I truly despite anything in this game that ignores armor. It damages one of the most important core aspects of the game, which is upgrading armor. It’s like eating a beef hamburger without beef. Why bother upgrading armor if these ignoring armor exist? why discouraging people from upgrade armor? it makes no sense.
BAD GAME DESIGN INDEED!!!
Tbh at long as its only one or two units I think its fine
I wonder what happen if Berserks are introduced right now as new unit:
OMG wtf is doing that unit healing itself, it destroys the monk concept pls remove that is bad design XD.
also, damage vs buildings and why the hell does INFANTRY get bonus vs CAVALRY?
“iT bEaTs My CaVAliErS:(”
berserks’ healing rate is abysmal, it’s no where near charge attack + ignore armor + splash damage on top. Also, self healing doesn’t destroy the core gameplay because it’s has always been there since the beginning and it doesn’t make blacksmith upgrade useless, if anything it encourage people to upgrade armors. Monk can heal faster than berserk can ever hope and castle with herbal medicine make berserks’ healing looks like a joke.
We’re talking about a cheap unit that out performs everything melee units in the game. Your comparison is off the track.
I think you are the one off the track, I meant why people is so biased vs new units, yes Urumi can warrant a nerf, but charge attack and ignore armor attack already exists with Coustilier and Leitis, and neither are OP. Also wtf, other units already outperforms others in melee (Boyar, War Elephant, Teutonic Knight, Leitis) and that’s fine.
If you seriously want an unit that truly need nerfs, I present you the Chu Ko Nu and Plumed Archers, units whose stats are just too good for their cost.
Oh and Jannissaries in castle age.
I didn’t know the unit has splash damage, that’s the only part I would look into. Honestly, it sucks otherwise as a unit. In 1v1 before post-Imp 200 pop scenarios, if you make say 15 of these in Castle Age to support ANY type of army, you feel bad atm.
Splash damage might need looking into and might be the reason why they overperform in your BF games, although I don’t blame the devs for adding splash damage to such a unit, when even a (on paper) great unit like Coustillier in practice is barely used, you can see how the devs would be desperate in releasing a foot Coustillier with less HP, less armor, less mobility and wanting to give it something nice to keep the unit viable.
But really, if you nerf it too much, you obtain a 65f 20g Karambit Warrior. That’s what the unit looks like to me without its charge attack which on an infantry unit unlike the high HP, 2/2 armor Coustillier, you are not guaranteed to get off.
I mean just look at the stats of CA version:
55 HP (5 less than a Longsword)
1/0 armor (1 less PA than a Longsword)
8 attack (1 less than a Longsword)
All while costing 65f/20g (25 more food than a Supplies Longswordman).
Longswordmen, even after the buff, are not a very good unit.
Imperial age version has:
65 HP (5 less than generic Champion - a not used unit that you make from Barracks)
1/0 armor (1 less PA than Champion)
10 attack (3 less than Champion)
I mean I would hope that their charge attack is insane and they have something hidden, who wants a worse Champion that can be made from Castles only.
There we go, I expected this nerf cry post for one of the new units this weekend. Just because it kills rare units like teutonic knights which are almost never made, it doesn’t mean it’s OP. It’s an amazing design and a well balanced unit. It’s very food intensive, not so fast and it’s a castle unit. So it’s going to be a late imp unit mainly. It has zero p.armor and will die to archers like flies. Totally unnecessary most of the time. The lack of proper cavalry means the civ has to play 3 tc quick imp into Arbalests most of the time. The barrack techs cost half, so its always better to do halbs or champs rather than slow down and build 4-5 castles for urumis. So in 1v1 you’ll mostly won’t need it. In team games, again you’ll either do Arbalests if its Arabia or Runestones and you’re playing as flank and for closed maps Elephant archers. Only in rare cases where everyone went random and as Dravidians you face Goths opponent and Teutons pocket, urumis will be needed.
I like the area attack ability. It has a lot of special effects and that is what makes it unique. It is needed for a civ that has a bad tech tree. I hope it does not get nerfed. I also like the UT. Even if you think it is OP on Urumi, you have to admit it is definitely not OP on champions and halbs. It gives them an effect similar to Garland Wars (maybe even slightly weaker on average as many units just have <4 armor with FU). If you don’t like it, suggest an alternate UT for their infantry. There are not many infantry bonuses left that would make a difference in combat while not overlapping with existing UTs and bonuses. The only things that I would change about Urumi are the cost, upgrade cost, training time and maybe recharge time of the area attack.
