Correct. The monk idea is good - even historically :). 15% more speed, atonement before they could be converted, 15HP more with sanctity. That would be noticeably better but not too much. And maybe it would be easy to implement.
Iâve been suggesting that movement speed bonus and pierce armor bonus could be tied to elite upgrade. So nothing would be really changing the castle age version so I fail to see how they are becoming invincible in castle if nothing is changing in castle. Even their conversion resistance could be made stronger with the Elite upgrade. Not too strong, just stronger.
All bonuses and upgrades that give percentage bonuses, apply to the base state of the unit. It doesnât matter at which point you research the monk technologies for the aztecs, since monks base health is always still 30.
Edit: however I believe War Elephants have in their area of effect damage a modifier that depends on their total damage, so upgrades and trigger buffs affect that.
1 Like
Now comparing them to TK or elephant archers kinda pointless because they are never used at all but unlike mangudai or plumed archers I dont see them as very common say out of 10 games 7-8 times mongols or mayans go for those or at least try to go(for 1vs1) for chinese I m not saying they are not used at all but its more same level as britons with longbows they are used of course but not prioritized unlike mangudai or plumed archers or huskarls from I what saw so far.
From what I have seen I disagree definitly not as common as plumed archers in my opinion.They are common as longbows at the most for me no more no less.
Armor is useful but units it makes big difference vills,pikes -halbs,chu ko nu and kipchaks besides those siege rams always better choice(speed,attack vs buldings,HP).As for gold cost in imp food less valuable but even in terms of total resources they are roughly equal too.(for a overall better upgrade and its easier to put down siege workshop than castle) As for castle you always make at least one true but here is the problem in early imp there a lot stuff you must get from castle like conscription,treps,unique units or other unique tech depending your civ also falling behind treb prodcution is very important too.
Yes itâs only a situational upgrade but siege ram with ironclad might be op donât you think. >:D Ironclad also affects scorpion, onagers, the tower of wheels and trebs. I mean, if you give teutons siege ram, you need to remove ironclad, imo. Thatâs the actual point I was making, not that the ironcladded capped ram is better than a siege ram without ironclad overall.
Edit:
But they are still used nonetheless and the point still stands, in that specific situation, Chu Ko Nus are usually very good against rams, against teutonic ironcladded capped rams, not so much. :S
That is completely untrue. Percentage base techs/bonuses apply to the current stats and not the base stats.
For example, there used to be a bug with the archer bonus for Vietnamese when it was staggered to 10/15/20%. If you got bloodlines in feudal, you would end up with more HP on your CA than if you got it in imperial age. Itâs because the 5% multipliers for castle age and Imperial age would count the +20 HP of bloodlines and give +1 HP because of that.
(And btw these 5% multipliers arenât exactly 5%, they are 4.5454545% and 4.347826%. Thatâs because you need to multiply 1.1 by 1.0454545 to get 1.15, and similarly for 20%. Another evidence that multipliers apply to current and not base stats.)
2 Likes
Wow, I would of thought that for this specific reason it would have been done so they affect the base stats. Guess not then. Sounds so illogical to me.
Yep, same kind of idea with the Viking infantry HP bonus. You can see it at work if you use Triggers in the scenario editor to research ages out of order.
Iâm curious how they compensate for the Vietnamese bug you mentioned, as well as things like husbandry + sanctity on missionaries, maybe a different multiplier is used depending on the techs researched previously?
As for the TK, I really like the idea if it being affected by Sanctity and Fervor, although 115 hp + speed might be a bit much for the ETK. If that buff were to be applied maybe nerf its base hp to 90 before the tech.
Not quite as common as plumes, hence why I said âalmost.â The Chinese have a more open tech tree than the Mayans, as all 3 of their main unit lines are fairly strong, so their flexibility means they donât always go for CKNs to quite the same level as the Mayans go for plumes. However CKN is still a very strong option for Chinese, and itâs pretty common to see them, especially if a player has 2+ Castles. Almost the only times Chinese donât regularly try to go for CKNs is when the enemy has a strong mangonel line (and is making them). As for longbows, I donât know which pros youâre watching, but for Viper, Hera, etc, theyâre quite uncommon. Itâs not quite a meme unit, but itâs so much less common than Briton Arbs that massing them in a high level game is considered so noteworthy and unusual as to be a standout title for a video:
1 Like
For Vietnamese, the bonus has been changed to a flat 20% so that solves the issue.
