So did I stated anything about war wagons are OP as my own meaning?
I only stated that the war wagons āhijackā the Koreans. Every time we discuss to add something new or remove something existing to Koreans, people always care about war wagons since people use them so much.
Add bloodline?
-No, war wagons will be overpower and Koreans will be overpower.
Add bloodline, let war wagons -10hp and elite war wagons -20hp?
-No, the usage of war wagons will be too hard and the usage of Koreans will be too hard.
etc.
I have suggested changing the class of armor of war wagons into cavalry + siege weapon from cavalry archer. Not only it is more close to the Hwacha, It is able to keep their statistics (including the attack bonus) from adjustment, letting them no longer be benefited by the free archer armor bonus and still having reasonable countering strategy. Then the bloodline is also discussable after this change.
If you make WW siege units, they should benefits siege engineers, and no archer armor, no archer attack, and no balistics. And this would be a nerf to the ground if they do not get bonus damage against siege, as any players can beat mass WW by making a couple of rams.
I like the idea of removing their bonus damage against building more.
We could also give them -1 range if they are OP. -1 range wil give them the same range as cav archers, so they will be outranged by TCs and it will be easier to deal with them using monks.
If bloodline were introduced for koreans it will never be researched for WW play except for the post imp so it makes absolutely no differences.
WW double castle is easy to counter juste make some monks in defence rewall.
By removing the strenght of WW you will just see a new uu which will have no use like arambai.
Considering the War Wagon is the Cavalry Archer replacement for Koreans, and the new Koreans are meant to be a heavy Archery Range civ, a Korean Cavalry Archer buff must necessarily accompany a War Wagon nerf. Koreans preferring Crossbow/Cavalry Archer in Castle Age with a late game transition to War Wagon is the ideal balance. I imagine a comprehensive redesign of Korean unit dynamics could look something like:
o Koreans gain Bloodlines.
o Koreans lose Chain Barding Armor as compensation for gaining Bloodlines to keep their tech tree theme of a weak Stable.
o Non-elite and Elite War Wagon -20 base HP as compensation for gaining Bloodlines (Testing on a Full Tech Tree game shows Bloodlines affect War Wagons.)
o Non-elite War Wagon loses its bonus damage vs. buildings.
o Husbandry no longer affects Non-elite and Elite War Wagon.
Here we see Koreans now having better Castle Age options than only UU. But with free Ring Archer Armor slowing down the fall off of Castle Age Archery Range units in Imperial Age, with the War Wagon still being easy to mass, and having a relatively cheap Elite upgrade by not costing food, an Imperial Age transition to the UU is doable, where Arbalester (or Cavalry Archer) covers the War Wagon weakness to Spears (and low mobility) while the Elite War Wagon covers the Arbalester/Cavalry Archer weakness to buildings (and Skirmishers to a lesser extent.)
I do not know whether or not the koreans are supposed to be this way, but these changes sound fine, except the husbandry part: it feels to gimmicky. I would decrease the WW movement speed instead (so a nerf) rather than the WW being affected by ābloodlines but not husbandryā.
I think with the last changes to Koreans they donāt need the war wagon in their current design anymore. They have decent archers, strong skirms, very good defences and Siege to deal with archers.
With their bonusses to stone and siege they also already have good pushing tools even without the war wagon.
Where koreans lack a bit is against cavalry. And I see that this could be the new āutilityā of the unit. Reduce their Pierce armor and give them bonus against cavalry instead against buildings. Makes the unit more specialised and fills the major weakness of the civ.
Currently the War Wagon more ājack of all traitsā than anything and I think it would benefit the civ if the unit would be adjusted so it plays a more destinct role in the army comp. I think thatās also why people criticize the unit as unexperienced people can struggle with having no clear ācounterā idea. (Besides a lot of units work against war wagons, they just need to be massed, no unit (except monks) gives a good trade if the war wagons still have a seizable value advantage.)
Wouldnāt do that, actually. I think Koreans already have a general problem with (and against) mobility. Better let the war wagon keep itās speed, as it is the basically only viable mobile tool the civ has to itās disposal.
I think koreans WW would be broken with a +6 damage vs cavalry. It would be like a geonese crossbowman without skirm and archers weakness. For me WW is already specialized as a slow but tanky cav archer.
After reading again, I agree with you that we should not decrease the WW speed any further . I still belive that it is bad if WW get bloodlines but not husbandry.
Actually the whole idea of Dbuen is not well thought. He wants to buff cav archers and nerf WW, but forgets to give Partian Tactics to koreans, so cav archers will still not br so great. So as Matcauthon3 said, it is just a nerf, as we would rather have armor than bloodlines in castle age if we need knights. His idea removes this option.
The main counters to WW should be monks, mangonels, knights, camels, and eagles. Not sure if they all work.
I donāt say WW is useless. It is needed for Koreans army composition but nowhere close to OP or āmetaā unit we can see in the tournament. None of the example you show is tournament game. Viper usually arenāt play perfectly in Ranked and still beat most of the players. Viper saying something āOPā āunbeatableā has little meaning. He even said Portuguese are OP on land.
Hera vs Viper in RBW4 (third game) was only case of mass WW appeared in major tournament, but Eagle and Monks just crush WW in that time.
