Ah that makes sense then. But that being said cost wise archers still counter HC in aoe4, with their attack bonus. But then they’re like skirms.
And as you said, HC eat xbows. But it feels like HC are just a much better generalist unit in aoe4, something closer to the janissaries in aoe2
Were they supposed to do ANYTHING? ^^
I don’t think many unit were designed in such a way we now discuss about them. I don’t think the devs ever thought about the current heavy cav + skirm comp.
Have I said they should counter that comp? Or my design would? I actually explicitely said my design is countered by archery.
The passage you citate is just about a general thought why HC can’t perform in the way they are probably intended, cause it looks like when there are still a lot of arbs out there they just can’t do their job currently.
I think there is a reason why people play most of the time skirms, as this unit counters halb + arbs. Why would you make a switch out of skirms if the unit you transition to is countered by one of the opponen units? That’s what I talk about.
Who said I buff HC? I try to adjust them so they have real situations the transition to them makes sense.
So there is something wrong with skirms?
Give them bonus vs Cavalry too, it will be historicaly accurate (it was gunpowder who ended age of heavy cav) and also give them additional purpose and usefullness. Also, training time need to be lowered, and RoF need to be better. Just a little.
I think we should not buff hc stats directly or they spiral out of control in fast imp.
Hc need more upgrades.
Attackspeed 20% tech for 450g, 200f from archery range.
You can either invest ress to massy early, or you van further upgrade, like with all other units.
Hc need to become closer to FU arbs
Then don’t give that tech to new Indians, spanish and Burgunduans, but all other civs with handcannons
But we talked about all this years ago.
Devs do what they like, not want we discuss imo.
One of such post of mone, but it has come up countless of time by many different people
hahaha yeah thats very true, considering how much has changed since the original civs
sorry i missed that then
no the skirm is specifically meant to counter those, whereas the HC is arguably specifically NOT meant to counter arbs. because it “should” already counter infantry, and it’s high dps, lends itself to counter cavalry, meaning it would be bad design if it now countered ranged units as well.
in the same way scorps are so much better at killing infantry, and mangos are so much better at siege
Well, Hand Cannoneers do better against Cavalry than Archers do purely because of their high attack. A much smaller mass of Hand Cannoneers can one-shot Paladins than larger mass of Archers.
Even saw it happening in some test games with the new Hindustanis, the +2 range Hand Cannoneers were eating the camels like nothing.
All Hand-Cannoneer need is to have some univercity upgrades which is srong but very expensive.
+4 dmg (600f 800g) (+3 for Elite Jans & Conqs )
+1 range +%15 rof (1000f 650g)
+12 attack bonus against Cavarly (450f 750g)
These techs should be full open for Spanish,Turks,Teutons (having no arbalester) (Turkjs with discount will be nice finally they will be quiet a punch and playing Turks in late game could be interesting i guess)
Ports,Italians,Indians and Bzyntines will have only 2 of these techs
Tatars and Persians,Saracens will have only 1 of those while Goths,Japanese and others will have none of these but only HC itself.
I think kinda new stuff to Gunpowder units will be historically fitting.They were strong innovative but expensive.