They should fix the Korean civ

[DukeOfLorraine]

@UpmostRook9474

but I notice that destroying a forest with fire arrows might not make sense

Explosive rockets seem better at destroying a forest, than throwing a bunch of stones at it.

[UpmostRook9474]

@DukeOfLorraine

Explosive rockets

The fire arrows themselves are not explosive. Gunpowder are used to provide the arrows with propulsive force.

[SMUM15236]

So if Koreans and Chinese get this unit, how you will change the balance?

I guess Koreans UT can just be changed to +1 Hwacha/Nest of Bees range. But what about the Team Bonus. A team bonus for only 2 civs will be very dumb.

[DukeOfLorraine]

Keep the bonus for both the mangonel line and hwacha line. Why complicate it more than necessary ?

[UpmostRook9474]

@SMUM15236

So if Koreans and Chinese get this unit, how you will change the balance?

If:

• Fire Lancer as a regional Archery Range unit and a previous unit of Hand Cannoneer in the Castle Age.
  Chinese can access the Hand Cannoneers as well.
• War Wagon could be reworked to Hwacha Wagon as a kind of siege weapon.
• Keep the Mangonel but remove Onager upgrade, and introduce the Catapults technology, Fire Arrow Launcher and Heavy Fire Arrow Launcher in the Imperial Age; Or, just directly replace the Mangonel line with the Fire Arrow Launcher line as long as people can accept the civs are no longer able to destroy forest or able to destroy forest with fire arrows.

Then:

• Korean team bonus changed to make Mangonel line ans Fire Arrow Launcher line have -1 minimum range.
• Rocketry gives CKN and Fire Lancer line (or only Fire Lancer line) +2 attack, Scorpion line and Fire Arrow Launcher line (or only Fire Arrow Launcher line) +4 attack.
• Shinkichon changed to give Fire Lancer line and Hwacha Wagon +1 range.

[SMUM15236]

Why would a civ get a bonus for an unit that they don’t have?

[DukeOfLorraine]

I thought it was a team bonus, in which case every civ would have either of the 2 so would be affected by the team bonus.

Still, many civs have bonuses affecting units they don’t get. How’s that frankish 20% cav hp helping their camels elephants and steppe lancers ?

[SMUM15236]

@DukeOfLorraine

How’s that frankish 20% cav hp helping their camels elephants and steppe lancers ?

Not the accurate comparison. They don’t have a bonus for an unit that they don’t have at all.

@UpmostRook9474

Korean team bonus changed to make Mangonel line ans Fire Arrow Launcher line have -1 minimum range.

I don’t about all these changes. Also I think it is easier to make Hwacha/Nest of Bees an regional variant of Onager. In that case, we don’t need to change the Koreans TB.

[MatM1996]

@AbuzzJam4677680

Maybe no for Mongols?

@SMUM15236

I was thinking that a gunpowder powered weapon shouldn’t replace a catapult. But then again, scorpion is also a torsion mechanism weapon and technically also a catapult.

@UpmostRook9474

In AoE4, the Mangonels, not the Springalds, are replaced with the Nest of Bees for the Chinese.

@UpmostRook9474

Why no?

@SMUM15236

In real life, the closest comparison will be Organ Gun. Am I right?

Yes, something like that, in AoE 4 you have the same siege units as AoE 2, but also adding the culverin that, like in AoE 3, destroys other siege units and the nest of #### ##wacha) for the Chinese and the huo huo pao for the Mongols…

@AbuzzJam4677680

I suppose it would be better alternative of onagers. Fast-moving Hwacha strength is quite unpredictable.

It may be a very slow unit, but very powerful against infantry…

@DukeOfLorraine

They took all their siege equipment from China including rockets, and thus introduced gunpowder from Europe.

The Chinese in AoE 2 could have the rockets they have in AoE 3…

@RatcicleFan

Also isn’t the irl inspiration of the war wagon really old? In that case, it’d fit RoR better than keeping it in AoE2.

@TommoChocolate

Maybe. My understanding is that the original devs wanted something like the turtle ship, but on land. The idea seems to be based on a mangam hwacha (from the 16th century) but the visuals based on older Chinese wagons. It’s pretty odd, but it’s easy to see how it would have seemed reasonable in 2000, with much more limited information available.

Yes, although Asian war wagons continued to be used until the 6th century so it can enter AoE 2…

@RatcicleFan

And on the topic of organ guns, Ports shouldn’t have organ guns.

Yes, they got that from the Portuguese in AoE 3, who also have the organ gun like UU…

[KarstHillFort77]

@MatM1996

Yes, although Asian war wagons continued to be used until the 6th century so it can enter AoE 2…

War wagons in both Asia and Europe continued to be used until the 17th or possibly the 18th century. The late medieval Hussite Wagon was technically a war wagon as well.

