Vote - Dravidians civ design analysis

Everybody rates them at the middle of the pack. I don’t know anybody who thinks they are really bad on closed maps.

They aren’t. Bengali ele archers trade evenly with skirms on total cost. Dravidian elephants are only slightly weaker than that. I’m talking about FU units in imperial age.

I’m perfectly chill my dude. However, I don’t have a problem calling out people when they phrase things in a particular way, repeatedly. I saw all your comments on both threads. That malay and portugese comment isn’t how it came across initially to me.

Okay, why don’t we make a civ with just villagers, halbs and siege with no eco bonuses then. Nothing else, no crossbow, no knight, no monks. Not everything needs to be viable, right?

Now, that’s an extreme example, but it is useful. The point is, all civs need certain core strategies to be viable.

Also, this is just a repeat of a conversation I’ve had a dozen times. So, I’ll just link that here.

I think it’s much more interesting to change them positively on land WITHOUT changing them/nerfing them on water.

Honestly, I think players just haven’t figured urumis out yet. Just today, Hera was playing a game as dravidians, and one of his post-match comments was that he was having a hard time countering raiding hussars, because his enemy could run them around his halbs and then attack his halbs with skirms.

But the thing is, urumis are basically just as good as halbs for chasing down hussars, if not significantly better, since in general they’ll only give you time for one attack anyway, and that would be the charge attack. Meanwhile being dramatically more durable against skirmishers, and faster so they chase down hussars better as well.

Urumis are also vastly more effective in terms of damage compared to most raiding options. Hussars take 4 attacks to kill a villager for example, while urumis take 2, sometimes even 1 with the splash damage.

Hera ultimately won when he swapped into Champions.


Dravidians should never:

  • Get Better Stables
  • Lose Urumi Splash Damage
  • Lose Medical Corps
1 Like

Fair enough, as long as those buffs don’t make them OP on water.

Yes, but they cost gold, and needs castles to be produced. They are also more expensive. My guess would be that halbs would be nearly as effective in killing hussars, as long as the hussars are spread out over the eco.

Well, that proves my point if anything. Urumis need a slight buff. I would reduce their food cost by 5 and give the elite version 1 pierce armour.

I don’t know about 1. I would give elite battle eles, and maybe even husbandry. But never knights or bloodlines.

If it was upto me, Medical Corps would go immediately. It’s total garbage. As it is though, I’d maybe just extend it to include light cav. I think that’s the most acceptable solution at the moment.

I’ve come to the opinion that Urumis are kinda like Conquistadors, in that they’re much more potent in the early game due to their very high base stats, but they then fall back as the game progresses and other units get more benefit from the armor and damage techs. The ability to 2-shot villagers, imo, is one that is not being properly taken advantage of as yet. Four Urumis in a gold or wood line can kill 3 villagers essentially instantly.

I need a LOT more practice with them, but ultimately I think they are meant to serve a very different purpose from the militia line, so to directly compare them doesn’t really give them their due. I do not think there is any point in a game (that isn’t already over) where you would want to be spamming pure urumis.

Personally however, I would be more inclined to give them a bit of a speed buff instead. They aren’t meant to be getting hit by archers in the first place, so what they need, especially for the Elites, is to be able to maneuver around the enemy.

Personally, I think giving them elite BEs would be something of a noob trap. Lacking husbandry and the final armor upgrade, elite BEs would be a very expensive upgrade with minimal benefits, and it breaks their bad stables theme.

I would not be averse to giving them the final cavalry armor upgrade, though. I actually had my opinion changed on their BEs recently, a mid-level game where the dravidian player actually did remarkably well with defensive battle elephants, buying some serious time with a minimal investment.

And they segue very nicely into Medical Corps. I think medical corps really can be a cornerstone of good play, they just might need some extra help getting into it, and making their BEs have more long-term potential could be a good way to achieve that.

I couldn’t disagree more. Urumis are not worth it in early castle age because how weak they are to arrow fire. Urumis will die easily to even TC fire, and they cost almost as much food as a knight. Urumis are just not viable till you have your food eco set up.

On the other hand, they are extremely strong in mid-late imperial, once they are FU. At this point, you should have enough of an eco and enough castles to pump out urumis.

Yep, I completely agree. Urumis are sort of like huskarls. You mix them with champions and halbs to form the perfect blend. The problem is, urumis move much faster than champions or halbs. So, you are kind of forced to use them by themselves.

What you are saying is generally true. However, I think that can be good in a few specific situations. If medical corps remain in its current form, elite battle eles can be good when your opponent goes full skirms. Currently, the only option that dravidians have against skirms in late game as a proper counter are champions. Elite Battle eles could be really good there.

