Sasumata - How can this Weapon be in Game

Man Catcher or Sasumata - How can this Weapon idea be added in the game? Watch the below videos to know about the weapon I am talking about.

What would be the feature of such an unit in the world of Age of Empires?
Can we perhaps add this as a second UU for Bengalis?

1 Like

Man catchers where used in Europe too.
Generally pretty common around the world.

Maybe a unit that does melee conversions? Or gets Gold for every kill to symbolise ransom?
Maybe turns enemy units into villagers on conversion?

1 Like

It will fit with East Asia as well. It is mostly used by Chinese Police now in modern day.
In India also to some extent :

I think it should be a unit that somehow holds units at one place.

1 Like

But the game doesn’t take part in the 21st century.

I’m just saying that the unit could be shared between multiple civilisations.
It could be a regional unit.

So kinda like snare in AoE3?

1 Like

Surely, a generalized design of it can be given to all civs. Though I would like a version with historical grounded design like in my second video.

Yes something like that.

Take the boarding ship mechanic and give it to a unit.while conversion is happening enemy unit is immobile.

Is there a unit like that?

Its a hidden unit in the editor and i think its in the last portuguese scenario.its basically a monk on water with no range main difference is the enemy ship stops attacking and cant move while being converted.

1 Like

What happens when you board? Does the garrisoned units sink?

I think only the ship gets converted.Not sure 100%.

From what I know this weapon was used by Edo period (17th to 19th century) Japanese police and firefighters, which is outside of AoE 2’s time frame and would be more suitable for AoE 3.

For AoE 2 era East Asia fire-lancers and flail cavalry would be the more suitable regional units


Melee convertion sounds really out of place.
I would prefer the snare effect or reduce the unit attack, like Obuch but reducing attack.

1 Like

Bodhidharma brought it to East Asia from India 1500 years ago. My second video describes this.

Fire lance sounds like an impractical weapon, no idea how it will work.

I trust real evidence rather than some obscure religious mentions. And real evidence suggests that this weapon only appeared in Edo period Japan, and I’m uncertain if it has ever been used in China.

The concept of fire lance is actually pretty simple it was basically a normal lance or spear attached with a gunpowder tube on the front portion of the shaft, which when ignited can shoot a stream of flame or smoke at the enemy just before melee combat. And even if the gunpowder tube has been depleted it can still be used as a normal spear. It must have been quite practical otherwise it wouldn’t have been used in East Asia for several hundred years from the 10th century all the way to the 16t# ## the 17th century.

1 Like

Bodhidharma is a person not a religion.

He was a religious figure and nothing suggests that he brought martial arts and weapons to East Asia. Those are just legends.


Bodhidharma was a rebel, not a myth. He did. In fact, new evidence from Chinese scholarship suggests that he was a critically important historical figure, one far more fascinating than previously imagined. But if this is true, why doesn’t he appear in any official imperial records that were created while he lived?

The earliest and most reliable account we have concerning Bodhidharma’s life, written by the great monk-historian Dao Xuan around the year 650 AD, clearly suggests that Bodhidharma did not like emperors and made a point to avoid them. The famous story of Bodhidharma meeting and rejecting the “Bodhisattva Emperor Wu” of the Liang Dynasty is only the most famous bit of information that supports this thesis.

Dao Xuan wrote of Bodhidharma that his “followers were like a city,” and “everywhere he traveled people were enlightened.” But he also says that “Those [emperors and elites] who wanted him to come to them could not draw him near,” and he “avoided places of imperial sway.” This appears to explain why Bodhidharma does not appear in any official imperial records—he simply stayed away from emperors. Dao Xuan, however, a Buddhist historian who likely had direct contact with disciples of Bodhidharma’s main disciple Huike, does provide various accounts of Bodhidharma’s life and the lives of his two principal followers. This textual evidence, along with early stone monument records in China and various local records, argue conclusively that Bodhidharma was a real person, not someone made up later.

Bodhidharma wasn’t the only early Chinese Zen master who was a political rebel—his disciple Huike and others down through the lineage were as well. Indeed, anti-imperial sentiment is so prominent in old Chinese Zen texts that I’ve come to regard this as a defining aspect of early Zen. In the struggle between it and Imperial Buddhism, the emperors eventually gained the upper hand, making Zen a handmaiden of imperial power within a few hundred years of Bodhidharma’s life. But Zen didn’t go down without a fight!

