Indians Unique Units

I read the patch notes and understand what they mean. Dropping food at docks actually makes indian less strong in comparison to all other civs, just like how adding supplies tech nerfs goths by giving everyone else cheap infantry. I’m interested in seeing what role Indians will now have on the pro scene. I doubt they will be picked often for fisherman friendly maps.

EA just feels like it has no role in the army. I hope they add some mechanic or balance it to worth making.

1 Like

The thing is that earlier with the bonus, the bonus wasn’t as good as it would now be because the villager spent so much time on walking, now it will potentially be spending less time on walking so the actual gathering bonus has a larger effect.

EA does need a buff indeed. Hopefully fiddling with its stats (like fire rate) or cost, instead of gimmicky mechanics.

I mean you could say that about a lot of things in the game too. Vikings. Chinese. Let’s not forget about all the missing civs who aren’t included that were around in the aoe2 timeline.

Also frankish throwing Axeman and Celtic woad raiders are pre dark age units. Should we remove those and replace them?

Aoe has never been a historical simulation.

1 Like

85 food and 70 gold for the same unit as current? Yeah I still wouldn’t invest into it

1 Like

you missed the part where i said

imagine if they received like half damage from skirmishers and pikes?

they aren’t supposed to be an anti archer. they fill a role right now to be more like a tank for the more flimsy archers behind them. best way to help that is to reduce damage they take.

As an Indian i don’t think Indian civilization in aoe2 looks Indians. Historically speaking what is Indians known for? Elephants and Archers.

India is all about Elephants. Our wars, our religious festivals( even to this day) is full of elephants. Elephants are like their sons and daughters to Indian families. Some times cruel things are done to wild elephants in India. Anyway that’s a different topic. My point is that Indians are obsessed with elephants. We were the first to use elephants exclusively. Even Alexander the great was afraid of Indian Battle elephants. So please, Indians deserve elephants more than any other civ.

Also India is known for archers. Our mythologies, history, childhood memories are all linked with archery. Even our gods have bows and arrows. Even against the British empire Indians mostly fought with Infantry and bows. So Please give arbalest to Indians.

Frankly speaking Indians does not deserve Imperial camels. Only 10 percent of Indian subcontinent was desert there only we use camels. Indian armies exclusively used knights. Not as heavily armored as European knights more like a tarkan i would say. Also Indians were not that good at hand cannoneers. The sultans like mughal sultans mainly used bombard towers and bombard canons rather than hand canoneers. They used cavalry and cavalry archers to gain upper hand against the native Indians. What the developers has done with Indian civ is that Indians are like An Arab-Turkish mix. We are friends with the arabs, we are more like brothers. But Indians are more like South East Asian nations, Like the Vietnamese or Burmese.

Also India is a land to great many religions like Budhism, Hinduism, Sikhism, Jainism etc. So It would be great if Indians got great monks like aztecs or saracens.

Remove Imperial camels and hand canoneers. Give Arbalest and Battle elephants to Indians. As elephant archer is useless, may be add a medium cavalry like tarkan as a unique unit. Devs we don’t want Indians to be an over powererd civilisation, But indians should be like Indians. Someone playing this game may think, “oh! Indians are like arabs, with camels and all”. No offense to arabs. But India has its own identity. Also Manipur is a state in India. Why would Burmese get a tech called Manipur cavalry. Someone must sue Microsoft for butchering Indians like this.

In the game, i would say vietnamese is the closest to an actual medeival Indian civilisation. Please make Indian civ in aoe2 llike Indians. It makes me sad to say this i never play as Indians in aoe2, it doesn’t feel like Indians.

1 Like

Thanks man. EA is useless.

1 Like

Please keep discussion on-topic and centered around the Indians unique units. If you would like to discuss the unique units of another civilization, please create another topic.

2 Likes

I think that they’re actually not a bad unit, they just have a simple flaw.

First off, to show that they’re not actually a bad unit, observe the following scenario.

Firstly, we have a simple setup: 45 Hand Cannoneers vs 30 Mayan Arbalesters and 15 Elite Skirmishers.

Now, the results: The Mayans convincingly win, with very little contest.

Now, we make a modification: add three Elite Elephant Archers, but remove Twelve hand cannons. This is twice the resources as the cost of the elephants!

Results? The numbers switch dramatically. The Indians only lose three hand cannons, and don’t lose a single elephant!


The clear purpose for Elephant Archers is to be a front-line tank. Their short range means they automatically take the front line and automatically tank a huge amount of enemy fire, almost like battering rams, except faster and healable by monks.

The problem? It’s simple. Their upgrade cost.

As you can see from my above example, even in combo huge numbers of other units, you’re not going to want more than a handful of Elephant Archers. But the upgrade from normal to elite elephant archers costs 1000 food and 800 gold! Even worse, this upgrade gives them just 50 health and 1 attack!

