I really find this unit is strong enough with it’s rapid fire and mobility, and their bonus vs siege is really tough. Well in general i don’t want to nerf the Mangudai in all sides, but i really think their bonus vs siege shouldn’t access to trebouchets, they are super strong and can ez snipe your trebs and kill them so fast, it is not a fair fight at all.
The Mangudai have +3 vs siege, and the elite one have +5, i don’t mind to keep it, but against trebs i think it should be +1 and i even don’t think if we reduced their attack bonus vs siege from 3 to 2 and 5 to 4 (elite) will be that bad in general, but at least now lets stick with removing their bonus against trebs and reducing it against rams too.
I guess mangudai hurts trebs too much so “it must be nerfed”.
This is not how balance patch works.
I don’t know what option mongol would have if mangudai is nerfed. Don’t tell me cav archer. They are mediocre in imp, and can get killed by even Japanese cav archer.
It is true a Mongol castle with a bunch of FU elite mangudai defending it must be like the single toughest one to bring down in the game. Deciding whether Mangudai should be nerfed or not is quite hard however.
Mangudai are definitely very strong, probably the best unique unit in the game. Trebuchets costs 200w, 200g, so even if the Mongol player trade 3 mangudais for a treb, it’s pretty worth. Bombard Cannons would be a even better trade. However, I think Mongols don’t really have strong civ bonuses, so they almost exclusively depend on the Mangudai. Thus, if they get a nerf on their Mangudai, they should receive a buff elsewhere to make up for it. One solution would be to reduce Mangudai bonus vs siege, but give them the last archer armor upgrade to compensate.
No, it’s not. If it is a treb war, you are also losing the castle next because your treb got sniped. If you are just pushing against a castle, you need to make your siege again and bring it there again. It’s a major setback, no matter how you look at it.
Mangudais have already 12 damage when FU upgraded, they fire fast and move fast. Their current bonus against siege is just excessively strong, it should be toned down a bit. It’s not like mongols lack good siege to deal with enemy siege anyway.
They still had an attack bonus against the ram armour class, which unpacked trebuchets do have so it was still easy to defend your castle with mangudai.
I think the base attack of Mangdai be nerfed by 1 so that it is on even footing with Camel Archers. Mangudai attack much faster while Camel Archers have +1 attack.
I am comparing them generally, not head-to-head.
However, a nerf of 1 attack doesn’t help against Trebuchets.
i think mongols should get a buff as civ and mangudai need to be nerf to hell. in reality mongols only have one strong option which is mangudai.
mongol players always going to mangudai(sometimes combo scout-line for kill skirms which one only counter to mangudai ). very simplex and idiotic playstyle
Mongols have very strong late game options (at least before the game degenerates in a trash war), with the mangudai being the center piece of their composition. They are also the best civs in terms of sheer mobility of their army.
I think it’s fine to leave the mangudai base stats untouched, it’s the bonus against siege which can be overbearing. It’s fine against rams, but when they also wreck onagers, which are supposed to be a hard counter to CAs, it just feels wrong to me. It’s also way too easy to snipe trebs like that. I would rather reduce the bonus damage against siege (except rams) and give mongols some help where they actually need it, which actually the mid-game.
If instead of having hunters collect food 40% faster they had a more reasonable ~15% faster (in line with other civ food bonii) and an additional “hunt lasts 50% longer” (or whatever number keeps them balanced) I think mongols would be a better rounded civ. This would also reduce the powerspike from hunt in hunt-rich maps.
Mongols is surely strong civ. But not the best civ in the game. It have so many strong point but also have weaknesses such as mid-game, too much relying on hunt, bad at trash war.
It seems like “Huskarls counter archers so hard is wrong because archers are supposed to counter infantry” Or Cataphract wreck halbs and Camel is wrong because they are supposed to counter Cavarly" I mean, isn’t it purpose of many UUs? Introduce some other mechanics in the game. Make UU just other version of generic unit is not a right move in my opinion. Difference between civs become too obscure in this way.
Also, Chu Ko Nu and Kipchaks already better vs Rams than Mangudai. Bonus damage against seige is selling point of mangudai and make them different from HCA. And sniping trebs by mangudai is not that easy if opponent play properly. Mangudai is strong but Fragile. only 4PA with lacking last armor upgrade and almost 2 shot by Halbs when not properly microed. If huge numbers of Halbs are protecting trebs, mongols player should trade like 15-20 mangudai with just 3 trebs.
It is hard to evaluate the effect. The crazy fast feudal of mongol would be slower but hunt itself is 2nd fastest food source. It gives less powerspike but more consistent bonus. But I don’t like changing civ mechanics. Sure mongol rely on fastest hunt but it almost expires in Dark age and most civ ahead in mongol if mongol player not attack early using their powerspike. I mean, it is already balanced in this way and why we need change? I don’t think changing economy and powerspike of all civs more similarly is right move.
I suggest to remove their bonus completely against trebs and keep their bonus against normal siege except rams, i think their bonus against rams should be less than 2
). very simplex and idiotic playstyle