Why thank you for that valuable insight. In other news water is wet.
2 Likes
Yes it has some limitations. But also benefits you are not taking into account.
It still out ranges anti personnel artillery to do its job as a culverin. It is just not an anti culverin unit. But they are fairly equal because of the HP differences. and a siege ele can make that gap quickly and not have to set up giving them a chance to cancel each other out. If it had culverin range, it would dominate all Artillery with only skirms and dragoons as a counter.
Its real limitations are Vs civs with extra long range mortars like Ports and Japan which India has no counter to, and weaker as an anti ship counter as some ships can outrange it. (though it is fast and tanky)
So it does its job as a culverin, and unlike a culverin has added utility to take out buildings. So in that way with its speed and HP is an above average culverin. That is why they had to give it light cav tags, they would be far too strong. With a strong melee set up this range imbalance is not as noticeable since melee units will push faster into the enemy lines and the elephant has more room to run around. All ranged compositions there is more bumping and units forming pathing walls, and the enemy can also set up a ranged game with greater effect.
I like the siege ele, I think it is unique to India, and works well with their style. Which is fast advancing melee combat, so the siege ele can keep up instead of out pacing the pack time of mortars and culverins. They actually work much better this way.
5 Likes
They need less weaknesses, every unit in tge game counter it. Skirmishers shouldnt do it.
6 Likes
Even with the low resist it take a lot of skirm fire to actually kill it, (about the same amount of hits to kill a mortar, if your opponent is that desperate to kill arillery with skrims use that opportunity to kill units, this is also why a strong melee army upfront prevents enemy skirms from being too close and having to micro themselves out of harms way) and because it is so fast it can evade culverin as a counter. This means with the proper micro and control would not really have any counters. So it is important to that it has a cav tag. and light cav is what makes sense for it, (and somehow let dragoons counter too with x2)
For instance, lets say I make 7-10 of them for a side winded attack through walls. With mortars you get time to react and culverins if chosen for a defense would work because mortars are slow and have to set up. But since siege ele are so fast they can just shoot n run, and culverins do not work vs that kind of unit. Heavy cav always do well, as they should but its a bit abusive.
1 Like
Want to counter all of India units(and buildings)? Fully upgraded soldados with grenade launchers will take care of everything.
This is a hilariously cheesy counter to India. Hell if you have the generals nearby you can buff their attack and spam more soldados faster than India can train gurkhas.
1 Like
India in legacy always had a weakness to grenadiers. Because they are a heavy infantry and mahouts have a reduced multiplier vs them so they are really inefficient (65 damage for 6 pop slots, ouch!) . Same with Sowars (49 dmg for 2 pop slots.
Even though it may not seem like it again urumi were the best unit for them, since they will do about 94 DMG (plus AOE dmg) for 2 pop slots by the time grenadiers chuck a 40 dmg grenade.
tiger, Flail ele seem to be the thing to use for them now but I have not encountered Mexico. Which new civs are designed as OP for sales purposes. Artillery were never a good counter vs grenadiers either.
1 Like
Cavalry counter grenadiers but not soldados (they have bonus vs cav like every musketeer), cause tgis I would nerf melee attack of soldados if the grenadier launcher is sent (as double edge card)
2 Likes
sounds like an OP unit, needs a nerf like you described
Soldaros buffed have the same melee attack or round about I canât remember exactly. Plus they have an area of effect attack and a ranged attack. Urumi are stupidly outclassed. If enough soldaros are bunched together urumi donât even manage to get close to their front lines before dying. Flail eles are heavy cav so they dont work. Tigers also prove mediocre at best.
They are countered by artillery. The smaller pieces are more effective at it.
i thought it was like a buffed grenadier. Many civs do not have artillery so seems like that unit needs a nerf rather than an excuse to give every civ artillery.
as is the case with new civs, are OP at first then get classed down.
2 Likes
They already got their nerf. This is the post patch results I am talking about.
I am sure the unit is OP, how do other civs like aztecs, inca, or others handle this unit?
Was the nerf enough? how was it nerfed?
1 Like
Mexico had very very cheap revolt options which allowed them to endlessly revolt and get more and more buffs. Those have the appropriate penalty now so they canât endlessly revolt.
Bruh if you canât take the word of someone who actually plays the civ as his main whose word are you going to take someone who doesnât play it??
Keep in mind with asymetric balance, not all civs will have fair matchups.
It is hard to take your word because you do not fur trade and complain about resources, and use mahouts for anti artillery, which is just really inefficient. So no wonder you think the civ is bad. I do not even know why you like it. There have also been some other inconsistencies in your arguments. There are many other civs that suite your play style much better.
Peace.
3 Likes
Thatâs just bad game design then.
By all means donât take my word for anything experience it for yourself. But you havenât just like most of this peanut gallery.
Toodles
This game is awesomely designed. but it was not intended to have perfect balance for TR.
Like I have said I am all for appropriate buffs, but staying true to how the civ is meant to be played.
your argument that because Mexico has a unit with no other counter than artillery (bad unit design that needs nerf) that India should get cannons⊠well that means lakota, Aztec, Inca, also should get cannons, and its just a poor way to justify it.
Changes that should be made should be buffs and tweaks to what it already has.
When I can upgrade my RAM and play DE again I want something consistent to what I had already been accustomed to, not some strange new civ that turns India into a Euro civ.
1 Like
At the risk of repeating myself that is the stated goal of the devs.
The civ should mirror itâs historical basis as much as possible. Thatâs what I find attractive about this series. I am all for taking creative liberties but fantastical units donât endear a history buff like me at all. So you had enough technical expertise to attach a small canon on top of an elephant but not enough to have a bigger canon be pulled by an elephant? That seems so silly and farfetched.
Again while sticking to the same historical template if a civ lacks a foundational unit then make the other units cheaper, faster and better. That is the abcâs of basic game design.
If you actually cared about the historical accuracy of India, youâd be railing against every single aspect of the civ as they present it. The entire thing is a caricature of India of the time period, with bits of Mughal, Hindu, and British Raj elements thrown in specifically to appeal to internet history âbuffsâ.
If you want the civ redesigned, then say that, donât rail against the current design because you personally want them to play more like a European civ.
1 Like