In those post-imperial Black Forest games I’d rather train Elephant Archers than Urumis all day.
Dravidians Elephant Archers are the reason I think they removed the bonus damage against buildings, they fare so fast they murder anything that isn’t Hussite Wagons or Huskarls, they have the same dps as Mangudais, obviously you need a meat shield in front, but since we’re talking about BF games, which are mostly team games, you’d probably have that, and they regenerate…slowly, but they do.
On Arabia you’d go Arbs no doubt as Dravidians.
Also, against Huskarls I’d rather use Champions, which I could spam better than Castle-tied Urumis, and maybe I’d add some HC.
I am pretty sure their splash damage is out-DPS by Druzhina due to being only applied to the charge attack, at least till Wootz comes, and then splash damage also ignores armor
Sure, Teutonic knights are good in melee. They’re also possibly the easiest to avoid unit in the game, and there are a lot of specialist units specifically good against them (Jag, Sam, Leitis, Cataphract, now Urumi lol).
Alright, well let’s make that clear so we’re on the same page. I know someone else was saying they perform unsatisfactorily vs knights, but saying that doesn’t really give an accurate picture of their strengths vs. weaknesses. Hard to get to is is an entirely different problem than poorly performing.
Thing is, Urumi is strong in melee right out of the gate: while it obviously benefits from their UT, it doesn’t need it to be effective. There’s no reason to wait until Imp/Wootz steel to start using them, or to delay integrating them into whatever composition you already have as soon as you get a Castle. I agree that getting to that point can be tricky, and the Dravidians in general are especially weak to massed siege (mainly scorps and SOs, but that’s more of an Imp problem, and they at least have the full mango line to counter scorps) So while it’s not always going to be optimal to go for Urumi (and let’s be frank, getting a Castle up even on an open map is not that high of a bar to clear, to say nothing of more closed maps), the times when it is, they perform significantly better than they need to/better than even other strong infantry that are worth building castles for (kamayuk, berserk).
Again, statements like this are not a good metric of how useful a unit actually is. In small numbers, pikes, (and almost everything else) dies to knights, but that says nothing about how useful pikemen are in countering knights. Hence why in my example I normalized for equal resources.
Who has said anything about infinite resources? I didn’t pull the numbers out of my butt, the number I used is the lowest common multiple of the 2 units cost, which is the most accurate way of comparing how they perform with equal resources. The point being that Urumi beats knight with equal resources (not as handily as pike, it’s true, then again, you cant’ counter Urumi well with longswords either.)
You started off making a good point, but then you throw in something like this which makes me question how much experience you actually have with how the unit performs. “Very average” is not how I would describe a unit that wrecks supposedly super-infantry like teutonic knights and samurai and holds its own vs cavalry. I get your point that it may not rank with the best UUs in the game, like the Mangudai, which is an S tier unit that is basically good at everything except taking down buildings, but it probably has the best overall performance in melee.
Eh, for the record I’m far from “upset” about the current state of the Urumi - Dravidians are actually my favorite and most-played of the new civs by far. I’d just like to see some of the excess strength transferred somewhere else in the civ (e.g. give them Elite battle elephant, but weaken the Urumi’s charge damage). Dravidians elephant archers actually have significantly better damage than the Bengalis due to their unique bonus and thumb ring. Sure the Bengalia EA tankiness is nice, but this is in the context of a unit that’s been nerfed heavily and takes a lot of extra bonus damage from skirms. Not saying it’s bad, I just don’t think it’s some kind of super unit.
Yeah, I don’t think most people have a problem with the Urumi’s charge attack or splash damage in isolation, but in combination with ignoring armor it’s just overkill. I’m not aware of any other unit having more than one “gimmick,” as we’re calling them, and Urumi has 3 for no particularly strong reason. Urumi makes the Berserk look like a Persian longsword.
Call me crazy, but maybe learn basic things about the unit before you counter-argue that it doesn’t need nerfs? Kinda seems like the people who don’t understand why others are calling for nerfs are the ones who are least familiar with how the unit actually performs.
Yeah, just going off the stats of the unit gives you a very poor idea of what else is going on, but it makes sense given your statements about it being “a very average infantry unit” The only real takeaway you get from the stat is that its weak vs. ranged units, which is a given for most infantry anyway.
People bring up how good it is against Teutonic knights to demonstrate its absurd melee damage, but it’s good against nearly every other melee unit as well, so pigeonholing it as a “Teutonic Knight counter” is kind of a strawman. Sure, Dravidians have a perfectly viable play with generic units (archers and pikes), but in the situations where Urumi is viable, they perform too well.
