Kapikulu were the heavy cav. Functioned more as a royal guard sorta thing, but they had the plate/mail armor, barded horses, etc.
Timarli, were generalized in two groups. The Anatolian tamarli were light cav - pretty much the classic horse archer. They functioned like medium cav sometimes, but it was generally understood that that they did NOT do heavy cav things. The Balkan timarli were a proper medium cav - had mail and horse barding, no horse archery, and fought with lances and other melee weapons.
The sipahi in game is close enough to be the Balkan timarli sipahi with a reskin, but as is its very close to the deliler light cav.
Ah, well. The unique horsemen is good enough for me. As far as I care, the big problems are the numbers on the jans and a minor issue with an age 4 landmark.
I mostly agree with you. Also the light and heavy distinction in the game is not like in real life. Janissary was a heavy infantry but light in the game. Sipahis also have armor and helmet in the design.
The ratio of Jenisary with heavy cavalry is 3 for every 2 if I relate its damage to its cost it has a damage of 48 in castles and in imperial it has a damage of 72
Conclusion: unlike the crossbowmen, the Jenisary have a lot of damage against heavy cavalry but they are also effective against Horsemen (crossbowmen are very weak against Horsemen, light cavalry, although they micromanage), it is a unique damage of this civilization
yes they are counter to horseman do the health version of this math and against a normal unit you are definitly trying to make janissaries stay weak im understanding this from the things you do
streltsy have no armor or they repair the siege. On health, it’s relative to:116, but as I showed Jenisary has 48 damage, plus she has to pay the cost to get to imperial to use streltsy
look at the minute, the manual artillerymen did not kill even 1 jiente in equal resources
You found that jan are theorical better vs cavalry than streltsi, well it’s their role.
What everyone is claiming about jans it’s that they are too situational.
I will try to give an example: camel rider by abbasid is a very situational unit. It will perform well against cavalry, but it’s not worth it against other units.
The difference here is that camel rider is a unique unit that doesn’t replace horsemen or knight. If for example camel rider were replacing knights, the problem would be the same as jannisary replacing HC.
Me, and everyone that it’s saying they are trash, just think that it’s totally ok having jans as trash gunpowder units that can repair siege and protect it from cavalry, but then Ottos need normal HC. Crossbows aren’t enough effective in imperial when HC enters the battle, and jans are too situational, so you must choose between performing better against cavalry or perform better against armored units in general.
HC acts like a game breaker. They cost a lot of resources but they don’t follow the rock-paper-scissor mechanic. You can build HC and they will be effective against everything, but its cost is high and if you lose them replacing them is a huge pay. But jans right now just don’t have the option to break the mechanic.
Also, cost and effectivity of Jannisary are not well thought. Streltsi costs less gold and a bit more food, but it’s way better than Jans. Also, if Rus can have a version of HCs better than other civs and cheaper, why don’t ottos can have their own?
Well, the heavy cavalry is the strongest unit in the game and in the late game light cavalry spam is common because the food is free for the farms and they cost a few 20 wood, so at that point I see Jenisary very well
castle age janissaries become a problem for me they are so weak so im going to compare them to crossbows resource wise:
crossbow 80f 40g =120 res , 80 health , 14 max attack ,5 range , attack speed 2.15 (castle age)
janissary 60f 100g=160 res , 90 health , 16 max attack , 3.5 range , atttack speed 1.75 (castle age)
Health of janissary what it should be: 80x160/120=107
Attack of janissary what it should be: 14x160/120=19 jan has 1.75 attack speed so 19/2,15x1,75=16 it has 1,5 less range so we can make it 17
as everyone can see castle age janissary hould be like this
if we do the imperial verison it is:
janissary health:127 (normally 105)
janissary attack:20 again they have 1.5 less range but luckly they added janissary guns tech which give +3 damage
thats what it should be devs made the attack math but they forgot to give them health
please pass these and just do the math i asked you they kill cav but they take %50 more damage from ranged its a counter system we are talking about stats here
you want the Jenisary to be better than the crossbowman then it would not be necessary to produce crossbowmen and that type of game is not liked by the developers
crossbow is better against man at arms and they are not gonna be better they will be equal of them resource wise dont run away do the math i asked you to do
But why jannisary has to replace HC if their role is nothing similar to HC? Don’t you see the incongruence?
It´s like replace crossbows with zhu ge nu. Each unit has its role, you simply can’t replace a unit that has its own role with another that has another role.
Yes, it would be necessary because a crossbow costs 40 gold and a jan 100.
the tests are made in equal resources, for every 2 knights there are 3 Jenisary, show that it has 48 damage in castles and 72! in imperial, it is very good damage
janissary has 32 damage at castle 48 at imperial against knight and still it is good my problem is cost of them they need to be better for their cost you dont even know their damage you are talking here
