I don’t think anyone thinks they’re fine, they just can’t come to an acceptable solution, some want them to be changed completely, some want them to be good but some don’t want Indians to be OP
Why do gunpowder units even need to be there to complement elephant archers against infantry if you make them fire on the move is my question, omg. How dense can you get lol.
Wtf. Again, where do you come up with that? If you make EAs fire on the move, they’ll counter halbs, archers and skirms and pretty much any melee unit that pursues them since you can keep running all day long and the melee units just hit you every now and then, their rate of fire gets reduced and they keep blocking each other while trying to reach their target unless the player microes them himself, but you don’t need to do that at all, just tell them to move away and they keep dealing damage.
WHY do you insist that we need to be OVERLY creative here with your towerfant “idea”? Not to even mention, you are actually talking about it now in context with a unit cost, especially when first YOU YOURSELF say this:
So first you are using the units cost as an “argument” against me, which didn’t even work, and now when I’m doing it your argument is to change the cost.
Dam 11.
How ignorant can you get. Mongols used tactics where cavalry archers shot their arrows while on the move. What does an elephant have to do with that. Nothing.
What a nonsense.
2 Likes
- learn following: if you’re talking about the current situation refer to current stats. If you say “EA are meant to be used in numbers” that means in current patch you need 100f/80g for each one to build. If you refer to a new situation apply the new costs, damage bonuses etc. Nothing magic, just basic thinking.
- Making them a counter unit obviously involves their normal pierce damage to be reduced but increase their damage bonus against archers/skirms.
- shoot and scoot with Elephants? lol yea totally OP considering they’re much slower than other units. Especially when I look at what other archer units are capable of doing in larger numbers.
- yes it’s true that Mongol horse archers shot while moving. So did other cav archers. That’s why these civs have the parthian tactics tech that gives them bonus armour and attack against spearmen.
Maybe give EA extra attack bonus vs camel? It would be good at both of Indians 1v1 and sometimes Saracens and Berbers.
Well you weren’t implying anywhere that you wanted the cost to be changed, now did you? It’s still meant to be used in numbers even now though. Less than cheaper units, but in numbers still, not like siege units which can work well with very few of them. It even costs less than war elephant. Do you think war elephants are meant to not be used in numbers? Really? That’s when the unit is in it’s most vulnerable state to monks for example. And why should I be thinking for you about your ideas when I don’t even want your idea to be implemented. If you want to think about ways to balance it with cost, that’s your job to come up with not mine. And since you did not come forth with any such words I can only assume that you did not want to change that. And even if you do, I don’t. Cause I don’t want to change the unit’s behaviour into a completely different one. Up its rate of fire a bit, no need to extend it’s range, change movement speed, or hp and see how it goes.
We should be trying to balance the unit in the way it is already implemented in the game instead of fiddling with their mechanics and roles altogether.
Then how is it a skirmisher again if you want to even lower it’s pierce armor.
???
Oh and take away parthian tactics as you said.
You clearly have zero understanding of this. Totally. Atleast with other archers you still need to micro them and you are basically shooting at some select few units. Unit’s that constantly shoot and move don’t need to wait on frame delay cause their target is there all the time and they can be shooting at multiple targets, so not making overkills.
Yes and that’s why also EA has parthian tactics. But you are now trying to make it a mechanic and makes zero sense that only EA would have such an OP mechanic.
Except, the way you have been answering me back, it would only be good at moving away from opponents who pursue it, but be completely balls if it had to actually fight, ie. when defending your base for example. Worthless.
It is a unit supposed to act as a meatshield for weaker ranged units and deal damage to the opponents frontline at the same time. Let’s keep it that way. You want to make it counter archers, but it is already doing that so what is it that your idea even achieves at all, aside from introducing “new” “cool” mechanics cause you deem the game too boring?
1 Like
Yea whatever, just keep them useless then. I could care less anyways, never encounter them in 1v1 anyways neither do I play them often 11
Which is why I’m saying to up their rate of fire a little.
Indians are already a strong civ, with a good economy. A weak UU will not deter them, and I would rather they stay the same, than risk overtuning them into a powerhouse, or have them nerfed later on in different ways.
This wasn’t even about giving them a strong UU but instead give a proper role to the EA in the indian army. But obviously it’s more acceptable to make the UU stronger overall with a 20% damage to do exactly what you’re fearing 
That’s how balancing works. Just add some damage and it’ll be fine. Even if the civ still has 10 other, better units suited for that task.
Civs that are strong and have a good economy:
- Aztecs
- Chinese
- Persian
- Khmer
- Maya
- Britons
… It’s not as if Indians would suddenly turn into Super tier if they have a premium skirmisher UU from their castles instead of an anti building archer (which still performs much worse than Archers with Obsidian Arrows).
plumes arent affected by obsidian arrows
1 Like
alright, another ninja change to forgotten then… Doesn’t matter anyways, still twice as good…
I said: without camels. Never said: ele only (I mean, no civ can do that anyway or else you die to halb spam). And the game I provided you indeed contained a grand total of 3 unupgraded camels, tons of archer/cav archer spam and you still claimed Daut was going to train camels even tho arb/bracer/HCA aren’t camel upgrades.
2 Likes
It never affected plumes
2 Likes
After all this ideas, I think that the only way of making BE viable is either make them fire several arrows (put more guys on top of that huge animal!) or giving them 2 or 3 lore range. I preffer the first one. Make it the ranged version of persians war Elefant. An unit with a huge damage imput, really difficult to mass and easy to counter. Kipchaks with enormous hp, damage imput, time and cost od creation. Highly expensive but highly pop efficient
1 Like
It has a proper role. <_>
Never told to increase rate of fire by 20% either. The number is debatable by how much, but is pretty much the simplest solution.
1 Like
Which role is that exactly? Apart from being an overall useless archer unit? And if it actually has a proper role - why do only a few players use it?
And weren’t you the one who suggested to match its rate of fire with other archers? In numbers that is from 2.5 seconds to 2 sec. Depending on how you calculate it it’s either -20% reload time(2sec/2.5sec) or in other numbers a rate of fire +25%.
I’ve already told you many times what it’s role is. However it’s attack rate is so balls that it is only a meatshield and doesn’t deal much damage itself in the end. It’s not a siege ram after all.
Yes that was my original suggestion but have you been following the thread after that at all? I’ve already changed my stance long ago and said it just needs to be closer to that than what it is. Doesn’t necessarily mean to be at that point, however it is not out of the question either if it happens to be the sweet spot.
1 Like
I actually kinda like the double-archer idea. Imagine if the back archer just targeted automatically while the front archer was player controllable, it would mean your damage could be substantially better than a normal archer without allowing for broken levels of focus-fire.
I cant beleive the devs havent fixed this trash UU already.
They should get BOTH these changes with no changes to their current stats:
- two archers on the back, one commanded other targets closest unit
- Can garrison 3 foot units each, with foot archer units(incl HCs) adding one arrow each
This would make them truly unique and also allow indian skirms/ HC to shelter themselves mid battle if faced with a mass of cavalry!
PLUS it wont allow dangerous levels of focus firing when ungarissoned!
Very cool, unique ideas, but I think EA dont need as drastic changes. I think the best improvment is the simpliest.
Give them bonus against Siege.
Think about it. EA is practicly design as siege killer. With its range attack and tankines EA can close distance to the onagers, trebs and BBC and kill them and simply ignore all other enemy units. Can also take 4 direct hits from SO. But now cannot kill all this fast enough, what makes EA practicly useless in this role. With bonus against Siege - will be good.
And having anti-siege unit in the castle is always nice and not uncommon.
2 Likes