I like the unit and UT as well. I do think some pretty small nerfs to the Urumi would make it fine, perhaps increasing the charge time or decreasing the charge damage. Nobody is saying this is TLK initial steppe lancer levels of broken, or that it has no counter, or that you’ll always use it. The point is it that it’s needlessly strong within its domain of effectiveness, and leads to power creep that make already meh infantry (TKs, Samurai) even worse.
The thing is, no one makes melee units against a civ which has a better melee unit after the opponent has made castles. When you have a melee-ranged combination, melee unit is the front-line and needs to have high p.armor or good hp or very low cost + high production rate. None of these are the case with Urumis. They’re a food intensive infantry melee unit and have zero p.armor. That’s not an effective unit for the castle age.
Yes it’s not THAT high, but it is quite a bit of investment and is worth only when your uu is that powerful for raiding - Conqs, Organ guns, War wagons, Janissaries etc. or form the primary most valuable unit for your civ matchup in imperial age - Mangudais, Camel archers etc. Otherwise you have to rush a castle only when your opponent is investing a lot into siege push with less eco.
Its not always about equal resources rather about production. Opponents will be attacking you with generic units like Knights-crossbows and you’ll be producing army to defend against that. Suppose if you lose the initial small number of pikes, you can build 2 or 3 more barracks and get more pikes. If you lose the initial bunch of urumis, its going to be much harder to get a good mass of them again.
No its not. The strength of a melee unit is based on how good it is against generic units that are commonly used in games. Amongst the new civ castle units, Ghulams are a much better unit than the Urumis. This is also the same reason why supplies were introduced and yet you’d have seen a lot of games with eagles but much fewer games with long swordsmen. You can’t fight urumis under enemy defense buildings or when there are ranged units shooting from behind. Ultimately its a zero p.armor unit with mediocre speed and high food cost.
The post literally starts by saying that. And I’m also not saying its just a Teutonic knight counter but simply pointing out the fact that an infantry uu which trades well in isolated melee fights in late imp against most other units isn’t broken by any means. The “situations” as you call it is too niche and once people learn the civ, they play accordingly and won’t use pure melee units against Dravidians in late imp (much similar to how no one does pure melee units against Teutonic knights)
I guess that’s ok considering how the civ has the worst stable which would hurt on land maps and no monks or bombard canons which would hurt them on closed maps.
The urumi is clearly OP and will be nerfed.
BUT what I am really scared is an overnerf. Just keep in mind that the civ has a meso tech tree with no eagles. Without a very strong UU (mangudai level) the civ would be pretty underwhelming.
So the nerf will happen, but be careful that this unit should carry the civ.
Honestly I don’t think Urumi carries anything at all.
Dravidians Elephant archers are much more powerful as power units imho, if you get to mass them and with adequate meatshield.
Ele archers were considered the worst units. Also, they miss the stable upgrades.
Urumi is clearly the best they have to me.
But maybe you are right, the extra dmg of elephants (maybe + hp regeneration) can be used
In fact Dravidian ele archers have the same ROF as Bulgarian Cavaliers, and also reach 6 PA which is enough.
Elephant archers were bad because they were an extremely niche unit, behind a castle, that required loads of upgrades, with low mobility and so on.
But in a restricted pool of maps, under specific conditions they were extremely powerful, for example in death matches or those BF “post-imperial fantasy games” as a user calls them.
In those games Dravidians’ Elephant Archer is now truly powerful imho. 1.35 ROF with 11 attack, 280 HP, 6 PA and passive regeneration, but as it’s trained now from archery ranges you can see why it could be much more powerful than the old Indians’ EA, even if it’s comparatively weaker.
Gurjaras’ and Bengalis’ one doesn’t seem as powerful though, I’d rather use other units as my “power unit”.
Indeed. DPS wise is on par with Mangudai, or to put it in another way, 33% more dps than a regular heavy cavalry archer.
Holy crap. They even trade respectably against CATAPHRACTS for gods sake. This is BEYOND dumb…
What I dont like is that the charge mechanic was unique for coustilier and it seems that urumi has stolen it. I can give a pass to splash damage because other unita have it (elephants, cataphract, druzinha)
I would propose a different mechanic instead of charge, but there are few ideas left. Maybe a mechanic that increase utumi attack speed with each hit (similar to obuch but affecting other stat)? That would reflect the urumi sword “battle dance” and somehow combo with the UT without being oppresive, because it leaves some time to react.