In that case, you’d have to discount their battle eles, or give something else. Medical corps does basically nothing for battle elephants.

I can’t agree. Yes, they die hard to archers, but that only matters if you run into archer fire, and Urumis have the option to simply…not do that. And even if they DO run under a TC, they can just oneshot one or two villagers and get away before the enemy reacts!

I view them more like special forces than militia. They can break through walls as effectively as knights and kill villagers in a fraction the time. I have used them in tiny squads to harass in a similar way to scout raids, but with the ability to do almost instantaneous permanent damage, AND the ability to evade or almost instantly kill small counter-attacks which, with normal units, would do much more damage.

The simple fact is, they cost too much to be a good substitute for militia. But I think that’s necessary; their charge attack and splash damage are much too potent to allow them to be massed too easily, since they scale heavily with higher numbers. And those are core aspects of their design and should not be changed.

They are fragile glass cannons that can do serious work if properly managed, and have very high base stats that make them a very potent early move. That’s what makes me compare them to conqs.

I don’t think they work well mixed with champions tbh. I thought so at first, but they don’t seem to perform well in that role. They overlap in too many places, while having too different of weakneses, so they result in a composition that is too weak AND not much stronger.

They could tank, but being unable to catch up to skirms, they will be really bad at actually doing anything about them. The Armor upgrade would achieve functionally the same results without breaking the stable theme, at a much lower cost to boot.

That’s what I thought, but in the game I saw, the player took advantage of the fact that battle elephants are produced much more rapidly than knights. The enemy was trying to break his walls and get into his eco, but every time he did, he had ~3 battle elephants there blocking the hole. This worked at first, but eventually the elephants died and he started to build more, losing resources over time and eventually letting the knights into his eco. If he’d had Medical Corps, those elephants could have defended virtually forever.

It made me really re-evaluate using battle elephants in a defensive role.

You are assuming that your opponent’s reaction is that slow.

Compare this to, say, knights. Not only can you easily withstand multiple volleys of tc arrow fire, you can also eaaily produce them from stables.

But hey, let me know if you find a lot of success in raiding with urumis. Maybe I am wrong, and urumis are top tier with that.

Depends on what you are going up against. Skirms? Archers? Scorpions? Champions might be pretty good there. Also, if you don’t have ebough castles to mass urumis, add in champions.

That is fine. This is for imperial age. They don’t need to catch up. You can force engagements with trebs and bbcs.

Not to be mean, but this is the dumbest strategy. You need 650 stone for castle, some 700 for the tech, nearly 200 for each elephant. That’s nearly 2000 resources. On the other hand, you can drop a monastery and make 4 monks. 600 resources, and the knights aren’t gonna come near you. They won’t even try to break the walls.

Those monks can even heal your elephants and pick up relics. I’d invest 700 res into monks over medical corps every single time, it isn’t even close.

True, but they offer better results than anything but coustilliers. It takes faster reactions than most other units to save your villagers with this unit. Even at top levels, villagers still die to raids, after all.

And Coustlliers have to wait 40 seconds for another charge attack, while Urumis only need to wait 24! That almost guarantees it’ll be available by the time reinforcements arrive.

And when you get right down to it…do they have any better option?

In my experience, it’s just not worth doing in any circumstance. With Wootz Steel, Champions are almost universally the better choice for big battlefield engagements. Which makes sense; champions are gaining between 25% and 35% damage, while Urumis on their first attack only gain only 11-18% damage from Wootz, and that’s where most of their power lies.

The Charge Attack diminishes the relative importance of attack upgrades, which in turn diminishes their relative power in the lategame. Combined with their much cheaper cost, Champs are almost universally going to be the better choice in any case except for being able to dramatically outnumber them, in which case you’ve already won anyway.

You just don’t need it. I don’t see the point, and it would be a very neutral change, in which case, why bother?

It ruins their stable identity too. I’m not a fan.

The guy already had the castle from earlier, so no cost there. He also already had the elephants, which were actually a really good investment because they produce in 24 seconds instead of 30 like knights, while giving far more HP! That was a big part of what startled me; they offer ~280% the production capability from a single stable compared to knights, allowing for a very rapid rebuild from an earlier loss, even with a single stable, which is about all dravidians are going to want. Far more useful to have SOME units than none!

And then he had a few elephants AND a castle, the extra cost of the UT would have been just 500 resources, and it would have segued very nicely into the other elephant units!