For this upgrade to be cost effective at its current cost/benefit, the player would need to plan on producing fifty-six elephant archers! That’s ridiculous, and completely contrary to their apparent purpose.

So my proposal is simple. Reduce the Elite Elephant Archer upgrade cost. Take it down to something like 300 food and 250 gold. Sure, it’s crazy low, but honestly not insanely low given you’re never going to be making more than a handful of them.

Because EAs are an anti-archer unit, by virtue of having both a lot of Pierce Armour, and a huge HP pool, specially for a ranged unit.

EAs are not bad, in fact, they are specially good against Mass Archers, which a lot of people complain about.

Exactly, but you will rather make Camel or Hussars for this role, because of efficiency.

They actually are not that expensive to upgrade, as far as Elite UU upgrades go.

Most Elite UU upgrades have the same issue, which is why UUs are usually rarely seen in Imperial Age armies, unless they are really spammable (Huskarl, Shotel Warrior) or really good (Mangudai, Longbowman).

Camels are terrible at being an archer tank, they’ve got zero base pierce armor. Hussars are slightly better, but per-cost still offer far less than Elephant Archers do. Plus, they don’t automatically take the ideal position to tank in the way Elephant Archers do.

They are if you consider the number of them you’re going to use. When you upgrade into a normal elite UU, you’re planning on using them for the majority of your army, or at least a significant percentage of it. Even in an ideal scenario, you’re not going to want more than maybe 5% of your army to be Elephant Archers.

1 Like

Hussars are disposable as Indians, as your Castle Age boom will see you spamming Farms left and right, so you can always pad out your frontline with a lot of Hussars, very quickly.

Most UUs have the same issue. If you drop the EEA upgrade price vey low, then all of a sudden you will have to do the same for a whole lot of other UUs, like Catphracts and TKs, as they have the exact same issue; good but expensive.

The difference is that those units are meant to be used as the majority of their army.

I want to achieve the same cost proportion per unit for Indians as other civs. For example, Byzantines might make 40 Elite Cataphracts at a time. By contrast, Indians will only make maybe 8 Elite Elephant Archers.

Therefore, the Indian Elite Upgrade should be around 1/5th the cost of the Byzantine Elite Upgrade.

Savvy?

1 Like

No they are not, as they are not that easy to muster. They are specialists that are overshadowed by other units in their own civ’s Tech Tree, except in very specific circumstances.

TKs can go against Paladins better than Champions.
Cataphracts are uncountered by Halberdiers or Heavy Camels.
Bot are just very situational, and easily replaced with other units that are availbale to Teutons and Byzantines.

TKs are meant to be the majority of the army? how? they are terrible as the core of an army. they are a very good siege guard though, against melee units.

that’s not the way stuff works though. by that logic, the crossbowmen tech should be very expensive, and the ranged bs attack upgrades should be far more expensive then the melee attack upgrades.

1 Like

I mean, Teutonic Knights are a terrible example, they’re not good at anything.

Cataphracts are a better example, they’re totally good, they’re just expensive to tech into, but once you do tech into them, you can absolutely make them the majority of your army.

only after you invest in all the blacksmith upgrades, husbandry, and 2600 food and 1400 gold into the elite upgrade and logistica.

1 Like

They are as relevant as Elephant Archers, and a very apt example.

Both are easily overshadowed by units that share theor category: Champions and Cav Archers.

By the time you actually tech into Elite Catas and Logistica, you either lost the game, or you are on Trash Wars and have no Gold to make 40 Catas anyway.
Nor would you, since you have efficient Trash as Byz.

The Crossbow upgrade is expensive. It’s way costlier than the Longsword upgrade, for example. It perfectly fits my point.

Sure, but those are contrasted with the upgrade cost for Paladins, not with the upgrade cost for Battering Rams, which is basically the role Elephant Archers fill.

Which is why Cataphracts are typically used in team game situations.

Either way, it has nothing to do with my point, because once you achieve that scenario, they become perfectly viable, and in fact very hard to counter, despite their cost. Their upgrade cost does eventually become worth it.

Because you make lots of them, and the upgrade cost gets diluted.

But you’re never going to make even the same order of magnitude of Elephant Archers, so the upgrade cost never gets diluted.

Which is why the upgrade cost should be reduced.

EAs are more like a mix between Towers and Skirmishers, rather than Rams. The only attribute they have even relative to Rams, is the bonus damage to buildings.

Team Games are a weak argument. Almost everything is viable in Team Games, by virtue of Trade.
Sure, some options are stronger than others, but you almost never see them in 1v1, for which they are balanced around.

If you do that, you will have to do it for a lot of other UUs.