjaras have a bottom tier post-imperial age, since their trash units are weak and everything costs gold. Their units doesn’t scale super well in imperial age either. But they are top 3, and the best civ before their (slight) nerf. This alone shows how strong castle age is.

To add insult to injury, castle age is not their only weakness. They are also weak in terms of mobility. They don’t have a single useful mobile unit even in imperial age.

Additionally, it is not as if Dravidians have an early imp sufficient to compensate for their weak castle age. They also lack hussar for raiding.

Lastly, you are wrong on them becoming top 5 arabia civ with knights. This is for one simple reason, they have no good land eco bonuses for cavelry. They also don’t get bloodlines, or cavelry armours. Furthermore, even if they get knights, they won’t be able to upgrade them. Meaning, they can’t mass them and can only make a few for raiding and defending. This means they won’t hold a candle to any good cavelry civ including berbers, burgundians, Gurjaras, Poles, Cumans, etc.

I think you are vastly overstating how much this would add. Now, this might get them to top 15 or so, maybe. But that is close to 50% win rate which is the ideal number we should want for all civs. It is definitely better than the bottom 5, which they are now.

5 Likes

Would shrivamsha riders be fine instead ?

Knight without Bloodline and Husbandry will carry them at best to top 25 in Arabia.

6 Likes

I never see people research Bloodlines or Husbandry if they are booming with defensive/offensive Xbow (say Magyars). Hell, you rarely see even then +1 armor cuz a Knight’s job in these “minimal aggression” scenarios is literally to ONLY snipe Mangonels.

It’s clear that, lacking last armor, Dravidians would never play Knights in Imp, anyway, and in Castle age ANY Knight is good enough tbh, you even see Vikings play Knights and they got the worst Knights in the game.

1 Like

American native people didn’t domesticate horses, thus they lacking cavalry is 100% historically accurate. On the other hand, native Indians had horses and they used both heavy and light cavalry very commonly, especially foreign invader Hindustanis (in history Delhi and Mughal Sultanate) were Nomadic Turkic people, thus they conquered India with their 100% cavalry armies. After conquest, they gradually decreased their cavalry but cavalry still continued as the most important unit of their armies.

In conclusion, Indians not having Knight-line is historically unaccurate.

[1] In the Eurasian steppes there are vast pastures to feed the horses, but the land is not suitable for agriculture. Therefore, the steppe population is very small, but the number of horses is very high. That’s why in the Mongolian army, there are 9 horses per soldier. Same 1 sodlier to 9 horse ratio existed in Turkic Nomads aswell.

1 Like

Mechanically yes, thematically no. Shrivamsha riders never existed in south india, and they are a group specific to the culture represented by gurjaras. It would be like giving berserks to italians.

2 Likes

Don’t tell this man about Leitis

1 Like

Or perhaps, make sure the Dravidians don’t have any upgrades for the Knight line as @BidGorgon527960 mentioned. I’ve always wanted to see the Dravidians get access to the Knight because their stable is way too weak right now and not to mention, the Dravidians getting access to the Knight is also because there were Indian empires that deployed Heavy Cavalry.

1 Like

i’d like them to have knight and camel or one or the other, thats it. no cavalier, no heavy camel.

I don’t want Dravidians to get knights even if they desperately need it for balance. Every civ from other regions of the world have knights (except Americas). Making a civ balanced around elephants is more interesting. Devs should make BE more comparable to knights in their utility. Another option is to give them camels.

This is fine because it is only 2 units in the campaign. If you give Dravidians knights, they will make knights in every game.

Magyars do get bloodlines and husbandry because they want to eventually go for CA.

What you are saying only applies to the early stages of a tech switch. I see Magyars play xbow into knights into CA in tournaments often enough, I think is the meta for Magyars, is it not?

Camels are not an option because they were never a thing historically. It’s extremely out of place, like placing a polar bear in a desert. The animal has never existed in the area.

I think that more defensive/booming options are more important. Your force isn’t mobile enough to easily counter raid while protecting your economy. They are also extremely weak to a combination of knights, skirms and mangonels.

There is a super long thread about this issue here

1 Like

meta is one thing, but also adapting is a huge part of the game. You can do the “standard play” which is what you say, but if opponent does something offmeta, like say mass Celts Siege, you would be foolish to stay on Xbow and stay too long and follow your plan, best bet is to do probably small amount of Knights into Light Cav (to beat Monks who come together).

Agree. I was only disagreeing with you saying ‘Magyars never/rarely get bloodlines/husbandry/armor’.

If Dravidians get knights, which I’m not specficially against, then Gurjaras and Hindustanis MUST get them as well. I wouldn’t stand the inconsistency otherwise.

2 Likes

yeah probably Magyars want to get Bloodlines at some point. I am not exactly sure about when you get into CA, in general CA transition is considered one of the hardest transitions, it’s very important to get the timing right. Lots of issues such as many upgrades needed (Thumb Ring, Bloodlines etc.), but also CA are effective only once you get a certain mass, and furthermore they are also fairly expensive individually (40w 60g and you really notice that 40w how many more lumberjacks you need to develop eco and sustain production). Last but not least you need to hit Imp with a competitive time, and hit it in good shape so that you can afford a secondary meatshield unit (typically Hussar) and all the Imp upgrades.

I reckon generally Magyars try to play all-in ish in Castle age these days because playing the macro game and doing the transition into CA without dying can be very hard.

Instead of Knights we can add “Kaikolar Cavalry” wielding spear as a unique unit (model can be like General Araiyan). This is most apt to the cholas - whose entire imperial army is made of Kaikolars (strong armed warrior) and Sengunthars (red spear warrior) who wield spears mostly.
Also adding a new unit like "Airavatha/Royal WarElephant as Cavalry/cavalry archer dual mode) is most apt in Imperial age as their elephant army is one of toughest and made use of war suitable elephants found in souther tip of tamil nadu and sri lanka.

You can check my mods - Redefined empires (2 versions) where these are added and much more done.

Knights not needed but suitable unique cavalry unit can be added for each of the indian civilizations.
Hindustanis - Ahadi or heavy lancer cavalry
Gurjaras - heavy cavalry (additionally to Shrivamsha) like anti-unique unit cavalry similar to samurai. Shrivamsha is for pratiharas and Rajputs (identity got later) rode different heavy cavalry and light cavalry.
Bengalis - Possible to add Huna cavalry (as they were part of their army) similar to Cumans - Cuman-Kipchak confederation named as Cumans with Kipchak unique unit.
Dravidians - Kaikolar cavalry (possibly spear armed like general araiyan) and make them anti-cavalry cavalry with high attack.
Above are few suggestions.

1 Like

I think they should add a new Eagle Warrior type unit for India.
Not as strong and flexible as the actual Eagle Warrior line though since the Indians all have the Scout Cavalry line.
So an Eagle Warrior without the conversion resistance and bonus damage against monks but sharing the same weakness to Infantry.

It could potentially also be available to some South East Asian civilisations.

AoE3 has the Tiger Claw that fills a similar role.

2 Likes

No no no. This is over-representation of each civilization unique features. You’re breaking apart the abstraction of the game that allows to have generic unit lines. A game with 43 civilizations (and increasing) would be a complete mess with unique unit lines instead of generic ones.

I don’t see a reason for Dravidians to get Knights (horrible idea) or for South Asian civs to get their own unique cavalry unit.

Instead, Dravidians could just get a small buff to their light cavalry line. It’s already got some small use as a fast trash unit that can trade better against insanely armoured units. So might as well let them have either Husbandry or Bloodlines, just for a little push.

Visually it’s not utterly jarring in the army anyway.

1 Like