He could garrison the BE for free. Herbal medicine is also cheaper and heals faster. 3 monks to heal the BE is even cheaper than that and heal even faster. There are better options than the UT in the situation you describe.

2 Likes

Sure, there are a lot of healing options in the game, but all of them have weaknesses. Herbal Medicine only works in close proximity to the castle, which isn’t where you’ll want to use your elephants; that’s not where his knights will attack! Not like you can really afford to leave elephants inside a castle for 4 minutes anyway, not to mention the micro involved. Monks work, but monks die, and then your investment is lost, and again, there’s micro to consider. Besides, their time would be far better spent healing lower-hp units like urumis or your militia line, or out collecting relics, or converting. By all means, get monks, but that doesn’t mean don’t get medical corps.

Medical Corps is micro-free, downtime-free, and allows seamless transition into multiple unit types as needed. It works in conjunction with monks, too.

Bow Saw usually pays off in around 4 minutes, and is nearly a mandatory upgrade. People often get the gold mining upgrades also with around a 5 minute payback time. For contrast, with just 5 battle elephants, Medical Corps pays for itself in a little less than 5 minutes. Especially given the very low cost for a UT, I think it’s an essential upgrade if you’re using any elephants at all.

That’s why we are advocating for buffs, isn’t it?

Wootz steel is essential for urumis because how their blast damage works. As an extreme example, against a unit with 10 melee armour, without wootz, urumis will do 9 blast damage, and they will do 15 with wootz.

So, for example, you need far fewer urumis as compared to champions if you are going against cavalry. If you are going against archers with infantry, urumis will do better as long as there is no meat shield in front. You make champions to eat up arrow fire, and urumis for DPS.

I can think of like 4 games recently where this was needed. 2 from masters of the arena, one where daut played against incas and the inca player kept making rams, and one pro game where dravidians went against byzantines. Dravidians don’t have a good enough skirm counter because they lack a stable.

No, that means he already paid for the castle.

My point still stands. Make monks. They are objectively better in every single way. Well, unless you can’t micro them. There is a reason why pro players use monks and not elephants to defend cavalry.

If they make like 4 monks, your entire game is over. It’s instant gg trying to hold with elephants. That’s why it’s a terrible play.

Look, if your eAPM is low and you can’t micro monks, this is probably useful. However, dravidians need a buff in thw 1200+ and especially 1900+ range. People at those elos don’t need auto healing. It could be nice, but that’s not what the civ needs.

My point being, I guess, that it’s difficult to properly assess their utility if nobody has actually used them in that manner as yet. Many units seem bad until you figure out how they are best used, and then end up actually getting nerfed instead.

I don’t entirely see the point you’re trying to make; blast damage ignores armor afaik. It always does half of the full damage, which is so high it ignores most armor. Even against a teutonic knight, you’re looking at two-thirds of your damage going through, and even the splash damage still does 10 damage.

Basically, relative to other units, they benefit less from Wootz Steel than almost any other unit. A light cavalry, for example, would instead gain 1000% extra damage from the tech against a teutonic knight, while an urumi would only gain 50%.

I just don’t see it. In every case I’ve experienced, champions serve in that role, even when significantly outnumbered. As long as I have the production capacity to have even close to equal resources, even longswords will handily beat an army of knights and skirms, even if the skirms are microed.

I guess my fundamental question is this; why elite battle elephant instead of the final cavalry armor upgrade?

Sure, but castles happen with great regularity, and given the defensive nature of the Dravidian midgame, I think having one is a perfectly reasonable assumption.

Not defensively. The attacker actually had 2 monks, they just died, and then the next ones couldn’t get there in time.

We have seen it. Daut has tried it, Viper has as well. I have personally tried it a couple of times, but not enough to draw any conclusions. I told you, I’m open to having my mind changed. Just need to see the evidence.

Not before wootz steel. There are 2 types of blast damages. First ignores armour. Example is Cataphracts, and Druzena infantry.
The second type does not ignore armour. Example is urumis, battle elephants, and war elephants. This means before wootz steel, the damage done by urumis to TKs through trample damage is (29-13)/2=8, and after wootz, it is 29/2=14

You are ignoring everything outside the charge attack. Urumis have a normal attack, which is weaker than a champion. Elite urumis have 10 attack, and 14 with all upgrades. Against TKs, they do 1 damage when outside the charge attack. So, except for that 1 hit every 20 seconds, the damage boost is still 1000%.

That’s fine as well tbh. I don’t mind either. In fact, last armour upgrade would be a stronger buff. I am just a bit biased because I like elephants and want to see elephants.

How did they die? It’s not like dravs have good light cavalry.

