How to deal with kamayuks + Skirms with Huns?

I was Huns. I opened scouts he made like 4-5 spears in feudal just to defend and try to go castle age. I got 1 vil kill. Then I clicked up send a bunch of farmers to wood and gold and dropped 3 archery rangers on the way to castle and went full cav archers. I was sniping some vils doing a lot of harassing on his wood lines and Eco he went skirms and dropped down a castle. I started making more scouts + knights to deal with the skirms but he started massing kamayuks. He was also walled so harrasing wasn’t that easy. Soon we were imp he pushed out with a mass of skirms and Kamayuks death ball with a few trebs they where killing everything i had. I can’t think of any counter units to that army comp as Huns, maybe if I had onager? But huns dont get that.

1 Like

Siege rams + heavy cav archers + Hussar and make use of your mobility.

Skirms + Kamayuks are quite slow so they can’t spread out and defend from several angles. Use it to your advantage.


Honestly, like TriRem said, Siege Rams and Heavy Cav Archers will do best.

Even though Hun siege sucks, I would recommend trying Mangonels and/or Scorpions as well.

Sounds super micro intensive. There is no other counter eh? Would you say Incas is a pretty hard counter against Huns?

1 Like

yup, and Kamayuks have 6 pierce with couriers so its very hard with Cav archers too


Yeah it didn’t feel like the cav archers were doing anything to them, knights were melting to them too… It says they are weak against archers in the tech tree but Huns dont get arbalest, no onager either. It seems like a hard counter unless you got viper level micro with cav archers

having neither champion or gunpowder or good siege makes it worse.
I think denying and destroying castles to produce Kamayuks from is your best bet

1 Like

yeah sounds like a hard counter to huns, like goths to ethiopia, your micro will have to be even better than theirs for that ram+ hussar + CA to work it sounds like…

ESPECIALLY since inca vils are so incredibly hard to kill (get blacksmith upgrades) so even raiding will have less of an effect…

oh wait… just research atheism (hate that tech so much!! >.<)

but more seriously… just a theory… you might be able to catch them if you tech 2 hand swordsmen and keep it hidden from the enemy, fill the rams with them and then send em forward, obviously not expected for huns to be using em, and will hopelessly fail if he catches you and techs champions, but 2h swords should beat kamayaks en masse? will have to test this

1 Like

In what world do Goths hard counter Ethiopians ?

Ethiopians have the much better early game (assuming pre patch Goths, they are broken vs any civ in their current form) with extra resources per age, faster firing archers and free pikeman.

Even in post imp, Ethiopians are more than well equipped to deal with Goths. Shotels beat huskarls and can even keep up with the production, and faster firing arbalests are excellent vs Goths champions. Shotels + arbalests beats any combination of Goth Infantry, and on top of that Ethiopians have the far superior siege, specially extra blast damage SO and heavy scorps to deal with infantry.

Kamayuks kill even Japanese or Aztec champions in masse, so Huns 2hswords without the last armor will get absolutely slaughtered, it’s the absolutely the worst unit you could tech into.


hehe the number of times ive seen this assumption posted, ive had this discussion with a number of different players already.shotels do not beat huskarl, whoever strikes first wins AND shotels are more expensive. pure huskarls will beat any shotel+arb compostion per res spent.

a goth with multiple attack paths wont be killable with onagers on a cost basis(aka 1 onager shot isnt going to kill an army if we’re talking about equally matched ethiopian and goth players, already want to add here lots of people strawman the goth and assume he’ll send 1 large onager-killable horde) scorpions are weak vs huskarls

goths have BBC which hard counter the onagers.

wow look at that hey…

1 Like

Gonna agree here. I play Ethiopians a lot. They’re very strong IMO, and that seige is absolutely insane, but if Goths get a Castle and Anarchy it’s basically over. You have to rely on their very strong feudal push with archers to pin them down in the early game. If they get Huskarl, you need Imp arbalest to be able to take them down and stop them from hitting Imp themselves for elite Huskarl. If they get Elite, it’s GG. You don’t have a counter to their production. Scorpions won’t work, SO is strong but Huskarls are fast and they have BBC. You have better BBC, but the micro work involved for all those units is intense and the cost is SO high.

As for @SorryHaah, mass Scorpion would work well. You just need a meatshield in front.

Analyzing your situation, I think rams would have been a good idea the second you saw that castle. That castle was put up as a defensive measure, you had the military lead. An immediate siege workshop would have been the smart play IMO, take that Castle down asap so you can push the walls and eco.

Would you be comfortable sharing the recorded game?

1 Like

when i read this i was like “you are wrong, but let me check it”

and wow unsurprisingly… you are wrong… hahaha PER GOLD SPENT EVEN A HUN 2HAND SWORDSMAN BEATS THE KAMAYUK!! wow im so surprised… (ran tests in the editor, 30 militia line (including goths) vs 20 kamayuks)

I think he was thinking in equal numbers. Cost effectiveness is key here, though.

There are so many things wrong with this…

First off, don’t be that guy who constantly moves the goalposts so that he’s always “right.”
There was a dude like that in the buffing Vietnamese thread and he was insufferable. Even when proven to have made demonstrably false statements by multiple people, he would never concede a point, and he would always perform all kinds of mental gymnastics and data reframing, I suppose to protect his precious little ego. From what I’ve seen of your posts, I wouldn’t say you’re like that, as a matter of course, but statements like this certainly wade knee-deep into that territory.
The convention on these and all forums I know about, when talking about X unit beating Y unit is on a per-unit basis (e.g. pop effectiveness), unless stated otherwise. If you want to talk about cost-effectiveness, state it explicitly, as people have no reason to assume that’s what you’re talking about.