There is no blast furnace already but sometimes Koreans still need the horsemen to do something like countering the skirmishers or raiding oppose base.
I would suggest adding blast furnace if they have to lose chain barding armor, then removing the hussars to keep the weak stable you stating. That would also help their halberdiers for countering the cavalry.
Or maybe just remove the hussar and get the bloodline, keeping the chain barding armor, lacking the blast furnace as the past.
How to technically make a cavalry archer unit benefited from bloodline but not from husbandry?
Create a new class of armor named āwagonā?
Why do they need this nerf?
It is net nerf to Koreans. WW nerfed and they get BL and also lose Chain Barding Armor. They need buff arenāt nerf. Also WW still slower than all cavarly with Husbandry (slower than Teutonic knight line), and more slower make them very awkward especially vs Halb. They become same speed as Lithuanians halb then.
Koreans problem arenāt against Cavarly. They still have halbs (lacking BF but at leastā¦). Koreans problem is that they are lacking tanky mobile unit can be used as raiding or absorb damage in battle and only WW fill this role. I donāt feel like WW bonus damage aginst Cavarly work. It can be too much for WW already tanky unit to counter archer.
Add skirms and pikes to that list and we have the list of the counters. You wouldn make pikes for obvious reasons against koreans, but skirms do work.
Mangonels alone actually donāt work, but I think thatās fine.
The key with all of these counters is to know that you need to get a seizable, upgraded mass first before engaging. The reasoning behind this is that all the units work as counter, but need food eco and upgrades, whilst the korean player doesnāt need that, he just can spam that unit.
But thatās also a main weakness of that strat as it doesnāt allow you to adjust. Itās an all-in strat.
Itās their main weakness.
Which actually means that they need 1 more hit against paladin. Even with factoring in the discount their halbs are somewhat about FU (same hits against cavaliers). And I think like about 3/4 of the civs have somewhat equivalent to FU halbs. Still cavalry dominates the ladder. Itās not enough to have about FU halbs to not be weak to cavalry. Ofc itās bad if you donāt have good halbs, but only FU halbs donāt make you good against cav.
Ofc if the other stats arenāt changed. But My proposal is to remove some of the pierce armor (so the wagon isnāt as strong against archery anymore) and the anti-building damage (so the fc push isnāt as oppressive anymore). I think that would be balanced. You can still adjust if itās not enough to go from 4 PA down to 2.
Donāt forget that the war wagon is also a very expensive unit, if it isnāt a jack of all traits anymore you would need different other unit types to protect it which would imply that you would need to set up a balanced eco with koreans instead of going for an all-in. This alone would heavily influence the powerspike the unit currently thrives from, which is the low eco investment needed to go for it.
Why stop with the War Wagons? Why not nerf every single UU in the game? yeah thatās what they should do. Trebs are also op, -5 to range and +30 seconds to deploy plz devs do it, come on plz! plz!!! ;_;
I didnāt mention the arambai outside of saying that they are useless now and yes i think it was dealable, stronger than current WW ? very probably however.
WW still have high HP and I still feel it soft-counter archer with less PA. I am not sure more tanky version of GC can work. Maybe reduce HP as well and slight cost reduction? Arbs should work against WW well in that scenario. WW can be Broken in late TG if both Archer and Cavarly arenāt work well.
I think Koreans coul just get a flat bonus of - 10 W for all units
That would also make them better on Water and Hybrid maps because it would affect their fish boom. And I think originally Koreans were intended to be strong on these maps, as they are classified as a naval civ.
I also donāt see a problem of the bonus affecting siege tbh. Koreans already have one of the best lategame siege it would just fit their general design if their bonus wouldnāt exclude siege. Imo this doesnāt make sense.
Itās more ābrokenā atm actually than it would be then. WIth the current meta of the archers having to deal the most damage, War Wagon + arb is actually stronger than paladin + arb. The main weakness of going for the strat is the low eco of the koreans player and war wagons have way less mobility, so you need flanks that can hold without your support a bit longer. So itās not that easy to get to that strong lategame comp.
But ofc, I think in TG, very lategame, there is nothing stronger than Elite War Wagon / HCA (or british archery). I canāt imagine any comp beating that. (Koreans player having one of the best siege helps also a lot there.)
Still, I wait for any pros to get to this comp in Teamgames.
And if WW would have less PA they would be less usable in that way as they would take a lot of damage from the enemy archers. Even if they deal bonus damage to cavalry, the reduced PA would have more impact there.
Well, dependsā¦ On arena ? maybe. Even easier if we nerf their damage to buildingsā¦
But then: what are you doing while the enemy makes WW ? onky booming ? no castle or army ? Would you survive from 2 siege towers with 10 crossbows ?
On open maps, harder to surviveā¦ But also harder fir the korean player to survive until massing WWā¦
Oh yeah, skirm should work. i think i am usually frustrated because it is not as good a counter as against archers. But it works. And I tend to panick and send units before having massed enough, which is importantā¦
Pikes might work if mixed with rams, but probably not that good.
I think it is fine that koreans are somwhat weak against paladins in late game. Halbs, WW, and hand cannoners can do the job to some extend.
