Kipchaks lost their identity

It’s not exactly but it’s around it, also taking armor into consideration just makes things look even worse, especially with the lack of bracers.
I did testings in the editor, units like paladins take straight up 25% less damage each hit while more fragile units like arbalests take 15% less damage (like I said before, GIVE OR TAKE -20% damage)

Yes atk speed doesn’t matter in that specific situation, but unless u’re playing against AI or against a very stubborn player they WILL transition out of melee and will start making ranged units that counter kipchaks, you also can’t assume u’ll always be able to solve everything by microing back.
And even so, their micro back potential is still nerfed regardless. It still has potential, but it’s not super op like before. Like this guy said

Still usefull? Yes. As good as before? Far from it.
Also the more u micro back the more map control u lose, and I think I don’t need to explain why it’s bad to lose map control. And let’s say u wanna try and atk their base, how do u expect to take down castles by microing back? sooner or later u’ll need trebuchets or rams to take those down, and u’ll need to protect them. When that happens, that RoF nerf will start kicking in real hard. Even if u have meat shield at front kipchaks will still do much worse than be4.

Not trying to say they’re too weak, just much weaker than before. Comparing them to how they were and comparing them to other units are completely different things.
And I still feel like somewhere in the ladder people have too much resource stockpiled and unable to create kipchaks fast enough, so CA would end up being a better choice for them, maybe even most of the times.

2+ CA without bracer > 1 kipchak.

You don’t need to upgrade both of them, just upgrade the one u’re making the most. Why only have 30 CA when u can have 30 CA +5 kipchaks? Like winterstarcraft says, more sh** counters less sh**

…just wow. That’s not good strat.

ok so now 30 CA is stronger than 30 CA + 5 kipchaks. nice math

Am I arguing with a child? It would be better to take the 5 non-elite kipchaks and just put them in CA if you’ve gone heavy CA. Your concept of math befuddles me if you can’t understand the cost benefit there.

Not to mention that the difference in costs alone gives you a reason to prioritize kipchak instead of CA. 35 gold vs 60 gold? And the elite upgrade requires no gold. As long as you can keep your Castles up, you should still always go kipchak with Cumans if you’re going a cav archer route. That’s 14 extra kipchaks just from the Heavy CA upgrade from gold alone.

I’m talking abt HOW FAST THE UNITS CAN BE MADE, not HOW COST EFFECTIVE THEY ARE
You don’t even know what I’m talking abt.
I’m saying that if the person has a lot of resource stockpiled and is going for CA (again, too many resources stockpiled), then in the time they make 30 CA they could also make some kipchaks.
I’m talking abt how Steppe Husbandry can start making CA feel stronger, if u’re just gonna completely ignore this and just keep saying “oh but kipchaks are more cost effective” then idk why u’re even here. Ik and it’s more than clear kipchaks are more cost effective, the whole point of what I’m talking abt is STEPPE HUSBANDRY.

The original argument you responded to from me was about how inefficient cost-wise it is to upgrade two types of CA. If you want to change the parameters of the argument to a hypothetical where the player has a huge stockpile, perhaps your teacher will let you do that, I can’t answer that for you.

And for the record, putting your argument in caps does nothing to make it more effective. It merely makes it seem as though you can’t construe it properly with your words. :slight_smile:

That in the situation of huge stockpile + strenght in numbers. If the player is making CA and has some spare resources for kipchaks, then he can just add some. You were taking my main point out of context and trying to point a flaw that can be simply solved by only making one of the upgrades. Still, all of that depends on the map and how much the player’s been affording and collecting.

No, it’s for something called emphasis. Do I need to explain that as well?

80 wood 120 gold > 60 wood 35 gold…SURPRISE!!!

we know what you’re talking about, but what we’re trying to get to you is that it so much less important than you are trying to make it.

Let’s think about a few things:

  1. Bracer is the single most important upgrade for any ranged unit that benefits from it. It is HUGE.
  2. CA are one of the most reliant units on upgrades in the game

Therefore Cuman CA are garbage. They are not even close to being good, having no bonus and lacking a crucial upgrade. You will never see them in any competitive match with good players involved. They are that bad and I’m 100% sure about that.
Kipchak is the idea of a broken unit that is (supposed to be) balanced by not having that crucial upgrade. Normal CA just suffer from that lack and are useless in probably every situation (useless in the sense of: there is always a better option)

You are talking about a huge stockpile of ressources - that still doesn’t enable you to go for a terrible unit, just because it produces fast. Because most likely your opponent will go for a good unit and then your ressources run out first unless you have a big advantage anyway.
The only situation CA make sense for Cumans is if you have tons of ressources, are maxed out on population, take a fight and lose most of your army and for whatever reason need a big army of ranged units (and melee doesn’t do the job, which is rare) and you are not able to buy yourself another 2-3 minutes of time and you have 5+ Archery Ranges anyway…and you have the Heavy CA upgrade ready, which you should not, because the unit is trash for Cumans. If ever that happens in like 1/200 games or something like that. I know I wrote 1/10 above, but I didn’t think about Cuman CA not having Bracer at that point.

