Or Hindustani extra range (even outranging FU crossbowmen) which means that not only will they shoot first (and depending on obstacles sometimes in impunity), but they also won’t the issue of moving around other units to get in range. So they are less penalised by scale.
A stealthy attack bonus.
The main problem with Italian is that they have really really good archers
Its hard tobjustify the transition to gunpowder outside of Arena
In general, HCs could use a buff (maybe a tech that Hindustanis would be missing)
I think over the patches hand cannons have increasingly distinguished themselves as a more attractive infantry range counter compared to foot archers. The next patch should reinforce this even further.
Not exactly sure why Italians needed this tech.
Even without any HC buffs, I’d like to see Hindustanis lose last archer armor and change the gunpowder bonus to +1/+2, so that their HC has generic armor while forcing ghulam as archer counter (as opposed to subpar skirms)
Hindustani Hand Cannoneers even have a hidden accuracy bonus.
They are more than 75% accurate at a distance of 7. Very OP considering the Hand Cannoneer bonuses of older civilizations.
Cost discounts tend to be a very strong bonus, as they allow for a larger army. However, they do tend to matter less once you’re at pop cap. So my experience with Italian’s gunpowder discount is that its useful for BBC (expensive unit that you usually only need a few of), useful for cannon galleons (similar reasoning there), but doesn’t do too much for hand cannons (who are usually limited by the 200 pop cap limit and have to compete with arbs and Gen-bows). That said, cheaper hand cannons is a strong bonus when combined with fast imp (is one reason Italian hand cannons are often a better choice than Italian condos for a fast imp).
I think Italian hand cannons have struggled to compete against Italians arbs and Gen-bows, even with the gunpowder discount. I think the new UT will improve the balance between the 3 units (unless the hand cannons end up too strong, which is a possibility)
Hindustanis losing the last archer armor in exchange for an additional pierce armor on the gunpowder bonus… sounds like an excellent adjustment to me. Weakens the hindustani post-imp a little (no issue there given how strong that is), but does make their hand cannons better in a early imp (which is fine - they likely wouldn’t have Shatagni researched at that point anyways)
That’s not because of a hidden accuracy bonus. That’s because “missed” shots will still sometimes end up hitting their targets. And it’s true for every civ, not just Hindustanis.
This.
HC’s high attack makes them better vs high pierce armor targets, but maxed arbs are generally the same or better than handcannons vs infantry.
The point of the comparison was to say that trying to micro ranged units against other ranged units over a 1 range difference and no attack delay is as impractical as trying to micro steppe lancers vs melee cavalry. I wasnt saying steppe lancers can be used that way - I was saying that microing jans over normal hc’s over the attack delay isnt a thing. The kind of micro you’re talking about needs either a bigger difference in range or an additional difference in speed.
That’s not because of a hidden accuracy bonus. That’s because “missed” shots will still sometimes end up hitting their targets. And it’s true for every civ, not just Hindustanis.
Handcannoneers lose/gain a fixed amount of accuracy depending on how far away the target is. Standard HC’s lose about 3.5% per tile (used to be 5%). It used to be that Shatagni was a double edged sword where adding tiles of range would reduce the accuracy by 3.5% for every tile added. In a similar vein, janissaries lose about 4% per tile.
There was a sort of hidden balance that at 7 range all handcannoeers would have a very similar accuracy.
Currently, it sets it so that hindustani HC’s have 75% accuracy at 9 range - so a drop of 2.8% per tile. As is, at a common range of 7:
Basic HC - 75%
Janissary - 69.3%
Statagni - 80.1%
How accuracy works in AoE2: each ranged attack has an accuracy value associated with it. For hand cannons, the number is 75%. For fire ships, the number is 0%. That percentage of shots will be directed towards the target. The remaining shots will instead be affected by attack dispersion - effectively a cone of potential projectories. How far away from the intended target the shot will end up landing will vary. Some shots will be max dispersion. Some will be more moderately dispersed. Some will see basically no dispersion, which often results in the “missed” attack hitting the target anyways. Missed shots will deal damage to the first enemy unit/building they run into (and is usually halved). The overall result is that a units listed accuracy is lower than the unit’s actual accuracy (especially at close range).
