Because now they can go knights against halbs? I mean, yeah they take less bonus damage, but halbs are still cost effective and still deal a decent bonus damage.
Against cav civ they will probably go cav themselves since they have more MA (you moved hauberk to castle age), and then add halbs.
You still didn’t point out any actual problem or any problematic context.
You didn’t explain anything. You just posted opinions and not even an example to support them.
For example the serjeant is more than a trash killer, it a slow tanky creeping unit that can resist almost anything, and thay can gain map control with donjons.
About what? A rush as a late game scenario???
I’ll be onest, I completely lost you here, if up to now I thought that you didn’t brought any argument now I think that you simply can’t explain clearly what you have on your mind…
You want HCA to use them with serjeants?
Why? Just add arbs or skirms. There is no sense on this. HCA are famous for their mobility and you want to pair them up with one of the slowest units?
TBF sicilians cavaliers perform about the same against halbs as franks palas. But the tech is also significantly cheaper and faster (and can be researched simultanously).
But I think this is maybe on of the key things as we know how important timings for the archer civs are. It the siciians have an upgrade that makes their cav performing basically the same against archer civs as franks palas faster and cheaper, they for sure have an advantage in this regard over franks against these civs.
For one melee armor in castle age? Are you serious? That’s definetely not worth it. You would need to make like 100 knights so it can pay of, if not even more.
I don’t think the sicilians without the bonus damage reduction would go this path. Pretty sure they should try to go ranged then because if they would play cav against other cav they would just play into the strength of the opponents. Better try to go archers + support then.
Well you can continue spamming that, but that’s actually only a shallow claim. I think I explained a lot of my reasoning. But if you never citate these passages then it’s your fault, not mine.
Yeah, I want to see if this works. I think there can’t be anything bad in trying if this works. We don’t have it in the game currently. And as sic HCA would still lack parhian tactics they wouldn’t be able to spam alone, so there is nothing lost if this comp doesn’t works.
But I actually hope it works. It would be interesting to see this comp and how it interacts with the other commonly seen comps. We never had heavy infantry + cav archers in the game and I’m against prematurely judging it. I think a bit more variety (at least potential variety) can only be good for the game.
At least I would like to play with that comp, just to try it.
Well I already seen that with bulgarians actually. It can work against some melee civs. But only against melee civs - and in these matchups the bargains swordsman often don’t add that much more (as melee usually means cav and then you can also just spam halbs).
As the serjeant has more pierce armor instead I think this fits the cav archers better than the bagains extra melee armor.
But ofc thats theorizing, nobody knows if the serjeant makes a better frontline for cav archers until we have seen it in the game.
And for this reason I’m against judging that idea preemptively. And if it doesn’t work as intended, who cares? Then sic would have useles HCA like many other civs have.
You like ignored all parts where I actually asked you precise elaborations on specific passages, like this one.
And it’s not the first time.
So if I don’t understand you don’t try to put the blame on you. I don’t quote all your passages just to avoid having a super long post.
Why not? Why they should go archers? If you remove the farm and bonus damage reduction why I should go archers? And why I should use a scorpion that doesn’t have a spread damage.
Yeah, nothing lost… except for the time spent on completely change a civ without any reason. Like the people work on this game for free…
You can add standard CA, and if that it’s not enough you can use the editor and play all the custom games that you like.
Hell, you can make a mod with your sicilians design and play it with your friends if it’s just to satisfy your curiosity. There is no need to ask for such radical change for a civ that it’s not perfect for sure, but it’s not either that unbalanced.
I think it’s better to remove it entirely.
Cause either way sicilians need something in retaliation, why not just acknowledging that this whole thing was a bad idea and make the civ totally different. And especially with the sicilians the whole concept of reduced bonus damage is just so weird… Because they have in the serjeant one of the best trash counters in the game. Why giving a civ a unit to counter trash that has the best bonus against trash anyways? it just makes no sense.
You mean Hauberk tech? I don’t think it actually does anything when facing fully upgraded Halberdiers. Sicilian cavaliers die in 7 hits with or without the 1 melee armor. 16+6+4-5 = 21 damage per hit without Hauberk, 20 with. Sicilians Cavaliers perform at Paladin level (still a losing fight) against Halbs purely because of their halved bonus damage.
I wouldn’t even spend the resources on Hauberk unless the enemy is making archers or I need to stay in castle fire. Even against other melee units the resources would be better spent on 6-7 more cavaliers than 1 melee armor.
That’s exactly what I was talking about. The difference tha hauberk does is against archers, as it basically halves the damage the cavalier take from them. Together with hauberk sicilians cavaliers perform about the same as franks paladins against archer civs but with way less upgrade cost and a better timing.
And we all know how strong franks paladins are, so no wonder that siclians have quite high winrates against archer civs (but comparably low against other cav civs). As the +1 melee armor of hauberk is just very, very underwhealming in these matchups, especially in comparison to the pierce armor increase.
Farm upgrades give 100% extra food and apply immediately to all farms, even already constructed ones.
Serjeants can build and repair rams as well as Donjons starting in castle age. (Possible idea, may not be balanced and may need a siege workshop first)
Bonus damage reduction changed from 50% to 33%, making counters more viable. Possibly changes to 25% in Feudal, 35% in Castle, 45% in Imperial, instead.
Then, because I kind of like the idea of the Ballista, just not as something that replaces scorpion line:
Ballista and Heavy Ballista added to siege workshop. They both cost 75W, 80G, and have 32 seconds training time. Heavy Ballista has 29 second training time instead. Both weapons need to pack and unpack like a trebuchet in order to fire. They both have normal arrow type projectiles with a different appearance, but are effected like Ballistics, unlike scorpions. Assume all values are for unpacked form unless specified otherwise. The variable X represents the enemy melee armor value. Possibly +1 to make it better against unarmored units.
Ballista:
Hit points: 50
Attack: 10 + 2X pierce
Attack bonuses: +7 vs War Elephant, +2 vs Building, +6 vs Siege Weapon.
Rate of fire: 3.0
Frame delay: 46
Attack delay: 0
Range: 9
Minimum range: 3
Accuracy: 100
Projectile speed: 7.0
Melee armor: 0
Pierce armor: 6 (Packed), 12 (Unpacked)
Armor classes: Siege Weapon, Ram (Unpacked)
Speed: 0.6 (Packed)
Line of sight: 10
Pack time: 5.0
Upgrade cost to Heavy Ballista: 1300F, 1200W, 45 seconds.
Heavy Ballista:
Hit points: 65
Attack: 12 + 3X pierce
Attack bonuses: +8 vs War Elephant, +3 vs Building, +9 vs Siege Weapon.
the most stupid of existing techs sicilians have is first crusade, that should be eradicated from the game.
Also, donjons should be made better, but not just a reskinned krepost. I’m thinking having the. ability to produce siege out of them. It would incentivise donjon building and add more spice. Maybe the extra unit thing from donjon could be a unique tech instead of first crusade, and hauberk should still be an imp tech.