Yea because at that time in aoe2 gunpowder units were wreckage. After our efforts devs heed our calls and buffed them perfectly. Also u are misleading my intentions . Because if you search little bit further then you can see my posts rejecting any typies of buffs to jans in aoe2 and i stated out that they can even erase paladins and arbalesters in equal numbers ( i also gave them proof videos about that)
Also what i propose wasn’t a buff it was a REWORK of them…Hand Cannoneer isn’t that sad. They are expensive and hard to counter type cool unit design.
1 Like
This is what jans supposed to HARD COUNTER where they barely do this against zero upgraded knights. Put them on civ orientated upgrade and see the results…Ofc results are there but u only share one-sided things because of ur own QUIRKS i can see.
So my little friend whatever you say doesnt change the fact…Arbaletier of Franks are AWESOME units…Longbowmen of Britons are PERFECT in design…Camel archers are GREAT on it …Mangudais have their good way…Javalin Throvers are AMAZING ! ! ! Strelets are maybe the best ranged unit …Chinese HC are ROCKING !!! And… Here we have fragile but expensive as &/%+ repairmen jannies with only tiny window where they barely shine if used with brainstorming micro and extreme military composition. IT IS NOT OK !
Also …Do i have to agree with you ??? When i dont am i became obsessive ?? If there is anything i am obsessive with it is what i want to say to high ground !..
I made too many calls about gunpowder units being so useless especially jannis…You know i stated out their being so sad with everything i can effort. Then thank to devs they buffed them in very positive way. This is how it works you know…Discussions are made for this. You can be mad at me i dont really care 
I want devs to heed my call.
After they buffed gunpowder units and drasticle bad elite jans with accuracy i revert my approach also i went against some ppl asking more buffs to it . (search it you will find )
After playing pup i stated out that ottomans and especially jans need huge buffs … Shnedier and ppl like him (like you too) immediately started to harras me with same kind of arguments…And you know what ? Ottos had their HUGE buffs…And recently Jans are fixed in positive way and they had slight buffs…In short i really care about what devs would think of …‘‘Jans should be more exciting unit’’ thats my point. ok?
u can keep posting videos about what jans barely counter …Why dont u put some videos how extremely they have been countered by all other units ? Because probably u guyz only care about ottos remainin with below %30 win rate maybe 11 . But i want them to be %45-55 thats it .
2 Likes
the ratio of life in proportion to its cost, with the manual gunner is 90 but in elite it exceeds 105, its damage ratio in proportion to its cost is 23.3, but it has 32 against cavalry, in elite they have 48 damage .
Other civilizations should produce crossbowmen against heavy cavalry but will lose against horsemen, Janissary can micromanage against horsemen, repair siege, production time 24 seconds, in practice patch PUP take less damage from archers.
The hand gunners are weak as shown in the video and the Janissary are in proportion to them, and ultimately who you need to convince is the devs not me.
1 Like
he is %100 right they need to be better when we look to other unique units you can see the unfairness
maybe we need to compare them to streltsy since they are a unique unit too
1 Like
If you look closely, you can see like 10 or more janissary shooting a spearmen and don’t kill him XD
2 Likes
its not 10 but 6 of them cant kill it 10 of them cant kill man at arms
In this forum If you say anything about these members dont like, you are obsesivve or you are vinrf. I dont enter the forum to see these guys posts but they are everywhere. I dont know why mods allow them. They think only they say true, they are beyond the pro player level or they are awesom but they dont. You are only a player right. I want to see good discussion not fanatic post of them. They are obsesive and they dont like to see what they dont think. . They want to Ottomans to have %10 win rate and Ottomans are built bad in the game.If Ottomans arent in the game, they dont care. They just want Byztines, Japanese, Koreans, Aztecs or other african and american tribes. If their favorite civ is built worse as Ottomans, they will open posts and whine every day. They blame vinrf to be fanatic but they are fanatic than virfs. You can see this their posts.
3 Likes
Like I’ve said may times before? If we can’t ALLOW objective facts and game data and top player OPINIONS to influence our ideas, how would we ever come to terms via discussion??
I see one of the concerns you dissenting viewers have is Ottomans is gonna have a really low win rate on the ladder? And i COULD agree this data (whatever it turns out to be) should also be considered among the discussion…
So why not we do this? Lets revisit this topic eith great force after 2 thousands 3 thousands + [Ottomans games jave been played? Then we can get ideas from aoe4world.com about matchup, and what skill levels get the best results out of the civ?
P.s. when i found out original PUP jans too bonus dmg from horsemen and mango, i didn’t hide that info? I shared it AND suggested they change it; the only thing that technically hasn’t made a difference is the mango shot bc 1.5 times 12 or 2.25 times 12 still both results in a 2 direct shots kills jans.
1 Like
Also your version of the jans is so strong that it jas no counter? It doesn’t take range dmg bonus? And it has natural melee armor? With the highest dps in castle with almsot standard range??
Why would you need any other unit except for minimal bodyblocking?
1 Like
they will cost acording to it obviously in my opinion for balance there must be 2 janissary gun techs one for castle age with +2 attack second is imperial with +3 attack then they may become decent i think
Do you know what was the imperial armory used for in history?
