Just saw the leaked photos of the new patch changes, and I am skeptical about some changes. The obvious ones are Indians losing last cavalry armor, Leitis having -1 pierce armor (we wanted to nerf the Leitis, but not this way).
The Turks are getting +1 pierce armor on the scout line to compensate for their weakness against archers. Okay, decent. But I don’t like this for the Feudal Age Scout Cavalry. In Feudal Age, they really have nothing missing. In Castle Age, they lack Elite Skirmishers and in Imperial Age they lack both Onager and Siege Engineers.
It is a great idea, but I only like it be applied to light cavalry and hussar.
Speaking about hussars, the Hussar upgrade is too expensive and to be honest it looks like a weaker bloodlines upgrade and a Blast Furnace upgrade against monks (Light Cavalry have +10 while Hussars have +12). I don’t what I dislike more, Turks having free Hussars which is an expensive tech on top of having free pierce armor, or the tech in general.
The Steppe Lancers are similar to Light Cavalry, but the Elite Steppe Lancer upgrade actually adds some value like +20 HP and +2 attack.
I like the Hussar upgrade to cost 500F (as usual) and 175G since it otherwise seems to be overpriced. Can someone actually tell me more about the Hussar upgrade? Why Franks do not have this. Frank Hussars will have 90 HP which is still less than the generic 95 HP for say Spanish Hussars.
I think that it’s not very constructive to discuss leaked balance changes of the upcoming update before we really know all of them. They might as well change until the final release.
the leitis nerf is perfect, leitis are better against meele units than paladins, and paladins are now clearly better against archer. it is a great change to give each unit a role!
indian nerf is perfect too, imp camels invalidated all other camel civs, dominated all teamgames, nerf is perfect. also this clears the way to add battle elefants.
i think if the turk buff only starts in castle then they wont improve at all. they have currently very weak early game and only pick up in castle age where the gold bonus is usefull, jannis are good and scout cav is free. They need the pierce armor in feudal in my opinion. Personally i would have prefered siphai for scouts to aplly half the HP it adds to cav archers.
Paldin always have been bettet than leitis aginst archers.
As for the turk buff. I like it. In feudal age the turk player does not need to invest in skirms they cant upgrade anyways but can rather commit to scouts that will translate well to castle age. Only thing i dont like is the fact that it overlaps so strongly with the tartar unique tech, but i guess thats why they will get +1 melee armor as well.
Battle elephants for indians is pointless, they were already strong in tgs ans weak in 1v1 adding another unit that only buffs their tgs while completely destroying them in 1v1 makes no sense. However we have to wait for changes to hand cannons and maybe they will get arbalests, which would also make elephant archers useful
While i agree that theres nothing to get riled up about without having the full and definitive change list, the fact that they might still change is even more reason to discuss them and give feedback.
Personally i think the celt nerf is unnecassary. If anything i would have staggered movement speed to 5% in dark age, 15% in feudal age, making there infantery always 5%faster than the enemies. However, there might be changes to the militia line that make this nerf necessary.
Hussar is most important trash unit and expensive final upgrade is fair point. They can just run away from pike and harass enemy’s eco. We see how strong full Hussar spam is in last tournament.
Honestly, considering the usefulness of FU Hussar, civ do not have good Hussar/light cav have significant disadvantage in post imp (like Koreans/Celts/Vietnamese). In this regard, I am not fan of buffing more on FU Hussar (Also too strong in feudal if leaked version is true.).
Also Franks doesn’t need any buff. Their only weakness is mediocre trash unit. They are already very strong civ.
Not exactly. The camel isn’t nerfed. The civ is by removing plate bard. This makes Elite Battle Elephants significantly weaker too. The strength of elephants lies in destroying towns, for which the pierce armor is crucial. It also negates the late game hussars which counter Skirmishers and even archers a bit.
they don’t have elephants though do they? and frankly i don’t think they get them. the problem for Indians has always been too strong in tg and too mediocre in 1v1. giving them Elephants does nothing to help that.
To say the very least, elephants are great at defending against Knights in own town. Camels can chase away and catch-up with Knights, but even with a slight numbers advantage Knights can win. Elephants on the other hand with more than double the HP, +2 attack, and blast damage can defend against horde of Knights. They are also anti-building, which is good since Indians lack good anti-building units (Camels are decent but not great, and after the nerf they are basically on the same strength as Paladins but with less pierce armor).
good thing camels are cheaper and train faster then
except they cost so much its not really feasible to make them in castle age. and the blast damage is mitigated by armor which means at most you’re getting 1-2 damage.
if only civs had siege weapons.
it makes far more sense to give them an actual 1v1 unit like the arb or the knight/cavalier then it does to give them elephants which rarely see 1v1 use.
but your argument was that knights beat camels in slightly superior numbers. my point was that shouldn’t happen due to camels being cheaper and faster to train.
you then claimed it was only seconds faster. which is false. its 8 seconds faster.
1 on 1 sure. In group, may not be since trample damage contributes to it. Also on open field camels are better since they are faster than Knights. If fighting is happening in your base, the Knights may or may not run away.