Again, you can say it as many times as you want. In practice, monks are always better. Ask any pro, any developer, any caster. As anybody over 2400k+ Elo. There is no point even in arguing about this.

Right, but if the blast attack didn’t ignore armor, then it would instead do (29/2)-13=1.5. Or worse, ((29-13)/2)-13=1. The main attack doesn’t ignore armor, but the blast does, is my point, so wootz steel helps the blast attack exactly as much as it helps the main attack, which in most cases, isn’t that much.

The higher your attack, the less important armor becomes, and the less helpful wootz steel becomes.

And yes, wootz steel does help them when not using their blast attack, but to me, that’s sorta like getting armor upgrades for your archers; it’s fine and alright, but ultimately slightly moderating a unit’s weaknesses isn’t making it better in its wheelhouse. They’re still just a mediocre unit in prolonged melee combat, and that’s by design. The blast attack is the core of what makes them good; the ability to instantly wipe a significant portion of the enemy force from the map in the first hit. The way you beat that is by continuing to engage after the blast attack hits, where they are weak and expensive, even with wootz steel.

Basically, when I get wootz, it makes me want the militia line more, not Urumis, and my instinct tells me the math backs that up.

Some sort of ranged attack iirc. There are any number of ways for monks to die though, and when on the defense, it takes a long time to get new ones out there, and they’re easy to snipe along the way too.

Again, I’m not saying you have to pick one or the other. It’s not like you have to pick between heavy plow OR bow saw; you get both, as soon as is remotely reasonable.

It doesn’t. Idk what you are talking about. Let me repeat, the blast attack does not ignore armour without wootz steel. As I said, wootz steel increases blast attack damage to 180% in case of TKs.

Again, this depends on if you are against melee, or ranged, and how much you push/pull. Against pure melee, urumis are significantly better. It isn’t even close. So no, the math does not back you up. Against ranged unit without meatshid (pure archer/HC), again, urumis dominate. These are not opinions, these are statements of fact.
Against champions, you can go full, pure arbalest and you are fine. If you do that with urumis, you will lose.

With urumis, you either win huge, or lose terribly. With champions, you have small wins and small loses.

Just make forward monastery. That’s better practice anyway, and is extremely common. Also, as I said, if you can’t keep the monks alive, that’s on you.

I am saying one is unnecessary, and can be changed. You saw this situation as a counterexample. I am saying that this is not a counterexample. This is not a scenario where battle elephants or medical corps is worth it.

We’re arguing semantics here, but if it didn’t ignore armor, then it would do half the main attack damage and then be reduced by the armor, not the other way around.

Let me rephrase; there are two ways you could do blast damage. You could do half the Man attack after the MAIN attack is reduced by armor, or you could do half the main attack BEFORE armor, and then apply armor to the blast damage instead.

The game does it the first way. You reduce the armor from the main attack, and then cut that in half, and the blast damage is not directly impacted by armor; in other words, the main attack is effected by armor, but the blast damage is not.

The other way would almost universally result in blast damage doing 1 damage, so it makes sense they did it this way.

Ultimately it’s semantics; the important part is, it worked the other way then Wootz Steel would increase the damage of the blast by 500%-1000%, wheras with this method, the blast damage is increased exactly as much as the main attack, so the fact it has blast damage really makes no difference in the RELATIVE importance of Wootz Steel.

That’s not true, though. In my testing, Champions tend to outperform Elite Urumis in equal-resource testing after Wootz Steel has been researched against all but the weakest units. The additional HP and armor, paired with cheaper cost, more than outweighs the bonus damage. Of course, IF you can get close, Urumis do great, but achieving that and not just wasting all your resources is questionable at best.

Urumis only really dominate if you have overwhelming numbers, but that’s not very realistic in a typical game, and like I said, generally only happens AFTER you’ve already effectively won the game.

Monks die all the time, lol. Even pro monks die all the time. It’s not a matter of IF, it’s a matter of WHEN. Medical Corps, by contrast, lasts forever.

The fact this game has play/counterplay isn’t a supporting argument really; it’s just a basic statement of the nature of the game.

Nah, I’d rather not. I think Medical Corps is a core aspect for people who actually enjoy the civ, and is as integral to their identity as Urumis are.

Honestly, it’s pretty strange to me how many people claim to like the civ, but at the same time want to remove everything about it that makes it interesting and distinctive! I’m with Viper on this one; don’t go changing the things that make the civ interesting and fun to play!

Stop. You don’t get to say who “aCtuaLLy EnJoYs thE CiV”. I have 300 games with Dravidians. Show your profile. You view it as a fancy toy. A novelty. You don’t actually play the civ, so don’t make such nonsensical claims.

