The thing about the bleed effect ignoring armor, is that it’s generally the same as just adding 9 attack. The exceptions would be to units/buildings that the bleed effect isn’t applied to and units with at least as much melee armor as the liao dao (base 9 atk, 13 with elite) - a list that can consist of (elite) Teutonic knights (7-13), elite boyars (max 11), and Bulgarian 2HS(max 9). And even for most of these, The liao dao needs to be missing attack upgrades while the defending needs to be well-upgraded before any armor is effectively ignored.
There might should be some other edge cases where the bleed effect is less impactful than a straight +9 damage - like healing/hp regen and blows that occur right before a unit bleeds out. I also wonder what happens if a unit that is set to bleed to death garrisons in a building or transport ship.
But the point is, the armor is still applied just once/attack for the Liao Dao, so the armor against them is generally just as effective as it is against other units (with a few extreme cases as rare exceptions).
Personally, I don’t mind for the… Letis. In the end it is based on the fact that the Lithuanians defeated the army of the Teutonic Order. Plus it’s melee, and you have to get close first.
Because the purpose of this post is not to nitpick on minor details like that, but to give a general idea to keep the spirit of the game intact and keep more content coming - all based on the player feedback so far. There can be like 1000 things that I could add, but they are not imporant.
All Armenians die against siege, but apparently the devs are fine with that. If your opponent manages to amass a dozen heavy scorpions, you can write gg 11
And that they double down every time they do something questionable with the historical aspect of the game. Eg:
Thirisadai: It was actually from a manual guys!
Armenian naval bonuses: Cilician Armenia had a coast = naval superpower.
3K: Extremely advanced.
It’s one thing to make mistakes, but I can’t forgive them when they justify themselves like that, sometimes even preentively before releasing a DLC. It’s like they knew those things were bad, they knew they were going to be criticised, so they prepared a response beforehand. But… If it’s really something so bad that you have to make a half-assed justification BEFORE releasing it to the public, then why not, y’know… Change it during the design process?
They admitted it’s inaccurate rather than apologizing, more like. But tbf FE and World’s Edge had nothing to do with it’s design, can’t blame them for Ensemble’s mistake
And at least with the mameluke, it very clearly communicates important attributes of the unit. as a camel it’s good against cavalry, using swords it’s doing melee dmg, throwing them shows it can attack with range.
Yeah, doesn’t look at all like the historical unit, but everything a-historical about the mameluke at least serves a useful function. It’s a-historicity seems intentional so as to enhance gameplay. Can’t say that about any of the recent historical mistakes. There’s no purpose or function, just errors.
That’s why, as part of the event, they should have given us an event mod to correct this mistake. It’s an event mod. Or an editor unit on top of the Camel Mameluke.
Sounds reasonable to me. This is supposed to be some partnership with the louvre. sword throwing camel mamelukes seems perhaps just a smidgeon too far given the context.