I think there might be a quite simple way of fixing the Janissaries. If how the systems work in the game allows for it, you could just give them negative ranged armour instead of a static weakness to ranged damage. With the calculations done and numbers set, they could receive roughly the same extra damage at the beginning from archers, not as much from other sources of ranged damage. With the armour upgrades, they would be fine later in the game, still countered by ranged damage if you, the devs, insist on that instead of a complete overhaul. They need that survivability. Also, I don’t think they should counter cavalry. I don’t think they’re gonna see a lot of use if they’re not all-rounders. If they must be anti-cavalry, then they have to be better than spearmen at it.
The Sipahi’s only problem is how Fortitude simply cannot work well with the numbers it works with. The attack speed buff only gives them a fraction of 50% damage in practice -around 7% if I recall correctly- while they receive guaranteed +50% damage. With numbers adjusted, it should be fine.
The Great Bombard’s issue also lies within the numbers. With the cost accounted for, it performs worse than both the generic Bombard and the generic Mangonel at their jobs. While performing worse than the Mangonel is understandable, I think it isn’t intended for them to be worse than the Bombard. Easy fix there, just pick if you want them to be strong and expensive or mediocre and cheap.
Mehter’s just fine. Might need some survivability buffs but any change doesn’t seem necessary.
Up to this point I’ve been typing as an amateur game designer. From this point on, I will be typing as a history enthusiast.
I don’t understand why the Sipahi is light cavalry and why it looks like the Deli. The Knight even looks like the Sipahi. Interesting choice there. You could’ve even included both of them with very miniscule unique traits. I really like the idea of the Janissary being an early Handcannoneer, since they were one of the first European standing armies with wide use of firearms, but I think they should’ve been an all-rounder with just a little weaker attack and more HP. I also like them being able to repair siege engines. Makes sense. An ideal Ottomans would have two types of Janissaries, with yataghans and with arquebuses, both of them trained at only military schools (maybe renamed to Janissary Ocaghi) at Ages II and III, respectively. That would be the most historical approach there without things getting out of hand. All of that, unchanged, is still acceptable in my opinion, but it really feels and sounds wrong that the Ottomans don’t get any kind of horse archery. An easy way to implement them at this stage would be to make the Scout unique, renamed to the Akıncı and giving them a weak ranged attack, unlocked at Age II.
Overall, some ideas that could’ve (and should have, in my opinion) been implemented with the Ottomans seem like they were implemented with the Malians. It’s fine, just bugs me out a little.