no.
limit for 20 charcters
Well, I donât quite know what to say after that.
I think he missed the selling point.
It must be â+10 in 2 months!â
Infantry bonus would make strong Vs infantry, even in low number. A counter unit who stands reasonably well against other unit would be good enough, especially because of its super low FU cost.
A +17 bonus Vs infantry would 2 shots halbs (not even needing the current +1 Vs spears).
Also Shatagani could give +10% accuracy.
Iâm not sure buffing base accuracy would help. It favors Overkill given the unit RoF.
2 Likes
Yes good in low numbers against low numbers of infantry. But thatâs not what you want. You want a unit which is good in medium groups against mass infantry. And higher atk vs infantry doesnât help in that situation.
Exactly, for units which tend to overkill a lot lower acc is actually better.
Then the solution could be bad accuracy, full damages against non direct target, reduce base damages, and high bonus damages Vs infantry.
High RoF would feel a bit weird. Black Powder weapons were initially awfully slow to reload.
2 Likes
But with the inventions of the different lock systems this changed dramatically.
Most high-skilled bowmen achieved a far higher rate of shot than the matchlock arquebus, which took 30â60 seconds to reload properly.[78] The arquebus did, however, have a faster rate of fire than the most powerful crossbow, a shorter learning curve than a longbow, and was more powerful than either. The arquebus did not rely on the physical strength of the user for propulsion of the projectile, making it easier to find a suitable recruit.
So there could be a reasoning to make a late-imp upgrade to the hand cannon which increases their firerate accordingly. Could be called âMatchlockâ. I think this would be a feasible solution, as you then need to tech into hc opposed to the current state where you have actually tech less into them than into arbs (skirms or champion), which makes the comparison very awkward.
1 Like
There are no Arquebus Guns in the game, except for the Portuguese UT name, all HCs in the game are using the 1400s Handgonne, not the Arquebus.
The Handgonne was actually a Siege weapon, whose main purpose was to strike at the top of Walls, not an anti-Infantry device. AoE2 does not have 1500s tech in any of itâs common units, except for the DE inclusion of Morion helmets in teh HC, which made it actually look weird.
All other common units are using 1400s gear, in the 1400s, the Arbalest was the anti-Infantry weapon of choice.
Perhaps they should have included an upgrade to Arquebusier, but they never did, as Heavy Cavalry, Halberdiers, Swordsmen and other units in the game, no longer born the appearance they do right now, when Arqubuses were introduced.
For example, the Halberdier is mostly in Chainmail, while in the 1500s, ALL Halberdiers were either in Breastplate or Brigandine.
This is 1400s:
This is 1500s:
Again with the Champion.
1400s:
1500s:
The technology of AoE2 goes AT MOST up to the end of the 100 Years War, and is unfit to represent warfare after it, so HCs will continue to be bad, because they were incredibly bad, in the 1400s.
4 Likes
They are still completely useless. I lost with HCs to Viking Champs and Pikes.
3 Likes
Only one citation where a few knights try to shoot some defenders from walls doesnât make it a siege weapon.
Itâs important for historical accurracy to donât cherry-pick but look in the wider context.
The first firearms were effectively used by knights for hit-and-run tactics. Because of the very low accuracy it was almost impossible to aim at single targets from distance. So using them in Siege to shoot defenders from walls may have been occured but was for sure very, very ineffecitve.
If you try to be historically accurate, use the accurate methods for your claims please.
1 Like
The first firearms were very, very inneficient, only with the rise of Bombards and Volley Guns, did they become useful, and even then those Guns capitalized on being inaccurate, either with just sheer Range and Force, or by bursting out shotte in a volley.
The Arquebus came much later, after the Middle Ages, straight at the beggining of AoE3 timeframe.
Wether one likes it or not, the Hand Cannoneer is using a Handgonne, not an Arquebus, so it does make sense that it is an inaccurate mess, and not a good unit.
AoE2 common units do not have equipment to represent warfare over the 1400s, which is why the game originally did not even have Halberdiers or Hussars, and those came with the Conquerors expansion, because the game was designed to dead-stop at the end of the 100 Years War.
3 Likes
I disagree with that. There is no reasoning to make a dead-end at any random time. Itâs an rts, it doesnât has the requirement to represent 100 % historical accuracy or have dead-ends or whatever. And the way the devs approached it with the different campaigns also doesnât make it necessary the out of campaign gameplay needs to be historically accurate.
It makes absolutely no sense to have teutons or celts in a medieval rts.
What about meso civs in 14 th century?
âŠ
I donât want to list it, but first your argument of historical accuracy is already defied by the game itself. And then you use wrong historical methods to justify your bad claims.
HC are part of the game, it makes no sense to make them deliberately terrible just because some people donât like them. They have a place in the game, they are supposed to be a support unit for cavalry civs in the lategame. And this is historically accurate to much more degree than your claims. Because in the process of firearm development they became exactly what they represent in the game.
And the game is also historically accurate with their first appearance as hit-and run cav and turkish janissaries. Maybe itâs a bit too early in castle age, but thatâs devs decision.
It makes no sense to add a unit with a certain task representing the firearm revolution that just sucks. If they want to represent the firearm revolution they must be able to perform it - if the player decides to tech into it.
xDDD
made my day.
1 Like
The reason why they are terrible, is because personal firearms in the 1400s were terrible.
I favour the addition of a Matchlock upgrade to increase Accuracy to 100%, and replacing the Arqubus UT with Royal Engineer Corps (more Portuguese, and actually still Medieval) afeccting only BBC, Caravel and Cannon Galleon.
But there is a reason why they were designed to be highly inaccurate, and awful to use, and that is because the gameâs Tech Level does not surpass the 100 Years War.
If they wanted this, they would have added the HC in the Castle Age, and the Arquebusier in the Imperial Age, but they never planned for the game to leave Medieval tech behind, so no âfirearms revolutionâ.
It is also why we are stuck with Heavy Cavalry Archers, and not Mounted Pistoliers, and why we get Paladins, and not Cuirassiers.
No they are not. There is almost no Cavalry civ that has FU HC, and the Ranged unit taht is designed as support for Cavalry, is teh Cavalry Archer, which is why it is faster, so it can always stay behind the meatshield.
1 Like
So for you HC are just a gimmick and youâre happy with their current state.
OK.
Just say it that way and donât try to argue around it please.
1 Like
You do not read the whole thing.
2 Likes
You know that wonât happen bec arquebus is occupied by ports.
And higher acc doesnât make HC better.
1 Like
Accuracy is exactly why they do not counter Infantry, which is their ingame role.
FU Arbs do less damage, but have higher Attack, Range and Accuracy. The whole schtick of HCs is +10 Bonus Damage vs Infantry, and teh reason they do not get used, is because they cannot reliably hit.
If they could, they would become a mandatory unit vs Goths and Eagle civs, because +10 Bonus Damage is a lot.
They could also use a HP buff, to at least the same value as Arbalests, but the reason they fail is that they miss too much.
They are fine now, they have 75% accuracy, no more buffs to this unit esepcially we will get many powerful gunpowder civs (Bohemians) and we have Indians, Ports, Spanish, Turks and Burgundians all of them have great gun powder.
No, they are not fine, they are still worse than Arbs at killing Infantry, which is their sole job.
3 Likes
This game is based on medieval ages not WW2.
1 Like