I know. It uses to be 2pa.
And believe me. Turks die to a good archer civ.
Well i mean massed longbows are super hard for a lot of civs but remember turks also have plus range on their bombard cannons (their imp tech).
Free huzars kill archers and siege
Jenizaries and hand cannoneers kills infantry
Camells kill knights
Bombard cannons kills siege and archers aswell.
They have also siege ram to help against archer civs.
Its a fact that not having elite skirm is tough, but they still have options in my opinion.
Itâs not properly a buff, itâs because you have to train them from a caste (which take a lo to build) to counter units from a stable, now each GC takes 22s, a knight 30s, all other UU archers take on average 16-18s.
So since itâs a lot more easy to spam stable than castles, and since a GC 1v1 canât still beat a knight, you struggle to mass them.
Here is a post where I explain it better.
I really donât understand why people keep saying BBC is a counter to archer, Specially Brittish. And HC + hussar is a really bad combo against halbs +archers.
2 Likes
But other archer unique units donât have such an insane bonus damage as genoese crosbow have. And looks like italians are really bad without genoese crosbows at castle age but in my opinipn they are not that bad. They also have knight with full upgrades and bloodlines. Its a fact that italiams are better at imperial age, but they still have cool things for the early game.
You should try it yourself as well. Bombard cannons have a splash damage that is really nice against archers.
Its not like the perfect counter unit but they are still good, the bad thing is they get oneshoted mostly, but they have longer range than archers.
And huzars are actually good unit.
You just need to micro better than your opponent
1 Like
They donât have thatâs much until castle age, and chukos, longbow and janissarys counter knights (and a lot of other units) as good as GC, while takin a lot less to be trained.
GC have a good bonus, but they still canât win 1v1, they need a critical mass, and now you struggle to reach that mass, knights will always outnumber you.
Read my posts on the link, there are some videos too to prove my point and all the math.
Man, are you kidding me? Why do you asume everyone is a noob? Ofcourse Iâve tried. And anyone with the minimum micro can dodge a bombard cannon shot with archers. Specially British one.
There is a lot of civs that donât have that much before castle age thenâŠ
Italians only need 415 food by clicking feudal. That way they can click before your enemy and start making scout first.
To go castle age they only need 680 food and 170 gold to click up castle (normally before your enemy) and go for those knights, or crosbows, or even fc + castle drop and make geoneose crosbows.
Longbow and chukonus might loss to paladins they are not invencible. Yes they are really good archers and win easily vs geonese crosbows becouse chukonu has better atack and longbow better range.
Generic arbalest like viking arbalest still beat genoese crosbow, but all those 3 units I talked about are different, different proposes maybe. Genoese crosbow is only good if your enemy is going cavalier. But I have never felt that they are doing their job wrong when I am killing those letis.
I donât think you are a noob. Sorry if you are getting offended but you donât really give arguments. I tell you why the things are like I feel. I play with turks a lot on arena and those crosbows just die so easily with my hand cannons and bombard cannons when i go fast imp. The best reaction is to go knights but then again my monks convert them and they are gg.
1 Like
I am giving arguments. Of course castle age units die to imperial age units, but FU Arbalesters wonât do. At maximum, BBC could be an acceptable response for archers in a very situational way (fast im in arena). Try to counter archers with turks in amy open map. And again, BBC are waaaay easier to dodge than mangonels. Any average player could do it 2 out of 3 times
Longbows and chukos can kill paladins pretty well, GC can do it to, but they still need to outnumber them.
Never tried vs letis, but Vs knights are a struggle.
I think that these two video can prove my point here about italians on full land and the GC problem (especially the first one).
Almost all civs got a lot more before and/or after that.
Mongols, franks, huns, chinese, aztec, mayans, celts, Persians (to name some) all age up faster than Italians and with more resources, Magyars, berbers, teutons, bizzantines and slavs got more resources, and a lot of them have bonus that make their knights/archers better than yours.
You just named all top tier civs accidentally. 11
Primacy effect and some bias, but I can go on:
Britons, incas, cumans, tartars, lithuanians, malians, etiopians, saracen, Spanish, goth (now), koreans, japanese, kmer, Malay, Burmese, vietnamises, vikings.
No way it happens, because Arambai + 1 amour upgrade - some attack = a worse conq that costs wood.
Regarding the whole archer problem, Howdah eles are still a super good arrow sponge, and going Cavalier as Burmese isnât a bad idea either. Siege engineer onagers are an option too. Lastly, a big enough mass of Arambai should have no problem fighting archer, as their innacuracy prevents overkill and can allow them to kill several archers at once. Turks have siege rams, and their skirms are about as effective as Frank ones. Burmese ones are better than both of these thanks to the better range.
So in the first one he concludes that he needed pikes as a meatshield (and not that it was unwinnable) and the second one is what happens:
when youâre up against Mongols on a hunt map
what happens when youâre an archer civ and the enemy pushes with siege rams
So nothing particular to note, really.
Tbh Spanish only got faster building speed to compete with Italian, and genoese Xbow counter conqs. Same for Korean: faster stone mining and saving like 4 wood per archer wonât help them, and skirms genoese xbows should counter war wagons. Furthermore many of these civs are at best slightly advantaged. For instance the Italian bonus is way easier to use than the Malay one. And itâs only open maps we are discussing. Closer maps will narrow the gap between Italian and closer competitors.
1 Like
I agree with you cactus
1 Like
He also states that âmaybe with like 40 of them they can be effectiveâ. I think I never see 40 GC, not even in the campaigns, because I would probably die of old age first.
Well, yes Mongol were clearly advanced, but he was able to reach imp, and to build a castle, still he doesnât even think to go GC, because he knew that he could never make a sufficient number of them in time.
Thatâs my complain, because of this painfully long TT you almost never see them online.
So more working time around all the game.
More wood saved in total means more farms, and food, it can snowball fast.
On full land, at beast they are at pair, also war wagon can be trained in less time, and so they can outproduce the GC.
He was fighing with 14 genoese crosbows against konniks but donât forget konniks had the hill advantage wich made those 14 GC 25% less efficient.
14 GC downhill are about the same as 10 or 11 GC which is not so many of them.
With those same 14 GC in the same level of terrain elevation, they can one shot those konniks.
I just canât say thats a bad unit.
Actually elite war wagon takes more time to produce than genoese crosbows. But i agree that war wagons are great. There was even some people out there saying koreans are weak now 11.