Secondly, your comparison/test solely on the basis of a unit’s gold cost, while not entirely useless, gives a very poor reflection of the value of Kamayuks in this matchup in an actual game, given that food makes the majority cost of both of these units. If you wanted to have a better comparison, you should have equalized for total resources.
Thirdly, and most hilariously, it seems clear that in your test you used what I call “spaghetti formation,” the go-to for most casual players “testing” a matchup in the scenario editor, but guaranteed to never be replicated in a real game. I’m guessing you made one, at most 2, very long columns of each unit, so that each unit faced off one-on-one vs its opponent, thus nullifying the advantage the Kamayuk would have had in any real situation.
I did that same test, even with the inflated 50% more Hun swordsmen (30), but I set the Inca formation of Kamayuks 4 wide by 5 deep (20) so that the Kamayuks could actually take advantage of their range. The result? The 20 Kamayuks slaughtered the 30 Hun 2H Swordsmen, with half of their army remaining (10). With minimal micro on the kamayuks (basically grouping them up tightly before the fight), you can come out of that fight with even more of your army alive (13+) No amount of Viper-esque micro on the Hun’s part could have reversed the situation, and the stacked formation is much more representative of what happens in a real game than the spaghetti formation. So yeah, Kamayuks wreck champs, and absolutely annihilate 2H swordsmen.

It goes both ways. They’re mutual counters, like hand cannon and huskarl, but the more of a mass and meat shield the ranged player has, the better he will do in the matchup (and this is even more true with DE melee pathing). Scorpions with a small meatshield can absolutely counter Huskarls.

On a per-unit basis, it goes either way, yes. In mass fights, Shotels have the edge due to their faster movement speed - there are tests going many years back, showing that Celt champions, in mass, regularly beat generic champions, despite being only very slightly faster. Mechanics like this will be lost on you if you do “one on one” tests or spaghetti tests and extrapolate the data. Shotels cost 7 more res than huskarls, so it’s not cost-effective over super long games, but they do well enough from Castle through early Imp. Ethiopians, like Mayans, will struggle against a mid-Imp Goth, but also like Mayans, they have plenty of opportunity to stop Goths from getting there.

1 Like

Off to go re-test the SL I guess 11

ROFL ok so according to this generic logic nothing beats elephats, since we only consider things in a per pop effectiveness… ill remember that (not)… i thought people were clever enough to assume this isnt a vacuum, and logically factor things that might sway the circumstances…

way to set up a straw man in the meantime :wink:

i had it 3 lines deep of kamayuks, with double line of 2h. now that ive seen 2h will beat kamayuks (well done for trying to find a way for countering them instead of just trying to prove how strong they are) we can look for ways to encourage the 2h to face off against the kamayuk, to give the hun some way of winning…

so if he had mangonels (even 1) to disrupt the formation, the 2handers could win?

kamayuks cost 90 total, 2hander, 65 total (wow i was SO far off comparing gold ratio) not 3:2 BUT 2.77:2 instead gosh… silly me, who would have thought food was that valuable post imperial…

leaves it at 27.7 to 20, also later game (when this death ball is becoming more threatening) food is far less valuable than gold as you well know, thus the initial non factoring of food.

Bless your heart, I’m not convinced that you know what a straw man is. For your edification:

This is a strawman; i.e. you’re “debunking” an argument that I never made. What I said was that considering fights on a per-unit basis was the default (e.g. most common, most easily understood) option unless stated otherwise. You’re responding as if I had said was the only option that should be considered, and conveniently ending your quote before I said:

Which should be common sense, and I think most of us, including @Walkop understand it intuitively. Obviously cost-effectiveness has an important place in the game, but if I were to say something like “Longswordsmen beat knights,” people will think I’m crazy and/or wrong unless I specifically state that I’m speaking with reference to cost-effectiveness, or gold-effectiveness, or the like.

So here we have escalation, which brings on its own host of problems. If the Hun has mangonels (which are awful BTW), what’s stopping the Inca from adding Onagers to snipe them? Or Eagles? Or monks with redemption? Or Slingers to better counter the 2H Swords? The bottom line is, the comparison of X unit versus Y loses its meaning and becomes a different ballgame when you add another unit line in, and it isn’t realistic to assume that only one side can add extra units. It also has no logical conclusion, as it enters the infinite counter loop.

The takeaway from my tests is that in real situations, Hun 2H swords do so badly against kamayuks, even on a cost basis, that it’s not worth trying to find some cute trick to optimize your engagements. You’re much better off using a different unit type to fight Incas. If you have enough crappy siege, then maybe 1 in 20 games the Inca player will be nice enough to perpetually stagger his kamayuks, or just send them 1 on 1 so that your 2H can do decently against them. There’s a reason Incas are/were in the top 3 by winrate, and I definitely favor them over Huns in lategame. Incas’ greatest weakness might be massed siege, which isn’t the Huns’ gimmick, so you have to use your mobility as Huns, as others have mentioned.


I love this idea. Might even try this in castle age before elite Kamayuks tech comes. Though I just remembered that the in game description on the tech tree says that Kamayuks are strong vs cavalry and infantry… Actually is this a typo? They don’t have any special hidden bonus vs cavalry.

Yeah I dont mind sharing the recorded game, how do i do that?

Your only option is two-handed, because cavarch die to both kamayuk and skirms. So two-handed + scorps while tarkans and ram raid enemy base. But Huns is weak af. They need heavy scorp and imperial skirm and incas need a 1 or 2 dmg nerf to the kamayuk. They are worth three halbs.

Kamayuk “Strong vs. cavalry and infantry. Weak vs. archers.” That is not the case with their adder melee range, 80hp and +6 pierce armor.