In advanced Genie Editor, Shatagni has 3 effects: increase range by 2, increase LOS by 2, and increase search radius by 2. No change listed to the accuracy value. No change to attack dispersion.
From what I’m seeing on your numbers, it appears that you’re using an experimental accuracy value for Janissaries and shatagni hand cannons, but not doing the same courtesy for generic hand cannons (instead using the listed accuracy value).
I’m using the on paper 75% for generic HC’s since they’re my control. Empirically, the given value of 75% accuracy holds, and numbers for jans/shatagni line up too.
What I want to know is why the projectile behavior after a shot HAS missed has to do with the likelyhood of missing in the first place.
Jesuchrist… I love how people like to judge on how this new UT will be OP without even seeing the clear numbers of it
Hand Cannoneers have 17 attack, and the pass-through damage will be just 3 damage (that’s reduced by armor), vs Infantry it will be 3.15.
If anything, this new UT already looks too overpriced with such weak effect, the better accuracy is again, another small bonus as well.
And make their Skirmishers weak vs Archers while giving them more PA to Bombard Cannons? No, just make Shatagni more expensive and that’s it.
Stronger than Portuguese gold discount and Arquebus? We have no data at all. Besides, how they compare is make HC vs Janissaries. I think the pass through damage will be matter more for melee units that walking in line, like infantry. How does pass through damage matters much for units that outrange HC? Besides, Italians already get arbalester to shoot janissaries down.
Italians gunpowder will be too OP while Turks gunpowder needs a buff 11.
I guess the description implies it should work like a ranged version of the ghulam, but wih only 15 % of the damage.
Which is very low and will only apply when the opponent is staking is units out-of combat.
From this it seems the impact will be barely noticable.
But ofc this is only if it does at is it implied, but maybe it isn’t.
It#s quite expensive for a tech that seems to have way less impact than the already applying discount.
The pass-trhough of melee units semms to be way more impactful in this game than of ranged units, cause if stacking is ever useful it’s for units with range against melee units. and then we even get a .15 multiplicator on it…
tbh i think the “discount” identity of italians needs to be thought over. The focus of italian states were usually way more on quality than quantity. The aging.up discount is fine, needs maybe a small tweak, but instead of the other discounts italians should probably instead get quality improvements which would fit both historically and in the context of the game as a timing focussed civ. In both regards as using these timings AND having the lategame pop efficiency as adaptive resurgence. As it is rn because of the general civ design, the gunpowder discount rarely ever comes to play actually - it’s just not fitting the civ concept.
If they behave like Chakrams, can see them being on OP side like old Chakrams
Not certain tho before release
What does the projectile behavior after a shot “misses” have to do with the likelyhood of missing? Well, for one thing, it explains why you have 69.3% accuracy for janissaries when their on-paper accuracy is 50% (65% for Elite)
Chakram throwers and scorpions are really powerful once massed up. Once they hit a critical mass, they destroy anything that comes within range, with little regard for how many units are charging at them. There’s a reason massed scorpions require onagers or BBCs to be dealt with. I don’t think ghulams have quite the same impact with their pass-through damage.
I find it pretty helpful for getting bombard cannons (which is a very useful and often essential unit). Also is nice for cannon galleons. hand cannons are less frequent, but still benefit significantly in fast imp scenarios (where BBCs also benefit significantly from the discount). But BBCs alone give the gunpowder discount significant use.
Its fun to think about and all the infantry talk got boring. Also, winged hussars and battle elephants also deal about 4.3 - 4.5 damage in a half tile, also reducible by armor. It matters in blob fights for melee units, so a ball of HC’s even a small boost will probably matter to infantry - and most critically against archers.
Nop, thats not how I tested the accuracy. Accuracy has a binary outcome - hit or miss. Secondary projectiles would be a dps calculation in blob fights. There’s no logical connection to the accuracy stat.
For my test, I took the mentioned units with all upgrades (elites, UTs, etc). The 69.3% for jans came from adding back the per tile accuracy step since they were firing at 7 tiles - the practical test (1 HC/jan shooting 1 war elephant) confirmed the theory with less than 5% error.