Halberdiers do +15 damage against Elephants
+12 vs Cavalry
+10 vs Camels
1 Like
Yes but FU Pikes actually survive until they close in and hence get in far more number of hits.
While Tatar āHalbsāā¦ theyād be lucky to get any
Tankiness on melee units >>>> Base Attack >> Specific Attack Bonuses
Iād be surprised to see 20 Tatar āHalbsā get a single hit on an elephant army backed by even regular skirmishers. With a little micro, all instantly dead, even to units with the lowest of attack (forget crossbows and TC fire).
While 20 FU Pikes will scare away both the armies, Elephants as well as Skirmishers, while taking down severalā¦ many of those fatties down with them.
And this is why Tatars need something to do hard melee battles in trash wars, +1 melee armor on Light Cav will give them atleast some hope, however small.
And SL are already forgettable, so +1 on them is a change in the correct direction too.
Great point
It has nothing to do with amateur mistakes or not. I wonāt say it is wrong to try in that. Even for pro is ne micro intensive unit hard to play. And yes most of the pro go immediately for cav Archer by reaching Castle age.
Playing as Tatars with cav Archer is like playing as Frankās with Knights, playing as Spanish with Conqs or Mongols with Mangudai. That just shows the bad state of cav Archer. Even Berber that has worst Eco than Tatars are not that bad because cheap Knights and Camels are pretty solid.
1 Like
yes but pros arenāt going to rush to castle age, and they too have recognized that the problem isnāt neccesarily tatars, but the cav archer itself, as most have avoided cav archers in recent tournaments.
which is a problem with the cav archer itself and its heavy frame delay. something youāll notice in my proposed changes is heavily reduced to make the cav archer more micro-able.
giving tatars +1 melee armor to Scouts/SL/Cav Archer is not going to solve their problems. especially when they struggle in the early game, which means before castles come down.
tatars problems can be fixed with two changes, in my opinion.
first fix the cav archer in general.
second give them a boost to their early game.
Exactly, and that is why Tatars need a buff to their units, however small, for now
At present everything is too generic for them, and then you remember thereās these things coming from their barracks that have the audacity to call themselves āHalberdiersā.
1 Like
and silk armor helps how? because the time tatars are at their worst is before castles come down.
https://aoestats.io/civ/Tatars/RM_1v1/1650+
And thatās completely fine, because Tatars is one of those Castle reliant civilizations, like the Mayans, Spanish and Bulgarians
No reason to change that, as far as anyone can see
Their non-Castle units though (i.e. anything thatās not the Keshik) are pretty generic, and even weak considering no viable infantry support. And also horrible trash overall, almost like the Turks, though not as bad I agree.
you miss the point - tatars are dieing before they get to castles down.
so buffing them via a castle age unique tech does nothing to help their winrates.
On the contrary the CA UT would be the right place to buff them, as it comes in, just in the nick of time. To help turn the tides.
And they are by their very nature a castle-reliant civilization, so I donāt get your complaints about them dying before getting Castle
This is like complaining the Bulgarians can die easily before getting their Castle up
is it though? looks like according to the data they are losing before they get there.
you can be weak pre castle without being dead pre castle. there is a difference.
and yet bulgarians are another civ people want buffed.
let me do this another way.
if you have a civ who is castle dependent.
and 75% of their games end before castles hit
and they lose 70% of those games.
but they win 60% of games that go post castle. is a 10% buff post castle really going to help there winrates all that much?
Similar to how we want Tatar units to be buffed, baby step as it may be.
Tatars need millitary buff not eco buff. Their units are too generic. Free techs, especially Castle Age onwards are a bonus whose value withers away very quickly.
We have seen this with the Turks.
Only Magyar free forging is a different case, as you can see.
1 Like
so the smart thing to do - is to identify where the issues are, and fix the issues.
what are the issues for tatars? it certainly isnāt when castles are down, their winrates only go up the longer the game goes. so youāre literally buffing them at their strongest.
well cav archers arenāt very good right
and they have trouble living to get to castles down.
so if you buff cav archers you help them in the latter part.
if you give them a small buff elsewhere, you help them in the earlier part.
How about buff both, military and Eco.
As you see in my balance proposal, I give Tatars slightly more Eco bonus early game and stronger steppe Lancer. Buff steppe Lancer, cav Archer and slight boost in early Eco is more than good enough. I bet Tatars receive the strongest buff in the next patch.
1 Like
Tatars are stronger than Bulgarians, Portuguese, Italians, Koreans and Turks
But Tatars need buffs anyways
1 Like
On Arabia and open land maps, yes
But letās not forget all those civs you listed have something special going on in pretty much any other setting.
Portuguese, Italians and Koreans are King in Water and Hybrid maps
Portuguese, Italians and Koreans were designed for water/hybrid.
and Turks and Bulgarians are King in BF/Arena/Fortess/Closed maps
Turks and Bulgarians were designed for Castle/Krepost rush, and Camping/Turtling in closed maps and forests.
Whereas Tatars are supposed to be a Mongol-Hun hybrid which specializes in Arabia and open land maps. And yet they struggle at the only thing they were designed for.
Now with this overall perspective, who do you really think is more deserving of buffs?
1 Like
Yeah.
Expect Bulgarians, theyāre just so bad everywhere.
Italians - Water, Arena
Portuguese - Water, Arena
Koreans - Closed maps
Turks - Arena
Bulgarians -???
1 Like
Bulgarian is the strongest. You donāt know how strong the Krepost rush are. And Konniks are stronger than Knights and less vulnerable to pikeman and Camels.
1 Like
Bulgarians are a closed map civilization like the Turks, so ofcourse they are a joke to our young Arabia master and only meta player Hera
Still not as much a joke as the Turks are
Krepost rushes are never seen in competitive arena games and itās countered by towers, castles, siege and archers.
However Turks are picked consantly on Arena tourneys while Bulgarians are never
I know Bulgarians arent taken often, but they are a closed map civ, you know it. Considering they have no xbows and have kreposts and millitia line melee armor buffs.
We are digressing. this is the issue here