6 out of the 9 points are about Turks…
4 Likes
Why is every of your threads just about Turks?
Yeah you sometimes list a few other things but they just look like they are there to make it less obvious that you just want to talk about Turks.
We aren’t that stupid. The mods already joined most of your threads.
3 Likes
Oh I see.
I guess Selim’s from Turkey and wants to play as his ancestors?
Doesn’t really matter if he is a nationalist or just a huge fan of Turkey/the Ottomans.
Some civs just attract dedicated followers, Ottomans, Japanese and probably Byzantines are top contenders.
But Ottoman/Turk fans somehow expect their civ to be OP while Byzantine fans probably like the “underdog” kinda perspective.
1 Like
@II.Selim just keep the discussion here, last warning.
5 Likes
Oh nooo the janissary now can be countered in castle age instead of sniping mangonels in impunity, and there is a short window in imperial before the elite upgrade when it’s better to make the hand cannon (which is stronger and immediately unlocked for the Turks so you have to choose between 2 good units). And 2 civs can beat them with hand cannons. Oh the humanity !
Now let’s talk about biblically accurate Franks
1 Like
Yes the whole Byzantine experience can be summed up as that Rocky speech to his son.
1 Like
Siege engineer benefiting the demolition line was the only change that makes sense. Turtle ship benefiting from siege engineer make as much sense as cavalry armor upgrades benefiting Missionaires.
I’m favour of reverting all these siege engineer changes back. If not, then bring a similar order;
No ship other than elite cannon galleon should have more than 13 range. Lou Chuan’s range should be decreased by 1 without compensation because they are already massively outclassing the cannon galleons against the other ships despite Lou Chuans being a siege ship. And they render cannon galleon’s extra range close to useless because no defensive structure has more than 13 range. Cannon galleon and Elite Cannon galleon’s range should be decreased by 1 too and they can be compensated by increasing their projectile speed and blast radius slightly. Or something like that. And artillery should provide +3 range instead of +2 because that was the previous order.
Why should a tech that affects cannons only work when the cannon is on the ground ? If you have better cannons, ships with cannons will perform better.
It reminds me of a letter from the US president during the 1812 war, answering a citizen who asked if it was legal to own a warship (spoiler : yes it was, the USA was very based in that enlightened time)
“We already established that you can own cannons, so why don’t you mount them on your ship already ?”
Will they ever stop buffing Turtle Ships?
- Their elite version’s range is increased.
- Siege engineer now benefits them.
- Their upgrade cost is reduced.
- Their speed is increased.
- And the Korean unique tech further buffs them.
That’s 5 buffs to the same unit in 2 years.
They also buffed the militia line several times in the same period. Sometimes an unit is very underwelming despite stats suggesting otherwise at first glance.
Speed notably, you’ll notice that EVERY slow unit (TS, TK, WE, militia line…) got a speed boost over the years, as speed can be very punishing.
2 Likes
Against 8-range Janissary + Mangonel combo:
You could go with massed skirmishers + monks. Monks got a specific buff against mangonels, so they will have an easier time converting them. Massed cavalry archers with ballistics also works, and you could snipe mangos with knights as well.
Elite Janissaries were supposed to be countered by massed archers or skirmishers only, not by other hand cannoneers. Janissaries are supposed to be generalist hand cannoneers, which means being worse against infantry at the expense of being better against everything else, including other hand cannoneers.
The Turks overall have a close to 50% winrate but they fall of in higher ELOs.
Their strongest aspect is obviously Early Imperial but their early game is weak.
They are really good on Arena but not so good in Arabia.
Means they are overall not a bad civilisation and they don’t need buffs for the late game.
So all the arguments about Cannon Galleons, Hand Cannons and Janissaries don’t really make sense.
Buffing the things that the Turks are already good at will not improve balance.
But the main issue is powercreep. The Turks are fine, it’s other civs that are getting too strong.
It’s not an advantage to be able to train an Imperial Age unit in the Castle Age if it’s a straight-up inferior version in every single aspect.
- Bohemians do not get an inferior hand cannoneer in the Castle Age; they get the same hand cannoneer.
- Armenians also don’t get an inferior longswordsman in the Feudal Age; they get the same longswordsman.
And not a single Castle Age unique unit other than Janissaries is inferior to its Imperial Age generic counterpart in every aspect.
- A Castle Age Mangudai deals with siege better than an Imperial Age Heavy Cavalry Archer.
- A Castle Age Genoese Crossbow deals with cavalry better than an Imperial Age Arbalester.
I’m not saying that unique units should be better than their generic Imperial Age counterparts in every single aspect, but they must bring an important and distinct value over them.
if this value isn’t going to be the range, then it must be another value compared to hand cannoneers.
Imagine the Mangudai’s range is decreased by 1, their siege damage bonus is locked behind their upgrade, and the cavalry archer’s HP is increased by 14%. Would you bother training Mangudai again?
Longbowmen are definitely worse then Arbalests.
Of course a Castle Age UU should be weaker then a generic unit from the Imperial Age.
Just because Hand Cannons are better unit for the Turks in Early Imperial doesn’t mean that Janissaries are bad in general.
Having access to Imperial Age units in Castle Age is a very rare bonus.
With the same argument you could argue that the Turks should have every bonus in the game because there is always another civ that also has it.
His standard is really beyond comprehension. How he argue is that janissaries lose to Italian HC/ Hindustani HC without micro in equal resource. So Janissaries need a buff.
According to Hera and SotL, Italians is not really top 5 gunpowder civs at all and Hindustani definitely behind Turks.
Bohemians> Turks> Hindustani> Portuguese> Burgundians> Spanish > Italians.
There’s huge literally HUGE difference between saying “A castle age UU should be better than it’s Imperial Age generic counterpart in every single aspect” versus “A castle age UU should bring an important combat value over their imperial age generic counterpart.”
Nobody says the first one should be the case. But the second one is literally the case for every unique unit except the Janissaries.
I say a Castle Age Janissary must bring an exclusive combat value to justify their many downsides compared to Hand Cannoneers.
Let’s compare unupgraded Genoese Crossbowmen with the Italian Imperial Age Arbalesters and see if they are inferior to Arbalesters in every single aspect or not. They:
- Deal +4 more damage to Camels
- Deal +5 more damage to Cavalry
- Deal +10 more damage to Elephants
- Have +5 more HP
- Have +1 more melee armor
Not to mention they also have a 1/1 extra armor advantage over Imperial Age Arbalests. They may have a shorter range and lack bonus damage against spearmen (otherwise there would be no reason to train Arbalesters), but an unupgraded Genoese Crossbowman brings massive value that even Imperial Age Arbalesters can’t provide.
Italians get all of these bonuses immediately, and they don’t automatically lose these advantages in the Imperial Age either. An unupgraded Genoese Crossbowman is still perfectly fine.
Now, what COMBAT value does an unupgraded Janissary bring that Hand Cannoneers can’t provide?
How many warnings has there been!?
Janissaries brings big pressure to opponent in Arena.
Italians players go for xbow/arbalest rather than GC in most cases. And GC have only 1 more base melee armor but same base pierce armor, compared to Italian arbalest. The shorter range makes them more vulnerable to skirmisher and mangonel fire.