ah ok, this is interesting. so the bonus is to make it easier to tech into them if you are going cav. I like it
Sure. But Iām not sure if my proposed civ can do that faster than Mongols.
Originally I planned LC and Hussar one age earlier. Maybe thatās a way safer bet that has Dark Age bonus. You know what, Iām changing now.
+6/+8. Thatās +1/+1 more than Tatars but also no Bloodlines. In castle age it is +4/+4 and I calculated thatās same as generic against skirms and knight, and worse than generic against Camel, Pikeman. Didnāt calculate for Imperial though.
Not good enough trash units.
Svan Tower that can move. 11
BTW, Ballista elephant donāt have any minimum range.
You can certainly say that. At least none of them ride horse and fire arrow, and more importantly not cost food. Also they will are easier to micro due to higher speed.
Yes and reverse.
i donāt care. resources on kill are anti-fun, because you are incentivised to delete units. and a civ with strong cav archers can just maintain them in a trash war
It can be tolerated that nomadic civs have a fictional wonder. But if you really want a reference, perhaps this one.
As for leader names, there are so many known names in the Ashina clan, not to mention the leaders of Tiele, Turgesh, Karluks, Uyghurs, etc.
Not sure about the Hussar upgrade. Itās expensive more than the Cavalier. Can people afford it in practice?
5% is not a clear difference. How about 20%/40%? Though I worry that the discount could be broken with the hunting bonus in the early castle age, and in the other hand, lacking Bloodlines could still make the civ overly weak in melee after the early castle age, which the discount could not cover.
Itās still weird to see no Bloodlines for them. Their horses were the basis of the Gokturk as well as Tang Dynasty cavalry and were affirmed by Emperor Taizong. I still want them to have it. Maybe let another civ lack it, like Sogdians.
Just not a fan.
It is gimmicky and costs so many but just for making up the lack of Bloodlines and Ring armor.
Iād still like to have at least scout cavalry line get more LOS. Just saying.
Well, no. Put aside whether it will be broken or not, it will make the Vikings no more unique.
The Buri, or Fuli spoke in Chinese, is the most obvious choice for UU as it is clearly recorded in history as the name of the elite guards. The term buri literally means wolves, and the gokturk warriors are known for the wolf totem on their banners.
Of course it makes sense too that they can be good at mounted archery, but people usually describe, or imagine, the buri warriors are heavy armored and good at charge with lancers. If the UU cannot be named buri, they may get a generic name like āhornbow cavarlyā. Well, not really attractive.
Why donāt give them full upgraded infantry at least?
Personally I think the most important thing is to make the UU have own niche rather than competing with generic units. If there could be a fresh and interesting gimmick for the melee cavalry UU, I would not mind it at all.
For example, make the buri warrior still able to move, attack and take damage within three second after killed, and then remove the Plate Barding Armor. I just read some sources saying that only guard warriors were allowed to use armors. āā¦the Gokturks frequently do not equip their horses in heavy armor but were still able to triumph in many of their engagements.ā so if you really want to have they lack full upgrade Knights, perhaps we can just remove the whole of Knight line, then try to make the steppe lancers more benefits, like the elite upgrade costs -50% and one age earlier, and there is imperial steppe lancer upgrade.
This should make steppe lancers better against units other than archers and make the buri an expensive but tanky cavalry to play a role in the late game.
The decent generic CA with full upgrade could serve as reliable ranged damage maker to cooperate with melee cavalry no matter which the melee cavalry are and what stage they are used, and there might be better have a bonus like free HCA upgrade to bring a power peak in the middle stage of game.
I am not sure how will this kind of CA UU be with the generic CA.
But such slow units donāt fit the image of a civ thatās supposed to be mobile and aggressive. Not a fan.
You can just choose one of the two bonuses.
I guess not. It will remain as a show off.
Most of the discount increases by 5% per age. I canāt remind anything other than Mayans and Malay. Malay one has very good reason and Mayans one was always OP. And 20% discount without Bloodlines wonāt be enough.
Sure. It is for the sake of variety.
Funny I was thinking about free Bloodlines for them.
Maybe limit it to cavalry just like Persians?
I just feel like FU infantry doesnāt match the steppe civs. I donāt have any strong opinion on this though.
Seen this on your previous threads. Not a fan.
I think we really should get out of melee cavalry UU for a while now.
They will have higher dps. I thought they could be broken if they are also very good at hit & run. Maybe you can raise the speed and then cost as well.
