Winning the cavalry is possible with spearmen since they cost and take less time, in addition to their additional damage, but the same does not happen with those of gunpowder, the knights cost and take the same time, therefore, they do not win.
Which is why I propose to nerf the Hand Gunner. With a base attack of 25 plus 10 damage with heavy infantry, in such a way that the horsemen will not have difficulty in defeating them.
Compared to the crossbowman, with all its technologies it does 21 damage plus 11 against heavy. Hand cannon costs double so it must do double damage therefore when applying the university technology it remains 25x 1,2 = 30 plus 10 against heavy = 40. With a reasonable damage according to its cost.
Unclear how this would remotely work, considering all the other side has to do is take 1-2 bombards or trebs and kill your wall the handcannons are on. Not sure why it’s surprising handcannons on walls would beat knights. If you win a 1v1 game with a wonder your opponent messed up horrendously or was super behind anyway.
Changing cost to 140/100 would be a buff since it’s the same resource cost but less gold??
Handcannons are quite expensive still and only barely a meta pick in some imp games. Any more nerfs would probably make them unusable (excluding strelets).
edit :
Which is why I propose to nerf the Hand Gunner. With a base attack of 25 plus 10 damage with heavy infantry, in such a way that the horsemen will not have difficulty in defeating them.
Compared to the crossbowman, with all its technologies it does 21 damage plus 11 against heavy. Hand cannon costs double so it must do double damage therefore when applying the university technology it remains 25x 1,2 = 30 plus 10 against heavy = 40. With a reasonable damage according to its cost.
As has already been stated, the handcanoneer has recently been nerfed and is not being used much in high ranked play. Let us see how it plays out.
The AI is very bad and does not form any grounds for proof that hand canoneers are overpowered. Particularly given a scenario where the units are posted on walls.
Good players are much stronger than the AI and will utilise superior tactics and have more resources. Based on your previous requests for autoplay features and the example against the AI, it would seem that you do not play on quickmatch against humans.
Your proposal requires evidence against actual players of notable skill. If you are just playing against the AI, the experience is limited and does not reflect the possibilities in a match with only humans.
Even if the evidence was against low ranked players, it would only magnify the mistakes being made by the player(s) and does not necessarily reflect the effectiveness of units due to many variables.
The unit is for a very late game composition and we should keep an eye on its performance nonetheless.
As many stated. You played vs an AI.
Any half decent human player would simply raid your economy to death, then, once you got nothing left, attack you with siege. Or he would skip the raiding part and just destroy you with siege.
For those who believe that they did not attack me with a siege, I send them the images Well, defending the wonder for 15 minutes with the resources and level to the maximum of the machine makes it more difficult than with a human who has much fewer resources, as you can see in the images, it took him a short time to replenish the army, with 4 siege workshops. Previously, I took holy places so the rival did not have time to win, I had 9 minutes to win by “wonder”.
Honestly the AI is so bad you could put any ranged unit on walls and you would autowin. I’d bet I can beat hardest AI with only spearman and walls, doesn’t mean spearman are op. 100% could do it only knights or MAA.