To add to that: in those situations with a ton of ressources, where it’s not so much about cost, the most important thing is not production time but pop efficiency. Now lets get another thing to you: Both Kipchak and Cuman CA (without Bracer!!!) suck at pop efficiency. So you probably would go for neither of them in that situation, bur rather for Paladin, Siege Onager, Siege Ram etc. (don’t know about Steppe Lancer, depends on how good they are now in huge masses).
If you have the time to micro maybe you still go for Kipchak…but I promise you Cuman CA just don’t matter. And please don’t bring up situations where you found them to be decent now, unless it was in a competitive high level game - in lower level games you can do whatever you want and possibly get away with it or even get the idea that what you did was actually good.

So in short: We get what you’re talking about, there are just a lot of wrong things about the arguments…

Congrats, u just contradicted urself.

That’s the point I’m trying to make, this is a move I feel like could be used, let’s say u’re at the end of an engagement and then both players lost a huge amount of their armies, one could try and pull off a ton of CA be4 the opponent could mass enough good units to counter them. This would need to be a game winning move, or else if the opponent survive they’ll be in a big advantage. You strike while they can’t do much abt it and then you just quickly steam roll. Fail to win the game there? U’ll be the one in a bad spot. It’s pretty much a matter of keeping the pressure when they’re at their weakest.
Also if steppe husbandry made people transition out of SL when they were still OP and go for hussars, then CA could still potentially have some extra value, even without bracer, even if not by a lot.

Well, only if you ignore the rest of my post and the point I’m trying to make (which you didn’t, but then there’s no need for such a pointless comment…)

Yes, i see what you mean, but I think you are overestimating the possible use by a lot. Because, as you said, if the opponent get’s back on his feet you just did a terrible move and are stuck with a bad and expensive unit. You would need to be on top of his production buildings and in his economy - and even then you probably want better units. So it’s really just about a high pressure situation and a first attack wave you’re sending right after a fight.

So in 1vs1 this just does not matter at all, because you will never have the gold to invest into such a rare situation and you surely don’t want your gold to go into a subpar unit.

In teamgames (unlimited gold through trading) I can see the niche situation we’re talking about, but then there’s still a lot going against that:
The opponent will also have gold avalaible and therefoire it will be a lot easier for them to get some power units like Paladins or whatever out - and then already a small number should be enough to defend and buy time or even win against those bracerless CA.
Also you yourself have a pretty good lategame civ, so why would you want to invest into such a gamble?
Also there are other players who could join the battle and just laugh at your terrible CA.

I think the situation where it’s a good move is limited to teamgames only and even there it should be pretty rare. So yeah, might happen at some point, but not worth the discussion imo

Hmm I see your point about pop efficiency, but we have the exemple of Goths that make non pop-efficient units usable in a late game settings. With Steppe Husbandry, you get FU hussars and a unit that kill harbs much faster, so it’s defintely something to be careful about in balancing. Anyway the kipchack getting more situational as the game goes forward is fine, it’s still less situational that say, teutonic knights or elephant archers.

1 Like

Goth units are cheap though, CA cost 60 gold per unit. That’s a lot! You won’t spam that for long unlike Goths.
If Cumans had a discount like Goths in addition to their increased production speed I’d totally agree that it would be pretty strong - but they dont (which is good^^)

1 Like

Ooops I forgot the discount lol

1 Like

It doesn’t emphasize anything other than the limits of your vernacular.

And if all you want to argue about is situations that are rare and hypothetical in an actual match like someone having enough resources to research and train everything, there’s no point in discussing with you.

I agree that the “fast firing” part should be removed from their description as they no longer fire fast.

I disagree that they need any kind of buff (or at least not until they’ve been tested more in pro play).

1 Like

If there’s something limited here is ur internet knowledge.

We won’t get anywhere when all u do is put words on my mouth. All u’ve done so far is say how wrong I am by taking what I say out of context and putting words on my mouth, instead of comming with decent arguments u just try to twist my words, so yeah no point talking with u.

I’d say resources are a lot more important to pro players than bad ones like me.
I often have thousands of wood and food floating, pro players are far more effective with their resources.
In pro games there’s a lot of harrassment and denial of resources.
So the cost matters a lot more than how fast they can be created.

Ik, that’s y I’m saying it’s something situational (maybe even more if the opponent ends up denying stone and u only manage to make a single castle)