Sorry man, but after that your opinion lost a lot of weight.
Plus, what’s this trend about Tatars being weak? They have 2 power spikes in early castle ageand early imp. Plus they have excellent CA, with extra PA (the only kind of armor that should matter for CA) and can take bigger advantages from good battles (hill bonus) can someone explain. Me why everyone say they’re weak? They’re harder to use, at least harder than other civs. But definitely not weak
Did you read my post completely? I think you just read few words, i suggest to you to reread the post with every single word, because it seems you misunderstood what i mean, i didn’t say anything about them if they are weak or not, i am talking about some features. Read the post again and you will understand what i mean
Arabia is not the whole game, nor THE standard of balance.
Well, in theory it is not ofc, but in practise 3 games over 4 are played there. So I would say that all the civs should be at least decent in this setting. Then a civ mau be specialized in closed maps, open maps, hybrid maps, pure water maps, booming maps and so on…
Regarding the specific point of the Tatars, I do not think them so behind from the other mid civs. Tbh, before free TR they were pretty behind, now they are in a good spot. If a further buff is given, it has to be something small: they are still pretty ahead of other 2 civs (Italians and Turks) which we are not sure they will be buffed next patch…
Silk Armor +1/+1 armor is a thing that they need.
Yes I read it. You want Castle age CA, with instant thumb ring, extra pierce armor and for more HP o cheaper price. And on top of that, extra damage from hills.
Mongols and Huns lack last armor for CA. They have only a castle age spike for thay Unit. Not Tartars. Tatars have 2 power spikes. And it remains a super useful unit in post imp. You don’t need to transition.
Once devs fix cav archers in general, Tatars immediately jump up in rating. Tatars are fine, I’d prefer them for going cav archers over any other civ right now (since I usually use Huns for knights).
Free parthian tactics is nothing to scoff at, it’s like another research of the last armor upgrade for archers PLUS an attack bonus against pikes. And they get the last armor upgrade - and another armor upgrade, silk armor. Tatar cav archers and cavalry options aren’t weak, the problem with them as a civ (if there even IS any, which I don’t think there is) is that they’re bottlenecked to ca and stable units. Their options are so strong that it doesn’t matter though.
That’s like saying Turks don’t have unique gunpowder. They get immediate access to gunpowder techs and have a bonus research that helps their gunpowder units with artillery. Tatars get this with cav archers since they get both relevant upgrades for free and silk armor.
Yeah but the problem is that the barrack in general in the Tatars with only one armour is a big problem, they are nearly useless so for the Tatars it is just like they have only stabel and arch range
They are not supposed to use Militia line units anyway.
Only Infantry civs use those after the Feudal Age anyway, and even then only if they lack Eagles or a better UU.
Now this is looking like any excuse to buff Tatars.
Probably give them the second inf. armor because they are crap vs Camel civs especially Berbers or Indians.
Not only militia but the whole barrack units with one armour is not that much, well it is good that they have halbs at least but even with only one armour is still problem
Tatars have Castle Age Cavaliers.
You are simply not meant to train Infantry as Tatars, and even then they atleast have Champion, hich is milesbetter than what the Persians get.
Tatars don’t have champion
You mean something like extra armor or higher damage in certain situations?
And please, try to justify yourself with ideas, not with personal attacks. I understand you, it’s just I think you’re wrong
Atleast Persians can deal with halb ram with their own halbs
True, they do not, that is how much I play with Infantry as Tatars, I guess.
To be honest, if it is not a proper Infantry civ or Ports (Gold discount), I do not even upgrade M@A.
Yeah i know me too i don’t use infantry in general that much and the whole of my speach was about cav arch
Tatars have amazing Cav Archers, they do not need anymore buffs.
yeah they’re definitely not meta so its understandable, as non infantry civs i also only use them for very specific cases… if im doing a m@a/twr rush or if im fighting mesos/goths where its imperative. beyond that basically every non infantry civ has a better option
but thats also why so many people were asking for buffs to infantry… even with the pathing helping the situation a lot, but still archer and “knights” are the meta