Bodhidharma’s disciples Huike and Sengfu continued his rebellious ways, both actively avoiding emperors. Sengfu lived within walking distance of Emperor Wu’s court for decades, but never responded to entreaties to come teach there. Other evidence indicates that Huike riled the religious establishment of his day by preaching Bodhidharma’s Zen to commoners, undermining the imperially sanctioned Buddhist schools. The traditional story says authorities executed Huike when the Imperial Buddhist religious establishment could no longer tolerate his defiance of their teachings and authority. While the texts that tell this tale are not as reliable as Dao Xuan’s stories, they concur with other evidence that remains.


Question about Fire Lance is how do you ignite it every time before you charge?
Wouldn’t gunpowder just fall off the tube by gravity whilst moving?
And the blast it creates can never be impactful enough without much compression in just a bamboo.

It seems like a show off weapon, not very practical. No video on YouTube that tries to remake the fire lance was successful.

Dude this India is so perfect and so am I attitude is so annoying

1 Like

Ok from now on I’ll stop replying to Verumkai. I frequent this forum because of my interest in history and in the game, not because I wanna argue with some Indian nationalist about who’s better or who’s earlier.

Though I’d still like to debunk some of the claims that he has made here so that people who don’t know much about East Asian history won’t be misguided.

First of all, there’s no evidence whatsoever to suggest that any form of existing Chinese martial arts can be traced back to Bodhidharma who is said to have lived some 1,500 years ago. Even the oldest forms of existing Chinese martial arts (including those practiced at the Shaolin Temple) are only a few hundred years old at most. I’m not denying that Bodhidharma might have influenced the development of Zen Buddhism in East Asia that’s a possibility, but saying that he’s the father of East Asian martial arts and even invented weapons is just pure fantasy.

Plus I’d like to mention that Buddhism was only dominant in China from the 5th up until the 9th century AD. With the demise of the Tang as well as internal rebellions, civil wars, and external threats following the collapse of the Tang in the 10th century AD, Chinese started to mistrust foreign ideologies and religions (Buddhism being considered one of them) and turned back to their old conservative and autocratic Confucian roots, which marked the following Song, Yuan, Ming, and Qing dynasties (yes I know Yuan and Qing weren’t Sinitic but still they followed this trend).

And regarding the firelance, here’s a documentary made by the Chinese Central Television (CCTV for short) a couple of years ago. Unfortunately the documentary is in Mandarin Chinese with no English subtitles and I couldn’t find a version which has subtitles. However I guess you could pickup what they’re saying simply by watching the reconstructions and tests they’ve done, without understanding the exact meaning of every sentence. I’m not saying that I necessarily agree with everything said in this documentary, I especially don’t like its political and nationalistic undertone. However credit where credit is due, they’ve done some decent reconstructions about the various types of firelances used in medieval China, including the flame-spewing type, the short-range shotgun type, and the smoke screen generating type. Despite this doc has been out for a couple of years already, I’ve yet to find another reconstruction better than the ones presented in this doc. Of course from a modern POV you may say that this weapon is just for show with limited effect, however you have to consider that this thing was invented more than a thousand years ago, and at that time it certainly caused a lot of shock for the people on its receiving end.

[《古兵器大揭秘》 第二季 第八集 梨花枪 | CCTV纪录 - ##################################################### (sorry the hyperlink is censored for some reason, you can copy and paste the above characters on Youtube and you should be able to find the documentary)

Since the hyperlink doesn’t work I’ll basically post some screenshots from the documentary

First type tested is the flame-spewing type

Flame-spewing firelance against a person wearing fire-retardant suit

Flame-spewing firelance tested against a pig carcass. The pig carcass sustained almost no burns, however the experts concluded that pig skin is thicker than human’s if it was an actual human being then it will cause some damage particularly to the eyes, face, and clothing.

Next to be tested is the shotgun type filled with iron shrapnel. First they tested its range and concluded that the range is only around 5 to 8 meters. Second they tested it again on a pig carcass and yet again the carcass only sustained very minor injuries and burns, and the experts reached a similar conclusion to the first one.

The last one to be tested is the smoke screen generating type. The experts said that the smoke is made by adding bits and pieces of charcoal, sulfur, and camphor into the gunpowder mixture, and concluded that it can cause irritations to the people on the receiving end of the smoke such as coughing, sneezing, and lacrimation, which decrease their combat effectiveness. In some sense you can think of this as one of the earliest chemical weapons.

Based on the above, I think that if ever the fire-lancer will be introduced in the game, it should be a siege infantry for East Asian civilizations and trained at the siege workshop. It’s like a land version of the fire ship with similar range and attack, and deals bonus damage against siege weapons and buildings. Against other targets such as cavalry, infantry, and archers it deals minimal damage, however it comes with the side-effect of slowing their speed by X% percent.

Alternatively like some others have suggested, it could also be a castle age version of hand-cannoneers trained at the archery range, with shorter range and weaker stats.