Ya hotfixes are sufficient. That way the balance team can come up with more solid changes.
Its actually an almost negligible nerf for Mayans and yeah Aztecs, Mayans, Britons these civs are quite strong and winning with them is so much easier.
No not really. It can still be good for Light cavalry/Lancer raids or using Hussar meat shield with Kipchaks.
ROFL… the kepchak is cheaper than generic cav archers, and guess what the kepchak is… a CAVALRY ARCHER
so castle age and beyond huns and cumans run large armies of quickly trained light cav and CHEAP CAV ARCHERS with missing techs AND no bonuses(thus the term sub optimal) unlike mongols, tatars, magyars, turks etc, and thus the comparison between the two, we arent saying theyre identical, but you said we shouldnt say they are comparitive
and if you want me to explain even further, the kepchak is incredibly fragile with short range, meaning it gets decimated by the hard counters to cav archers, even more so than other cav archers… and the hun cav archer is missing armour tech, with no bonuses…
wow i guess they arent that different after all… you guys literally want to be right just for the sake of being right…
Thank you, JoJo. Don’t know why this was getting heated.
Back on track—Kipchaks do better against Skirmishers than any other Cav archer, just to be clear. They’re better than Mangudai against Skirmishers; if you’ve followed this thread since the beginning, I’ve done many tests on these two units. Kipchaks are not like Cavalry Archers.
They’re bad against anything that’s fast with HP; other Cavalry Archers beat them, Camels, and Paladin. They’re great against low HP targets. You can hit and run Camels, since they’re faster than Camels, but just barely. Very micro intensive.
I personally would not say Huns and Cumans play similarly. Cumans have great siege. Cumans are a good booming civ. Yes, they both have CA and can produce Light Cav fast. Huns produce Paladins faster, not just Light Cav, and not nearly as fast as Cumans. They also have the Tarkan, which couldn’t be farther from a Cuman unit. They get cheaper CA, which Cumans don’t get. Their CA is closer to Mongol CA than Cuman.
Huns either go HCA+Hussar or Cavalier/Paladin, not both. Too expensive. Cumans can go Kipchak/Cavalier with ease, which is a good combo until you have the eco for full Paladin.
alright lets stop this toxicity, This thread has some good discussion don’t de-escalate this.
I swear I’ve seen them lose 1v1, unless ofc if all arrows hit which is hard against a unit small as skirm
It’s versus Skirmishers in groups. 40 Elite Skirmishers vs 38 Elite Kipchaks, all FU (Skirms are generic FU, not Cuman).
“In equal resource battles against 40 skirmishers (38 Kipchak, 30 Mangudai), the Mangudai fall far behind the Kipchaks. The Mangudai are decimated by Elite Skirmisher, with 12.6 Skirmishers remaining, versus 6.6 Kipchaks.”
Those are averages taken from my earlier testing. They’re not hard-countered as well as other CA. They still lose hard cost-wise, but per unit they do well. That’s Elite, though; regular Kipchak have less arrows and do worse. It’s in Imperial Age where they do decently.
hmm looks like with 4 arrows buff, they narrowly win 1v1
Isn’t multi-attack wonderful?
all of this basically applies to all cavalry archers… the kipchak is still a cavalry archer… yes it has bonuses in certain areas but its still a cavalry archer… you are literally saying the same as a “boyar and a paladin arent similar”… yes they have differences, but they arent as different as say a spearman to a paladin, or a champ to a paladin
to add to you analysis… the kipchak should perform better against any high pierce armour unit (warwargons etc) than other CA, due to the multi attack, not only skirms. as a lot of CA will only do 1-2 dmg, as opposed to up to 5 from the kipchak (1 from each hit)
wrt your comparison to the mangudai, the mangudai can specifically fight siege, kipchaks with their low hp and short range are much easier to kill with siege.
false because the kipchak is a cavalry archer, and is cheaper than generic cavalry archers
you have a word order problem here, do cav archers beat camels and paladins?
I was replying to a message in a different thread that said civs are losing their uniqueness and that Cumans are the new Huns, which they’re not. Cumans don’t replace Huns or Cumans are not the new Huns is my point. I never said Kipchaks are not cavalry archers nor that Cumans doing light cavalry+Kipchaks is weaker than Huns doing light cav+CA.
