Hi guys, if it’s not too much trouble, please go check and vote on this survey.
I’m just curious about what people think, and I’m trying to have a sample as big as I can.
Well if we go that road against then SL civ will just get free wins against civs with bad archers. For instance imagine you’re Celt and you have to face that. Your archers are crap, SL are too fast for siege… So yeah, you just end up losing.
2 Likes
It would be a hard match up. Not sure if it is a civ win thought. I think it is fine.
If this idea was considered by the devs then they should ask someone more qualified from their pro contacts to weight in their opinion.
1 Like
Keshiks are strictly and objectively better than Knights, that is a fact
Keshiks and SL existing is the reason why nights should be removed from them, after an SL buff
I believe players should be pushed into using unique units, unique civ bonuses and unique technologies more instead of the generic units
That is what has happened every expansion we’ve had to AoK
1 Like
Then go ahead and fight 1 knight vs 1 keshik and tell me what happens.
The only time keshik are better then knights is in numbers. And those numbers require a castle to be built. It is objectively easier to mass knights then keshiks.
the only time you will ever fight knights with keshiks at a numbers advantage is if 2/3 of a castle for every stable he has, which isn’t bloody likely.
1 Like
Tatars do get camel riders to defend in castle age, in later ages Keshiks can be built in good number mixed with Lancers, this should be enough to match Knights, what’s the problem?
2 Likes
and then you’re winning because you spent more resources. the point is that Parthnan claims that Keshik themselves are enough to beat Knights.
my point is that, while technically true (Cost wise), they need a numbers advantage for it to actually be true. if the opponent has a numbers advantage over my knights with keshik, i made a mistake somewhere in the game. and frankly, if they are coming at me with keshik and lancers, then i’d be mixing something else into my army that counters those units. like pikes.
TLDR - good luck beating knights with keshiks unless your opponent makes a mistake.
3 Likes
Keshik can also generate gold while fighting.
2 Likes
but they have to be fighting to generate that gold, and are super squishy to melee attacks. the fact of the matter is though, if you’re mixing in steppe lancers with your keshik, i wouldn’t be going pure knight either, that’s just stupid of me.
2 Likes
Not quite. Keshiks are better than Knights and Cavaliers, and fall short only against Paladins, in cost-efficiency.
Tatars should still not lose Knights, though.
1 Like
Doesn’t matter because I can still counter as Tatar whatever you mix into your army. Knights are not super essential to Tatars.
Yes they are good but not something they cannot live without.
It is not something they should lose either.
The only unit that really makes the Knight line a “must-have” in Imp, is the Paladin. Since Tatars lack Paladins, they actually avoid the boringness of being just another Knight civ.
When playing Tatars, I usually go for a lot of Cav Archers, Keshiks and Heavy Camels or Hussars, as it is way more efficient than Cavaliers in that combo.
Tatars are a Cav Archer + Siege civ, with a decent Stables. If I was to take any unit from their roster, it would be the Halberdier (like on release), as they miss 2 armour upgrades, and it a very dire noobtrap. Your Halbs are so bad, you should never upgrade them beyond Pikes, as Tatars.
Essential or not, I don’t think such huge changes should be made to a civ based on emotional whims and opinions of a few
4 Likes
SoTL just uploaded a video on this, and I use this as Evidence. Look how well they perform extremely cost effectively vs not just knights, but also PALADINS.
Keshiks suck vs Paladins. They are only cost-efficient against Knights and Cavaliers, but never pop-efficient.
2 Likes
Yes and it requires you to have MORE NUMBERS. good luck building more keshiks out of castles then someone else makes knights out of stables. That is what youre ignoring.
4 Likes
It does, however, allow you to outrade Knights on resources, which is a valid startegy, if you are careful about.
The Gold generation also makes them better raiders than Knights too.
Still does not replace the Knight, however. At most it replaces the Cavalier.
1 Like
Keshiks train in HALF the time(16s vs 30s) and have much much less upgrade costs and the upgrades are much much faster too.
Also, they generate 10 gold each while fighting Knights,(see vid for proof) and before in my post , someone opposed me by claiming they dont even generate 5 gold per Keshik.
The amount of Distrust in the forum is incredible.
1 Like
So if you have 1 castle for every 2 stables you end up with equal numbers of units and he wins the numbers trade.
which by the way, results in a 10 on 10 fight leaves 6 knights alive.
3 Likes
Ya, just go on ignoring the fact that Keshiks COST HALF of a Knight. 50F 40(-10)=30G VS 60F 75G