Yeah we said from the start gurjaras have the best camels for countering cavalry. Hindus have the best generalist camels though. To it’s also why britons (a more specialised archer civ) is better in TGs than 1v1.
I could be wrong but, on top of this mobility is even more important in TGs because the maps are larger and you can more easily get to more places with the shivs.
ie pressure one side with allies and then harass someone else’s base on the opposite side with the insane speed. And nothing in the game can remotely match that response time
Well. They can actually take some xbow damage. It’s not their “strength” but they are in fact kind of tanky cause they have the same HP as knights while costing 20 res less.
I think in comparable army investment with equal ressources camel + xbow beats knigh + xbow. Pair this wirh a good eco and it’s understandable why this meta counter strat works that good.
Well they shrivamsha will die if they are targeted by the xbows. But you can potentially “dance” with them close to the xbows. If you are good in dodging the arrows it would mean that the xbow player would need to manually target down your camels which would result in a high efficiency loss.
Another way is to first engage with your camels and then send the shrivamshas in when the engagement is already going. Then the knights won’t target the shrivamsha and again the xbows need to focus fire then to be effective cause otherwise the shrivamsha shield will absorb too much damage over time.
But both are hard to execute especially as you need to be very aware of how many camels and xbows you need, because if you don’t have enough camels to deal with the knights your shrivamshas will get shredded.
What is actually about gurjaras flank? With their good eco they could possibly justify to just defend with towers and go directly shrivamsha in castle age to jump on opponents xbows.
Especially if the team makes that sheepsling strat.
What we often don’t talk about is how greedy you can be whith a good eco behind and just use the defences cause you know even if you invest too much there you are still competitive because you have that eco behind.
That’s one of the reasons why I think that shrivamshas from the flank position might actually work in TGs-
I am actually the most disappointed that civs like Bengali still have the lowest winrate even in TGs. I still want to know why they made the civ so bad
It depends a bit on the respective numbers of units (ie more cav vs more ranged units) but generally speaking no. Knight xbow is superior to camel xbow if players coordinate properly (but as this doesn’t really happen across all levels I guess in casual tgs going camels is fine).
Well rathas are super powerfull. Probablem is that for most stages of the game the civ has nothing to offer beyond good UU and good eco.
You’re right, but they don’t play their own game then? Almost no one thought the civ was OP like even a week after they dropped? Same for drav.
We didn’t even get the same thing that happened when LOTW dropped. People thought the civs were OP when they actually had sub 50% winrates, ie even the knee jerk reactions were that the civs were too weak.
About the only time people thought they were OP was pre release
Are they really though? Considering the production bottle neck and tech limitations?
They are strong, but take too long to get going. Spanish win almost purely on their UU as a comparison (on some maps)
If you get them massed with boom behind it’s incredibly tough to stop for basically any civ. But yeah in contrast to conqs the unit needs some time to get going. So you need to either open with another unit in castle age or defend for quite some time. Sometimes that can work but oftentimes both of these can be pretty awkward. Spanish does not necessarily care about having so little options midgame but for bengalis it is a different scenario. They simply lack an alternative at this stage.