As far as Kipchak being a cav archer - Yes they are a CA but they can’t play the same role as CA for a civ like Huns because they still need castles for production and getting multiple castles takes time. Late castle age push is good with Kipchaks but in imp they tend to fall short because they lack bracer. They’re a good unit but not powerful enough to justify the investment into stone to make them. As a civ, Cumans are still okay but not a civ like Mongols or Chinese where their unique unit forms the best army composition. They’re a situational unit, so it might be good to give a small buff as the original post suggests.
Oof!
That line sound like it came straight out of a beta boi.
It is OK Stacy never slept with you in highschool. She is married to a lawyer now, and you just have to take it, because it is your fate to always be a beta boi…
Need I say anymore.
Hahahahaha!
This is so crngeworthy I woke up my wife while laughing, with this Internet warrior crap.
Jesus, lad. Don’t ruin yourself so publicly, with such gusto. It is a very unsightly show.
I would just like to suggest that people ignore this post in its entirety, including any suggestions about the Kipchak. I don’t want any of my opinions in this thread to be tied to LyricLight at this point.
Back on topic. I do think that’s +1 damage to the Kipchak in Imperial Age is something that wouldn’t break the Cumans or Kipchak after further thought.
Big question: is it OP for the cost?
Thoughts. Kipchaks aren’t strong unless massed. +1 in Imperial Age is useful if: a) you get multiple castles up. b) you keep your Kipchaks alive until Imperial Age without sustaining great economy damage. c) you’re able to take 1100 food away from Cavalier production to spare for Elite Kipchak, which is an absolutely necessary upgrade in Imp if you use Kipchak. I’d almost argue it’s more important than Cavalier, but being so much cheaper Cavalier wins out.
You also have to keep those expensive castles up. Those are big ifs, especially since Cuman castles aren’t the strongest missing Architecture.
It’s a lot of expense for a Paladin civ to get multiple castles up. I think that’s why Franks get cheap castles.
Some thoughts, at least. I have a bunch of data mods I plan to make testing these thoughts when I have time.
As do Magyar Huszar.
Back in April I argued the kipchak needed a buff, also considering its poor results against the game’s other UUs. The test was from MikeEmpires and on equal numbers.
Some pointed out the test wasn’t ideal, because it didn’t take into account the kipchak’s cheap cost. Fair point.
But now it appears, that on equal total ressources, which TriRem himself finds a good test (see https://www.reddit.com/r/aoe2/comments/hg8enc/elite_eagle_warrior_best_unique_counters_tierlist/fw2nadc/?context=3), the kipchak performs even worse, which is quite a feat…
AgeArena’s video on the kipchak: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoNKVMZSMQQ.
The kipchak as it now stands is a pure micro-unit and largely unusuable in big imperial battles.
A single Siege Onager shot and an army of kipchaks is gone. This is not even true of regular, archery range HCA!!
A lot of people complain that the gen. crossbowman is hard to mass because of its long training time. The kipchak’s training time is even longer.
The kipchak needs in my opinion a buff. If bracer is judged too risky, even in exchange for chemistry (Viper’s opinion, when asked by his twitch chat), then I think a kipchak should at least be able to survive a SO shot…
Well the test doesn’t involve any sort of micro so obviously the kipchak will perform bad, its also HP based score so TK comes above Rattans even though in practice it will never be true
Yeah well thats still the fastest produced cav archer (tied with Kasbah camel archer), thats not the issue certainly
why though? SO is a super late game unit, even Mangudais can’t deal with SOs because of the splash damage. To survive SO they’d need to be buffed with 15HP which is more than what they had originally.
I’d increase their fire rate to 2.1 and give the Elite 1 extra attack, sounds reasonable for a buff without breaking the civ
This is my favourite thread cause it shows how much some people are cut off from the real gameplay.
And the amount of theoretical research they do to prove their point…
I mean, I started the thread and I agree. 
There’s a lot of theorycrafting that is taken completely out of context of the game. Even my tests, I don’t let the tests rule the conclusion completely; that’s not realistic.
Tests are good. Conclusions must be drawn based on the big picture, though. Tests and theory are only a part of that picture.
i have to disagree. I’ve been seeing the kipchak used a lot recently and don’t think it needs any love at all based on performance.
Kipchaks carry Cumans like Mangudai Mongols. There are many times I win the game with Cumans only because of Kipchaks. Cheap units, fast producing and even without bonus damage to siege units, they do quite well against rams and tribuchets like Mangudai do. They don’t need any buff. They don’t do big damage but in mass just amazing.
Like every player, they play with Cumans, they go for Kipchaks, more than Knights and Paladin and that tells a lot.
well kipchaks are dirt cheap, and even the elite upgrade doesn’t cost gold. that certainly helps.
