Yeah, it does make it a little weaker, but that should be okay as long as it does maintain a good enough winrate.
1 Like
NO one plays India in TREATY almost ! win rate is only relevant in supremacy, and even in supremacy the meta is very VERY slowly changing towards longer games.
All civs have mortars , and most have canons , every civ is literally built to be playable in TREATY than India.
Meanwhile India having :
No Over POP advantage
No Pop bonus
103 vills
No canons
THE UNCOMPESABLE DISADVANTAGE : LOWEST RANGED CIV IN THE GAME.
The game rewards power, which can be countered by speed if tried. But range is a such an advantage that is absolute.
One can easily predict a TREATY OUTCOME :
If a civ with up to MAX 30 Range (Siege ele) VS any other civs (40 range Japan/Ports + other ECO French etc + POP Advantages Inca etc.) and they all have mortars lol.
One can simply drain the Indian eco by having 5-10 mortars at the back destroying the base, and just holding the ground with over POP/ Higher eco.Meanwhile you can struggle keeping up ur barracks count and trying to slowly create pop heavy units die trying reach the mortars 
2 Likes
India is a hard civ, but that is for learning its timing and poping units out in waves. melee can be very strong, but in TR its really the wall spam that ruins it. Walls are just a bit too cheap and too good (able to shoot through them, fast building, instant gate)
The idea though is to keep India pure as a melee civ, to help with the asymmetric value of the game rather than lean towards a bad version of a range dominated civ. (which it actually does not half bad due to 21 range gurkas and long range Tanky howdas. its just hard to keep massing with the train times that it suffers because range armies kill units slower, but a melee army once it makes contact has very favorable kill ratios.
Its a melee civ but you dont want a buff to the weakest unit lol. Nagis with more HP always are going to be better cause they can hit for longer, so more damage at the end.
If a civ is dead by walls, then is dead on treaty, so easy solution, THEY NEED SIEGE AT RANGE (do u use rams as Hauds vs walls??). You dont want give them mortars? Its ok, buff siege eles then:
-
Removing bonus from Skirmishers
-
Removing capability to attack no-canons units. Unlike mortars this becomes even harder to take down walls because they will attack a ■■■■■ skirmisher in the gate if you missclick, or they will do it auto with that high attack of 80 wow)
-
You dont want that?? At least more AoE to kill canons easier
1 Like
This is sooooo sad ! 5 siege ele hit closely standing 6 falcs, only 1 dies 1 reaches 1/2 health.
Meanwhile, Culvs keep kiting units , and killing Siege ele with their 4 more range, that allow them to have a layer of protective units.
Mean while you block 35-25 pop for 10000 yrs and then kill 2 falcs Luckily a culv maybe, then death by skirm/cav etc
Meanwhile an Inca can tsunami you with 250+ units instant train times, decent eco and HAVE MORTARS (WTF) ! similar goes for every other civ in the game !!
I dont understand how people see balance in Indian treaty game.
3 Likes
I do call for some buffs for sowars, mainly that they train faster like Euro cav, their use is important to have that speed and get them in the battle when needed. I have also talked about experimenting with an extra 10% range resist so that they are still easily countered by HI and husars yet a bit more resilient to range volleys to get hits in
What I do not support is big buffs that will make the mahout outclassed.
speed also allows units to get more hits in just like HP, they catch up to kiting units quicker, they take less volleys to get to their targets, this is an attribute that should not be overlooked.
I really think the siege ele is fine wine with its classifications, if anything I would remove its artillery tag and so culvs (or keep the tag but give it a siege resist) would not have bonuses vs them and let them be countered by all units. They just have too many HP and are too fast to only be countered by culvs, you can just out flank them and run through bases with tanking too many shots if played like that, Its an odd unit.
@PratUshh culvs also do a 2 area of attack, so if you use 5 culvs on one target is going to do the same… you dont need 5 siege ele to kill a falconete so split your attacks.
I do think though that since it is a short range anti siege unit needs some more protection from siege, such as a resist. this would force the enemy to use more units to try to counter them and get up close in melee range.
Not to mention that culverins now have damage against buildings.
1 Like
heh really? I do not really like changes like those.
1 Like
How is fine that is countered by every unit in the game?? Where is the point of that HP?? Skirmshers shouldnt counter them as they dont do it to other canons. You can kill s.eles with pikes, musks, hussars and culvs. REMEMBER THAT BY THE MOMENT INDIA CANT KILL MASS INFANTRY, SO IS EASY TO BLOCK THEIR ARMY
1 Like
I forget this. Nagis have 2 cards, Sowars have 5…
1 Like
A good way to offset this could be to give elephants the Stampede Attack ability that the new Royal Horseman mercenary has. Changing the Terror Charge tech to enable this would be a good fit. Melee elephants like Mahouts and Flails could even have a weak version by default that gets further improved by Terror Charge.
Terror Charge
Enables the Stampede Attack ability for elephant units instead of its current effects.
Professional Handlers
The cavalry training time reduction could be moved to this card.
5 Likes
I guess you missed the part where I think it should be more resilient to Siege and culvs vs inf and cav. likely best way is a 2nd resist for siege.
Its a unique unit, short range anti art/ buildings. Having it countered by inf means armies need to draw in closer, which makes better use of India’s melee opportunities. It also means with the fast speed people cant just make 5- 10 of them and romp around a base destroying everything just because no culverin can catch up and all other units do almost nothing to it. (which is still can work pretty good sometimes)
The extra HP still makes them much hardier vs many units like hussars, and dragoons. it still takes a lot of shots to kill it even with skirms or muskets. The most OP thing is explorers being able to crack shot it which should not be so. (i think they did nerf this but I am not sure by how much)
Yes india can kill mass infantry, the key there is urumi… which needs to be more accessible/ or have faster card delivery time.
