If you have gold, condos are better…but expensive on the long run. Otherwise it’s either pikes or hussars depending on which units you are facing.
The arbs would take 3.08 instead 2.86, so not that big of a deal.
I don’t dislike +1MA, but it is more important and impactful +1PA.
Yeah probably condos are better in a blitzkrieg strategy, hussars are more cost effective in the long run.
Going down with 4 hits instead of 3 could make the difference, especially if used in conjuction with archer stacking. Still, as I said, it’s not a very consistent upgrade and I would rather have the +1 PA bonus acting on a wider range of units. Especially having feudal skirms with +1 PA could be very good for defending against archers, it could allow you to delay your blacksmith for example.
My arguments was thay if the arbs lack even 1 HP they will still go down with 3 hits, so the difference it’s not that big of a deal.
While +1 PA means that an arbs can take 8 shots from a skirms instead of 6.6, and 10 instead of 8 from another FU arb.
To me between the MA and the PA, the PA have the bigger effect on the arbs, so take the priority.
True, but even just archers with +1PA (or getting the armor sooner) would make them so much better at raiding, since they would be more difficult to counter with skirms.
Definetly, +1PA on archer-line and skyrms is better than +1/1 PA on archer-line
The main advantage I see is for archer fights. Still it is not a smart move camping under skyrms/building fire.
I am wondering if +1PA for both units is balanced.
Even for archers-skirms fights, since in feudal +1PA or out-tech you enemy gives you a huge advantage.
Italians had +1 PA skirms with pavise, this e though would be stronger since it would affect skirms since feudal and it would be free.
I’m not sure I follow what you are saying. A normal FU arb (40 hp) takes 3 hits from a FU paladin (18-3)*3=45 damage. A 5 MA arbs takes instead (18-5)*3=39 damage in 3 hits, thus needing an additional hit. This means that the buffed arbs would live significantly longer and continue to dish out damage in the meanwhile. Are they going to be good against paladins? Of course not, but they would be countered less harshly.
Again, how effective MA is depends from case to case and even with +2 it often does not make a difference. I would very much prefer +1PA to a wider range of units, since it’s a more versatile bonus.
I was comparing FU arbs with pavise (so 4MA, 18-4) with hypothetical FU arbs with pavise +1MA (so 5MA, 18-5).
Since we already have the first, between the 2, the difference isn’t that big, it nearly 1 hit more, but if the arbs is already wounded even BY few HP, then it’s the same.
One thing is discussing on what bonus is stronger. Probably +1PA for both is better than 1/1 for archers only.
The other issue is if it is balanced. I mean, is +1PA for both archers and skyrms too much? If so, is +1/1 armor for archers too much? If so, +1PA for archers seems the way to go…
No, that’s just a bit more than +1PA.
It could be that archers get their +1 in feudal, and skirms get it in castle.
I don’t really think +1PA to skirms is too strong. I would go for +1PA to all archery range units + GCs. Also, I think CAs should be removed from the italian tech tree, they really make no sense there, even more from a historical perspective.
Having the base one without TR and the heavy upgrade is almost equivalent imo
Maybe a +1 PA to archery range units makes sense…
It could be too strong in feudal, but in castle it is ok.
They can be of use time to time, but if their removal is balanced by a sensible buff to their foot archers. However, the only civ that don’t have the castle age CA are the meso civs.
That’s a bit trickier…
What? Italians have TR… maybe you mean PT?
Yeah sorry, I mean PT
Tatoh won an Italians mirror with Cav Archers. They are a decent surprise unit, when unexpected.
I have won multiple games as Goths, by going HCA when the opponent expect Infantry, and just snipe Vills until his economy goes to crap.
Almost no one prepares Skirms or Camels against Goths, so it has a surprise effect. You can do a similar tactic with Italians.
Yes but against Italians it’s most likely that the enemy prepared skirms.
Yes they can be useful, but it’s that game out 100 that you can pull that off.
It just invalidates fletching without having to invest in padded archer armor, feudal archers are hard countered by skirms anyway. Should have no effect in skirm vs skirm either
Oh I know that they can be situationally good even without HCA and parthian tactics, at least in castle age. I was just thinking that they may be too strong in castle if they end up getting extra pierce armor, which is also the tatar UT.
You can make it as foot archers, not a big deal