a 1.45 rate of fire, 10 more HP in return for a small -1 attack is “them not being better”?
To me it seems like they are a flat out better champion, even vs generic units. Also remember that Champions used to have 0 melee armor (iirc), probably since Militia-line got major buffs, it makes sense that Samurai get +1 melee armor and maybe -5g cost
Champions had 1/1 armor before. The ls and ths received that bonus. Not champs.
Considering Japanese champs have a 1.5 reload time, the Samurai doesn’t look that impressive in comparison. IIRC the marginally faster attack of the samurai is cancelled out by the champ’s +1 damage such that they have about the same DPS (champ actually better DPS vs. higher armored non-UUS). So the Samurai end up with a net +10 HP advantage over the champ. Nice sure, but not hugely significant, and certainly not worth the extra 35 res. Samurai cost 38% more but are nowhere near 38% better vs. non-UUs. But yeah, even if the devs go the boring route with buffs to just make the Samurai a better champ with some situational anti-UU use, more armor or cheaper cost would be a good start.
you get 1.45 reload and the Japanese bonus on top so they are still better.
so you want Samurais to have Karambit Warrior price but Samurai stats? I don’t get it. I think the unit needs +1 melee armor and maybe -5g but it literally seems a fine unit to me.
Historically there were a lot more lightly armoured archers from lots of different cultures who also carried knives for close hand to hand combat than vice versa (armoured infantry swordsmen with bows).
So i think archers with knives would interest me more, although not necessarily for the Japanese.
i think 1.45 is after the civ bonus, base rate is 1.9
Nah, the 1.45 has the civ bonus factored in. In other words, samurai get most of their attack speed from being Japanese, not from being Samurai. So militia line gets nearly the same attack speed but slightly higher damage, which eats into the already marginal utility of the Samurai’s extra HP.
This video is pre-supplies, and already shows that the Samurai is a niche unit and only better than champ where it can bring its UU bonus to bear.
Where did you get that idea? I was agreeing with your suggesting about a moderate price reduction/stat boost as a possible buff method. What I really want is a toggle mechanic or speed increase to make it versatile against UUs, but I’d settle for a stat buff/cost reduction to make it more competitive with the excellent Japanese champion.
Samurai is 11% faster than Champion (1.0 vs 0.9) and Samurai’s upgrade is faster and cheaper (750f 650g 60 seconds vs 1275f 590g 215 seconds) . Eventually Samurai is stronger unit than Champion and faster-to-upgrade, however, cost of Champion make it cost effective against non-unique units.
Cheaper upgrade makes it more convenient in some situations (i.e. assuming you have multiple castles and are in no hurry to make trebs/get UTs), but its not a great long-term plan vs. non-UUs, especially value-wise. Champion’s marginal DPS advantage probably roughly negates Samurai’s marginal speed advantage, and if you’re not fighting UUs, you just end up paying a lot more for 10 extra HP, which isn’t really anything to rave about. Even the upgrade cost difference isn’t impactful except in the ultra-short term. It saves you 465 res, so if for example you decide to go champs, it only takes 19 of them to make up the cost difference, and you only save more from there. Upgrade time is only really a limiting factor if you find yourself in Imp with no militia-line upgrades and suddenly decide you want to go swordsmen. So yeah, there’s a very limited situation, sort of a niche-within-a-niche where it’s a great idea to make samurai vs. generic units, and it would basically require all of the following conditions to be met (assuming that it’s a good idea to go swordsmen in the first place, of course):
-You are in Imp with multiple castles but don’t need to make trebs/research UTs immediately
-You haven’t teched into any of the militia line upgrades previously (or maybe M@A max)
-You can win the game or establish a winning position within 2 minutes or so (otherwise, congrats, you just teched into a worse value swordsman that you need to keep your castles up to make).
I think deflect mechanic is very stupid. In general, infantry is slightly weaker than cavalry/crossbow meta, but you don’t want infantry to be hard meta, either. I think -5g and +1 melee armor will make Samurai a good unit.
Samurai is also pretty good against non-unique units. Samurai beat Vikings Champion for instance. +11% speed is also important advantage, Champion suffers a lot from its speed. In Castle Age, Samurai is better than Longswordman even against non-unique units with +10 hp and +1 atttack and need no upgrades.
Using Samurai is more flexible, you gain 70 hp 10 attack infantry with no upgrade in Castle Age, you can delay elite upgrade because its base stats also very good. Additionally, It is normal that Champion is more cost-effective than Samurai considering Samurai has huge +12 bonus damage against unique units but power gap is not insane, when you already tech into Samurai, switching to Champion most of the time doesn’t worth.
I think Castle Age infantries is very close to be viable unit. If they gain +5hp or +1 attack or +1 Melee armor separately like 70 hp Woad Raider, they will be fine.
That’s a completely unremarkable performance metric for a UU given that Japanese champs do the same thing more cheaply. Heck, Japanese champs almost beat Berserks (and do beat them on a cost basis).
The speed boost is nice, but it’s not nearly to the level that would make them strong vs archers or able to chase down cav; it’s probably best thought of as a pretty minor combat advantage that helps them acquire targets a little faster. Castle Age samurai actually has decent stats since the buffs but its viability suffers in Castle due to similar reasons discussed above, besides it being a food-heavy unit in an Age where you’ll likely get more value from knights, or saving your food to boom/go Imp. You still get more bang for your buck with Castle Age longswords due to their lower cost/easier access, and they’re better vs. eagles to boot (situational yes, but where applicable one of the more important uses of longswords).
The point stands, yes, Samurai are close enough to the militia line in terms of functionality that you can use them to do most of what you would use militia line for…but that’s not really a selling point for a unit that is harder to mass and more expensive. Their performance in CA is somewhat better and only slightly better in Imp, for a significantly higher cost. Now if they were to buff Elite Samurai such that their attack was greater than champs in Imp, you could make the case that they’d be worth choosing as an all-purpose power unit with the added flexibility of performing better vs. melee UUs.
Well, I have a crazy idea about Samurais. I warned u people, this is a crazy idea, and don’t take it too seriously. How about making them a Ratha-like cav-archer unit that can change battle modes between melee and ranged but after they die, just like konniks, they revive as infantry. An ultimate unit of all!
It is crazy indeed. Too many mechanism in only one unit - sounds like Urumi 2.0
May as well give it a charge attack, splash damage, trample damage and an explosion when it dies if you research the new UT “Kamikaze”
–
In all seriousness though, and as a guy usually resistant to changing the old civs (I’ve been playing since AoK) I wouldn’t be at all opposed to it. If you were to cut out arbalest as well then the Samurai would likely see a lot of play. The bonus damage against UUs never planned out that much, with ranged and Cav UUs never getting hit by them and infantry UUs either trading decently with them anyway (Jag, ETK) or being bypassed for archers to kill the Samurai.