Ottomans depends on Spahis?? Why India has to do it with Urumis?? AGAIN URUMIS ARE WORST THAN CANONS AS THEY DONT ONE SHOT INFANTRY
2 Likes
True.
URUMI and MOHOUTS are COMPENSATION, they are NOT REPLACEMENTS.
But after so many updates and new civ n features, these compensations have become almost useless.
1 Like
they they should be improved so that they are not useless. not accepted to be useless. THat is why we are here right? to talk about how to improve the civ and make it viable. Just making it a carbon copy of everything other civs do will not help because other civs will still do those things better, India needs to develop in its own path.
Here is what is some members think of the Urumi as applies to SUP games where it is used as an integral part of an Indian deck. This is where card times are not as big of a factor since armies grow and is not a sustaining battle in a single spot.
taken from thread about “most hated unit”
“Urumi is probably number 1, so many times I’ve defended the sepoy rush pushed the agra, just about to siege it down and urumi pop and whole army destroyed.”
“Urumi
absolute killingmachines”
“I dream of the day when the Urumi gets the Shock Infantry tag they need.”
now this is not the same as killing 1 unit in a shot, but lets compare some similar damage numbers for base stat units. a 5 pop falc does 100x3 vs inf. (300) 2.5 urumi will do 297.5 ranged dmg to HI in the same time it takes a falc to shoot and reload. A mahout will do about 168 dmg (all numbers not accounting for the AOE dmg as I am not sure how that can be divided out and different units have various rates) (both DMg outputs more than enough to kill age 3 HI and skirms)
Advantages for cannon: has range, but infantry are faster so they can run away from the protected ground
Advantages for urumi/mahout, fast enough to track units down and push a battle. Once they can snag some units there is no escape.
So while these units have different strategies and techniques for use, actually have similar damage outputs, Once an enemy gets caught up into a batch or urumi and mahouts, they really cant run out of it and die very fast VS cannon, that may get a good volley off but give the chance to disengage and make counters. Its what makes India an aggressive melee civ.
trying to make India a defensive ranged civ does not work, since everything trains so slow, it will just be a weak ranged civ, and/or all its units (siege ele, cannon unit? ) will have to be reworked to accomplish the same dynamic
1 Like
These advantages are good on paper for shorter games etc. In a treaty where everything is overwhelming facing 10 mortars/8 Horse/falcs+Guarding troops+walls is a Death assurance.
The advantage u didn’t list for cannons was. They are re-usable and faster to train Meanwhile for an Urumi/Mohout to be effective, its guaranteed for them to loose HP even if they win. And a even a sligthest blockage like a wall/tree/animal/river/ally units etc can easilyy cause a failure of the attack (which usually is the case.)
There is a reason why India is paralyzed to fight in Waves only, after u charge with one wave that might die while crossing the Orinico river/bump into trees etc. etc. , you neither have the buffer army available nor the train time to recreate the new army to hold the counter pressure ASAP. and its not like you have a very supportive eco to absorb those economic losses twice.
And lets face it !!!
Even I'm one of the supporters of India being a melee civ, The eco and the stats doesn't fit and are VERY FAR from being viable. There is no melee civ in the game cause it needs way better eco than a normal ranged civ, and absolutely great pathing, (U can count Inca and few others maybe as one, but they do have a great eco , instant train time and huge pop space available and mortars) (OFFTOPIC : I'm flattered by the pathing on Chimu Runners, when I compare them to Mohouts! DAMN! they are smooooooth)
1 Like
You said it, ON SUPREMACY. For treaty is better to protect a piece of ground from range. If units can go to canons (Sepoys and gurkhas should be in front), they also can run from urumis.
Batch that u cant have because you spend 18 pop slots for 30 seconds, plus the slots spent on mahouts. Also that batch is easy countered by hussars, that are trained quickly.
Mmm, a bit detail, INDIA NEEDS WOOD CRATES
IF THERE IS A WALL, THE BATCH CANT ATTACK AND ENEMIES CAN TRAIN MORE HI THAN YOU URUMIS.
1 Like
In a good treaty match , you almost manage 2 resources and hope to loose less wood as possible ,
But the Sepoy Built Barracks are bombarded with mmortars,
To push through walls U need Siege eles.
To make ur So-called Strongest unit, U need wood 
so…yea
1 Like
8x5/6 is 40-48 pop in cannon, 10 mortars is another 40, that leaves about 10-20 troops to guard them…
2nd point-- buffs to make urumi train faster have been suggested.
3rd point- india needs a strong eco, Karni mata nerf seems uncalled for, even with it, the boom was not OP.
Yes there are strong melee civs in the game, china, has a lot of strong melee units, as does Spain, among others. melee has and will be part of TR, people still need and use hussars, cannon dont do the job all the time.
4th part, urumi are even better in TR because in SUP games the trick is to kite away from the battle and kill them one by one with micro, but in TR when you are holding a line, you either have to send hussars in or take the hits. Its oo hard to kite away from them and if you do India just gains more ground and builds a near instant FB.
If you forced someone back to their walls, you then are in control, don’t get right up on them , and siege them down slowly making a hole to get in.
getting the enemy to use more hussars is good, that is what helps drain eco, and India is very good at countering hussars.
I find people boom overly greedy for coin and do not gather enough wood. Do not rely so much on wood crates, its fine if u do, but that is just a crippling handicap to not use urumi, or make a card that allows urumi to be trainable. (perhaps to balance it, a card that allows explorers to rebuild the agra fort, and allows only the agra to train urumi in batches of 5-10?)
think creatively with what the civ has and its designed strengths,