If the Mehter is going to make the Horse Archer do better than the Mangudai, then perhaps the Mangudai should get buffed or at least put a nerf on the ability that the Mehter carries out.
3 Likes
what I wouldn’t do to have Mether for the Mongols.
One drummer boy putting a great Khan to shame.
2 Likes
Many people care not historical feelings, but I care, and I support adding CA to Ottoman.
However, look at AOE2 DE, new civs usually get more features (more unique units, more mechanics) than old ones, so I believe devs are ones who care not historical feelings.
3 Likes
If we can prevent more alt accounts being made, that would be a good idea because these alt accounts create trouble around topics that are criticism of certain aspects of a civ. We should be able to discuss what’s wrong/what we find wrong with a civ without someone going around and causing a mess with alt accounts. Not to mention, the alt accounts that gave a like to a post are rather fake likes.
2 Likes
I think that the Great Bombard should not only be Ottoman, there was also a Tsar Cannon in Rus, and if horse archers become part of the Ottoman Empire, the Tsar Cannon should become part of Rus.
The Great Bombard should only be unique to the Ottomans because looking at the Great Bombard, it’s based on the Turkish cannon weapon of the same name (this weapon is also referred to as the Dardanelles Gun). The Tsar Cannon was first invented in 1586, which is barely within the medieval timeframe. So, no need for the Great Bombard to be shared unit nor should we add in the Tsar Cannon. Horse Archer can definitely be a shared unit in the future with tweaks made to it for balancing measures.
No no no, if you are talking about the loss of the uniqueness of one civilization, then you have to put up with the loss of the uniqueness of another civilization. Horse archers were also more Seljuk, not Ottoman Empire, and the Tsar Cannon falls into the time frame and had dimensions like the largest representatives of the Great Bombards
Horse archers are so widespread over a lot of different civs that making them a unique unit in the first place was a mistake.
Here I agree and if now to deprive this uniqueness of Rus, it is necessary to offer something instead. As you can see, the Great Bombard was not unique either.
That may be, but a Tsar Cannon is not the way to do it. I don’t play AoE4 too much, but maybe a Boyar like AoE2 could be an option?
1 Like
If a new unique unit is to be introduced to the Rus, it can perhaps be the Boyar.
El Cañon del Tsar fue solo un proyecto unico y no masificado, en el aoe 3 hay una referencia a este en una carta que te envia 2 cañones pesados en la edad industrial, no es por despotricar ni nada contra aoe 4 de hecho no vengo a eso tampoco xd.
There is such a thing, not quite unique, Gulyai-Gorod is called. Streltsy could build them, but this is difficult to do in the game. They were originally planned, but something went wrong. The boyars are represented by reinforced heavy cavalry.
Y el oprichnik y el cosaco que salen en aoe 3 no cuentan? xd
What? That post makes zero sense. You want a new unique unit for the Rus, I’m suggesting the Boyar. Your post seems vaguely linked to that, but not in a way that is comprehendible.
1 Like
You suggest Boyars, but Rus already has them, this is a reinforced heavy cavalry, and I suggest Gulyai-Gorod, whose models are already in the game.
Or Tsar Cannon, which falls within the time frame and is the Great Bombard, put for some reason in 1859 on a gun carriage.
There does exist the unique technology called “Boyar’s Prestige” but it’s only referring to the said prestige and not the Boyar itself. The Boyar can still be featured or some sort of cavalry with a different name that was restricted to Russia and places close by.
There were other bombards cast by the creator of the Tsar Cannon, and other craftsmen, just the largest one was preserved, the Great Ottoman bombards were also not all the same, and how many of them were produced in total? I think it’s also not worth talking about their mass production.
If not, the Boyar being a new unique unit for the Rus, then it could be the Cossack instead.
Creo que al menos en el sitio de constantinopla habian 12 o 14 de ellas (no estoy seguro estoy dispuesto a cualquier retroalimentación) , si tampoco fueron muchas, y no se emplearon más alla como potentes armas de asedio, el caso es que, si, los rus si tuvieron grandes cañones pero en su mayoria eran sacres o cañones de 32 libras (demicannons) ( que en el aoe 3 se ven representados por el cañon pesado, que los rusos pueden producir a traves de las fabricas) las grandes bombardas son algo distinguido de los otomanos, asi como los strelet para los rus. En el aoe 3 todas las civs europeas tienen una caballeria ligera a distancia y va asi:
Franceses, Españoles, Ingleses, Portugueses, Italianos y malteses tienen Dragones (algunos mas fuertes que otros y con sus propias ventajas)
Holandeses tienen al ryuter (un dragon mucho más barato pero debil)
Alemanes la carreta de guerra (basicamente un tanque XD)
Suecos Hakkapelitas (no me preguntes que es esta cosa por que es una unidad hibrida xd)
los Rusos y Otomanos oh! sorpresa, tienen arqueros a caballo, ambas civs comparten esta unidad pero poseen cartas que los diferencian entre si, en el caso del arquero a caballo de los Rusos este tiene la mejora de guardia real que se llama “Arquero Tartaro Leal” en el caso de los Ottos solo dice “Arquero a caballo vigia” y una resolución que se podria hacer en el aoe 4 es que tanto los Ottos como los Rus tengan esta unidad pero con mejoras unicas que los diferencien (sino nombre las cartas de ciudad natal de aoe 3 es por flojera perdon xd)