Also, you are not the judge of what is integral to the civ. State is as your opinion, which it is. And I care very little for it.

Viper has no issues issues with changing medical corps, and he said as much in the video. Look at what he said about it on the poll.

I mean, you are just wrong, mathematically. I have done the tests lots of time. Same for wootz steel. It makes a huge difference. You can run the tests yourself and see, if you care.

Pro monks don’t die to random arrow fire. They usually die to precise attacks. That’s not battle elephants. You don’t have to keep them alive forever, only till you get the conversions on the elephants.

Much to the contrary, it’s actually the only civilization I’ve played for the last 3 or 4 weeks. By contrast, however, I am the one who likes it as it is, whereas you have tried to change virtually every aspect of it.

Honestly, I’m a bit perplexed as to what exactly you actually enjoy about it. It seems as if you have proposed removing almost everything that makes the civilization distinctive at some point or another. Why play something you seem to actively dislike in almost every way?

I’d say he was ambivalent. He did definitively say that he does not want the things that make the civilization interesting being changed, however.

To me, that predominantly includes Medical Corps.

So have i, interestingly. I’ve tried urumis, urumis and champions, and pure champions.

In most cases, unless I completely outnumbered them, I found the swordsman line to be preferable.

Sure they do. I was watching a game just yesterday which was I believe Hera versus heart, where I saw many monks dying to arrowfire. Sure, it was specifically targeted, but what difference does that make? That takes only the barest modicum of effort.

Monks are slow and weak, it’s inevitable that you are going to lose some, it’s only a matter of time. Assuming that a unit will never die is not a very balanced o meaningful way of comparison.

Okay, link your profile. You might’ve changed in the past 3 weeks, but I have my doubts with the situtaions before that. Also, nobody considers Medical corps to be particularly flavourful. Let’s just be clear, it’s just a “meh” bonus. Wootz steel is iconic, and flavourful. If asked about 3 main things about dravidians, it’s urumi, elephant archers, wootz steel. Some might also include lack of good stables in there, replacing one of the three.
Medical corps is irrelevant.

I don’t know what you are talking about. Every change I have proposed except medical corps and raiding unit are small ones. I have certain gripes, but that absolutely doesn’t mean I dislike it. Elephant archers are one of my favourite units, and dravidians are pretty much the only civ that can play them with infantry.
Also, I have personally learned to wield an urumi. That gives me an active investment in the way it is portrayed.

I will never understand this “kEeP the CiV wEaK tO MaInTaiN PuRiTy” argument, ever. Balance comes first. History second. Purity is a distant third, especially for a new civ like Dravs.

Stop putting words in his mouth. His replay was “I would say … arguably” sees yes, “that’s fair”.

To you, that might be medical corps, but that’s not his opinion, and that’s not the opinion of most people.

I’m not talking about preference. I am talking about how strong they are.

By imperial age, you should have enough food to go around. Therefore, I am considering 1 urumi = 1 champion, because they have equal gold cost. Here are the number of units 30 champions/30 urumis can beat.

Unit | Urumi | Champion
Arb | 22 | 19
Paladin | 18 | 15
Heavy Camels | 33 | 28
Generic Champion | 40 | 32

Taken From Here. They updated it for accuracy recently.

Are urumis vastly better? No. Are they better? Absolutely.

The difference is between building fire and archer fire. I should’ve clarified that. We could get into technicalities, but I don’t think there’s much of a point. If you want to defend against cavalry in castle age, going elephants is one of the dumbest things you can do. Just play monks.

Those two things you set aside completely change the identity of the civ. It seems to me that, in total, you’ve proposed changing almost every single thing about the civ. Just recently, you’ve proposed ruining their weak stable identity by giving them elite battle elephants, as one example among many. You can’t afford to ruin a civ’s identity for a mediocre increase in power.

Civ identity is the absolute number one goal with any change. Balance is second, history a distant third. It doesn’t matter if a civ is balanced if all civs end up bland, samey, and boring, which is exactly what most of your proposed changes would do.

His exact words were, “Every civ is already so similar…why do you want every civ to have access to everything?”

I appreciate that spirit.

Bad testing leads to useless results. You cannot produce urumis as fast, you cannot sustain maximum production.

Anything seems good if you ignore all the weaknesses first.

If your enemy is coming at you with a dozen knights, one or two monks is not going to save you. By contrast, one or two elephants can, by physically blocking them from entering your base, especially if you don’t have a monastery but you do have a stable.