For missionaries having bloodlines or not before sanctity, well itâs quite simple. Despite the description saying sanctity is a 1.5 multiplier, itâs actually just a simple flat +15 HP.
Exactly as I said.
Actually when he has 2 or more castles or he has upper hand viper actually goes for them which is same when he goes for chu ko nu for him playing chinese thats why I said to me its same as britons unique unit but mayans on the other hand for them its a go to strategy because its strong one yes chinese have more options than mayans overall compared to mayans they more feel like jack of all trades master to none at late game.Again I never said people doesnt go for chu ko nu at all but putting them same level as plumed archers or mangudai or huskarl doesnt make sense at all.
You did actually start with this opinion on the Chu Ko Nus, is why we even started having this conversation.
So what actually doesnât make sense, is calling Chu Ko Nus rare to begin with, calling them akin to mayans is much more closer to the truth.
Yeah, CKNâs strength doesnât rely too heavily on having huge masses of them, I seem to see them relatively often from chinese.
By contrast, Longbows NEED to have a critical mass to compensate for no thumb ring, which requires an economic advantage to pull off.
You may think like that I dont think chu ko nus on mayans level definitly.For my rare instead of rare maybe relatively often but point here is if a chinese player doesnt go for chu ko nus at least 6 out 10 games than its rare to me,I also think britons longbows rare too for obvious reasons.It just seems your perspective of common or rare different than mine thats all.
yeah me too its good unit just not game deciding or stuff like that if you have some castles it makes sense hence overall they better than arbalesters.
Rare would be like maybe 1 or 2 games of 10. Having them atleast half the time on the field doesnât make them rare at all. And I wouldnât say they are used less than that.
Are we kidding? Chinese bread and butter is chu ko nu. The thing is theyâre hard to get, due to all the upgrades they need (FU Attack, armor, ballistics, chemistry, elite and rocketry). The only reason you wonât go for chu kos is if your opponent is ahead, playing with cavalry, and you go for camels. Yeah, you also can open with kts, but at the end, youâll like to go for chu kos. Itâs not an option (like berserker for Vikings or Woad Raiders foe Celts) itâs the Meta.
1 Like
speaking for NAC3 and Fair civs cups(which didnt had much chinese play on open maps like arabia for other tournement I havent watched it yet) expect Fortress never seen chinese go for chu ko nu.Also for mayans or mongols even if your opponent is ahead of you still try to go UU but for chinese you must ditch the plan completely so there is a big difference I wouldnt call that meta but rather strong choice if situation good.
Well same can be said for mangudai and %99 of time mongols go for them thats what I call meta but than again this my opinion if you disagree thats fine.
I was merely arguing that calling them rare was further from the truth than comparing to plumes. Thats all.
Weâve gotten a bit off topic. Mangudai and CKN donât have too much to do with Teutons. (though I admit I would like to see stats on TK usage, but I doubt weâll get that).
As I see it, one fundamental problem with just buffing TKs in a straightforward way, is that Teutons are already ostensibly balanced. They have around 50% win rates, theoretically theyâre the last civ that youâll see changed, while the upper and lower civs get nerfs and buffs respectively.
This is part of why I want them to get an entirely new mechanic like building towers, rather than a straightforward buff. Building a tower is an option, but it also costs you something. This makes TKs more useful, without significantly buffing the civ as a whole.
Just giving them fast TKs could easily lead to them just obliterating everyone the instant they reach the castle age, which obviously is not our goal here.
It wouldnât be easier for them to shot arrows from siege towers? (i neither agree with tjis idea, but I think it would be simpler)
It had to do with the fact that someone wanted siege ram for teutons as a buff and I was explaining why ironclad cap ram is already pretty good, chu ko nu was just one of rams usual counters that becomes much worse against rams when you have ironclad, then there was an argument that ckn donât matter in the discussion cayse they arenât even used almost at all, when they actually are so the upgrade does make the capped ram in that situation much better than a normal siege ram and that situation is likely to happen if you face chinese, so siege ram would be quite op witj ironclad. So nothing to do with tks, but about how to buff teutons, yes, it was an important discussion to have and not off topic.
I think they should get the last Ram upgrade regardless of other buffs.
It could end up being and indirect buff to TKs because garrisoning TKs inside rams is a good way to use them.