When you know nothing but think you know everything 
You will only see very few of them.Because in 3rd age only one building will spawn them and that is landmark.
Likewise they will be countered by CAVARLY at castle age because they dont have any attack bonus with that change. Also they will be very few in numbers. So they wont be abusing the 3rd age era. They are sure weaker then arbaleiter and royal knights. And you cant create them by ur own.Arbalaiter has nice dmg with bonuses at 40g cost.And have 6.5 range.
When it comes to 4th age … They have similar stats with HC so u can counter them in the same way.But they are more expensive then HC’s ( Have you really read that ? ) Also at imp age by visier point they can at least be created for very high cost. So allmost all units will be cost efficient against them. Dont you worry. You can outnumber them. And they have similar stats with HC and with upgrade they still has no bonus against light cavarly.
Imperial armory name could be changed and is easy. And it was for balance reasons son.
So you end up being a history teacher now ? Good. Yea what i write is pretty correct only achemis school is not that correct maybe but if you think of its incorrect then lets talk about spakhis.Weren’t they heavy cavarly ? LOL no man. I wont get into these. But at late era (4th age in game) anatolian people were too allowed to get in the ranks of Jannizars thats my point. If you don’t agree with that then probably its you who insults people with false claims . Yea i give it you back …Please read something serious then start writing about it.
No they were not, a basic history education is enough to know that. I assuming you’re living in turkey, didnt they teach you in school about timarli sipahis as provincial levies. Just googling a few pic doesn’t make you expert. You need to be sure before spreading false information. About insulting: you’re receiving same respect as you shown.
Yes they were. Dellis and akinjis were light cavalry.
‘’ Turkish pronunciation: [sipaːhi]) were professional cavalrymen deployed by the Seljuks,[1] and later two types of Ottoman cavalry corps, including the fief-holding provincial timarli sipahi, which constituted most of the army, and the regular kapikulu sipahi, palace troops. Other types of cavalry which were not regarded sipahi were the irregular akıncı (“raiders”). The sipahi formed their own distinctive social classes, and were notably in rivalry with the Janissaries, the elite corps of the Sultan.Enough mister knowing better then historians ?
It was also the title given to several cavalry units serving in the French and Italian colonial armies during the 19th and 20th centurie’’
I live in Hungary. They didn’t teach us full details but i checked many informations by google.
Who told ya that i just googled few pictures ?
You were first to post against me then i turned out not to be showing respect towards you now ? Get some help man.
I live in turkey, and they teach me all the details. So i’m trying to inform you. Sipahj is generic name for cav!!!
Kapikulu sipahi, we call them kapikulu askeri (also sipahi literally mans soldier) was heavy cav which you saw them armored in pictures. Deli (mad) cav, originally was delil (guide), because no army calls their corps mad was late era cav, you cant use them in early ages. Even in kapikulu sipahis, there was light cav and horse archer. Did you think whole cav army created by single type unit. Don’t try to teach me my history please.
You’re the obsessed one you should get help.
That doesn’t make you understand Ottos better then others. Turks were only a part of ottos.
Thx we have many historians and WIKI for that business not you !
Wiki doesn’t agree with you. In ottoman language suvarymen are generic name for cavalry not spiahis. Sipahis were used for ELITE cavalry forces of Ottoman army ( we call it heavy cavalry in game )
I didn’t say anything about it.
In Seljuk army akinji cavalry were used vastly which were light cavalry indeed.
Were you among them buddy? Dont be funny with it . Helding an arrow doesn’t make you light u know. Nearly all ottoman soldiers were carrying swords like all other civilisations so you dont call archers as archer with ur interesting approach at most xD 11
Nope i didnt say that…
Nah…You are way beyond being teached. Ottomans DOESN’T represent Turcos. Ottomans represent balcan slavs and serbians as professional soldiers as Jannizaros.Ottomans represent persian oriented ruling system. Ottomans represent Turkish style cavalry warfare and economic background…So Ottomans are history for most part of the eastern europre not only Turcos. As far as i know Turks were not accepted to ruling system of ottomans…So you shouldn’t personalize an empire to your own history.
Note: This is topic for jannizars if you want to have a personal argument you can send me direct messages rather then this. TY
Most ppl that play the game are NOT that intrigued by absolute historical accuracy; we’re more engaged by FUN and balanced gameplay
1 Like
How can you manage to be so damn wrong in every sentences Clearly you don’t know about history. I can’t spend my time to correct you, you even didn’t want to be corrected.
Just most nonsense ones:
All empires includes other minorities, that is how to become empire, you even don’t know what empire is. So we can call that british was only part of the british empire.
Anyone can check Sipahi - Wikipedia to see that you’re lying. Even the wiki is not a reliable source of history. And wtf is suvarymen. Did you mean suvari. Sipahi’s was provincial levies, after household corps founded, another sipahi class added to stationary army.
Is this information comes from the movies, lol.
Hahhahahahha
I know this topic was janisarries, but you re talking about history like you know about a thing, so i’m preventing the spread of the wrong informations for other users sake. Wouldn’t you fix me if i say hungarians were originally japanese.
1 Like
i’m not against that, just they shouldn’t call it accurate or historical fact to mislead others.