[KarstHillFort77]

Koreans are fine as they are now, I don’t think they need any change. Their UU the War Wagon, although not 100% historically accurate, is still passable or acceptable (certain Ming era Chinese military manuals did depict large two-wheeled rocket carts very similar to the in-game War Wagon). Plus it synergizes well with the identity of this civ (defensive with powerful but cumbersome units).

[RatcicleFan]

@KarstHillFort77

certain Ming era Chinese military manuals did depict large two-wheeled rocket carts very similar to the in-game War Wagon

Keyword “Ming era Chinese military manuals”

[UpmostRook9474]

@SMUM15236

Also I think it is easier to make Hwacha/Nest of Bees an regional variant of Onager. In that case, we don’t need to change the Koreans TB.

You mean to directly replace the Mangonel line with the Fire Arrow Launcher line, or to make the Mangonel able to be upgraded to Fire Arrow Launcer? I don’t think the latter makes sense as there should be some niche differences between the Fire Arrow Launcher and the Onager, such as the Fire Arrow Launcher should have projectiles that fly faster but have a slightly lower base damage than the Onager. They should be like the Ram and the Siege Elephant.

[MatM1996]

@KarstHillFort77

War wagons in both Asia and Europe continued to be used until the 17th or possibly the 18th century. The late medieval Hussite Wagon was technically a war wagon as well.

Sure, they first appeared in Asia and came to Europe with the Hussite wars and were used until 1504…then you have the conestoga wagons (the town center wagons in AoE 3) that applied the same techniques on the trip to the far west in the 1850s…

@KarstHillFort77

Koreans are fine as they are now, I don’t think they need any change. Their UU the War Wagon, although not 100% historically accurate, is still passable or acceptable (certain Ming era Chinese military manuals did depict large two-wheeled rocket carts very similar to the in-game War Wagon). Plus it synergizes well with the identity of this civ (defensive with powerful but cumbersome units).

Yes, it could be a war wagon used in the Korean literary purges and the imjim wars in the 16th century…

[KarstHillFort77]

@RatcicleFan

Keyword “Ming era Chinese military manuals”

The Korean Joseon dynasty was a close neighbor and an ally of the Ming, hence it’s logical to assume that they had similar weapons and tactics.

[DaftPlains72242]

They will never fix anything. Just drop your delusional expectations from Devs.

[TutelarMarmot83]

• A long time ago, when there was a controversy over historical evidence of the tram, a special unit of Korean civilization, Korean historians searched for real history and found many similar things in terms of operational teaching, although they actually looked very different.

• What Korean civilization needs most now is the naval battle, but historical evidence is a mess. Turtle Ship was originally a system of ships built as “Assault Ship,” but the “Panok Ship,” “Gwaseon” and “Hangseon” that should be operated like the “Turtle Ship” did not appear in AOE2.

• Photo of “Collaborative Ship”. For reference, it served as an accessory ship for a large combat ship in Joseon.

• Panokseon, the main ship of the Joseon Navy, was a strong-structured flat-bottomed ship and coastal defense ship. The first architect was Jeong Geol (1516-1597), a Joseon man named 丁傑. Panokseon was able to carry and operate various gunpowder weapons such as small- and medium-sized guns such as the Emperor’s President and the Emperor’s President, fire trucks such as new warfare, and “Wanggu,” a military gun. In the West, it can be seen as a transitional ship of galley and galion.

• Dagger-axe Ship. : As a representative warship in the mid-Goryeo period, it was a sword ship that cut off the enemy’s wires by inserting skewers like a turtle ship, and in China, the Chinese character of Chang was “gwa”, so it can be said that the Gwaseon inherited only its name.

-Although there have been actual historical attempts to make the Joseon-style ‘Hwacha’ look like a machine gun, and usage cases have been recorded, it is not well known abroad. For your information, it is called “銃筒” Hwacha. However, there were quite a few variations that appeared later, too. For your information, the “龜車,” which was planned as a super-large “Hwacha,” was left as a paper project due to budget issues.

[HighRider101]

Its just a sign that the game is going to be nothing in 5 years

[TutelarMarmot83]

• For your information, the real historical error is that Korean civilization does not provide any support for the “Partisan Tactics and Bloodlines.”
  After Swordsman, the tech “Champion” will be supported. However, there are no historically incorrect and historically inaccurate market research trees called “Banking” or “Guilds” in Korean history, and gold mines should not support the “Gold Shaft Mining” research tree.

[FearfulSugar350]

well, for balance purposes, a lot of techs need to be removed from the civ. Also, their cav archer already gets 50% wood discount allowing players to spam them easily in castle age, which somewhat simulates their use of cavalry archer in history. You cannot have them being cheap and getting blood line + parthian tactic at the same time, it’s OP.