2 Likes
Why not combine the pass through with something else like bonus against uu or cavalry?
It is just for only steppe lancers, so 5% is not really different.
The Berbers discount is 15%/20%, but for all stable units.
Even Huns have a difference of 10% on CA.
Eh. Due to the history, the Gokturks obviously should not have weaker horses (animal) than Chinese and Sogdians. Iād say the variety is not everything. If you want the sake of variety, maybe keeping the bloodlines but lacking the Knight line is the way more varied, more interesting and still follow the historical accuracy.
When you pursue the variety?
The interesting mechanic, what kind of niche it would have, and historical accuracy are the points I check. The type of unit is not the most important.
I mean, sure that having variety could be nice, but come on the civ is pretty clearly suitable to have a melee cavalry UU. If you check the historical records you will find the Buri, the wolf guards, is the most suitable thing to be the reference for the UU. Only warriors serving as bodyguards were eligible to wear armor, so it would also make sense for the civ to use the Buri playing the role of heavy armored tank especially they might have no Plate Barding Armor and entire Knight line.
There are some existing civs have melee cavalry UU, like Burgundians and Lithuanians, but they actually not really āneedā melee cavalry to be UU because they have more better choices. The Burgundians had the largest and most advanced field artillery army in Europe, and 1/3 of the Burgundian soldiers was said equipped with guns in heydays; The LeiÄiai were armed retinues, and almost their image was of infantry though one of their duties is to raise horses.
My point is, Iād like to see a civ who deserves a melee cavalry UU getting it rather than losing it due to the existing civs who not really need it but have obtained it. So sad.
Then I may give up on such a design. Itās a shame that a classic nomadic civ cannot hit & run and forced to be slow. Maybe making the arrows can passing through only one unit could help the balance work. I donāt know.
As for a mechanic for a CA UU, perhaps having lower HP and an attack bonus against cavalry could be good. That would make it weaker against archers and infantry, evenly matched against CA, and stronger against cavalry. Iāve a Sogdians concept that has such kind of CA the UU and has a UT which makes the Sogdian Cataphracts trainable at Stables.
I planned to do so for Pashtuns as they would be a hindustanis split.
Good point. Iāll add Gambeson.
I guess we have to disagree.
Probably Monaspa was my tripping point. If not way out of historical context, Iāll change all the melee cavalry uu to range for a while from now on.
I see your point. Letās see what game devs have on their mindā¦
Kipchaks have very low health. And CA UUs are usually good against cavalry.
Adding Bloodlines requires a good number of changes. Luckily I did have some plan B.
1 Like
Fine. That is your concept and your choice and I respect.
Iām not interested in Hindustanis split to be honest. No matter what, I would like to keep bloodlines for the Gokturk because they are Gokturks.
Ok that is my opinion. Many things affect peopleās experience. The type of UU is a thing but not necessarily the most important.
I focus on the historical accuracy and the niche that UU can make up the flaw of the tech tree. The mechanic of Buri does not have to be keeping alive within seconds after killed, but it could be great to play the role of heavy cavalry well when there is no Knight.
Well, all you can disagree.
By the way, if you eager a CA UU so much, there are a CA UU for the Sogdians and the Crossbow Cavalry (CA type too) for the Khitans in my concepts, so we can welcome, or tolerate, the Gokturks and Jurchens to have melee cavalry UU.
Kipchaks have very low HP but the additional arrows cause extra damage and the most importantly they are pretty cheap. What I suggest would still be different. No matter with low HP or not, they could cause less damage on archers and infantry by their basic attack but clearly more damage on cavalry than other CA units due to the attack bonus. In other words, they were specialized against cavalry, which means they could cooperate well with the Sogdian Cataphracts and probably would not be cheap like Kipchaks.
1 Like
With Bloodlines.
Gokturks
Cavalry civilization
Team Bonus - Market gives 15 pop space.
Civilization Bonuses -
- Hunters drop off 15% more.
- TCs spawn one scout cavalry on age advancing.
- Steppe Lancer is 15%/20% cheaper in Castle/Imperial Age.
- Cavalry Archer arrows pass through enemies, deal 50% damage on secondary targets and arrow travels 3 more tiles than max range.
Unique Technologies -
- All buildings and land military units except siege +3 LOS. (200 food/150 wood, 30 seconds)
- Get 5 gold for each military units killed by cavalry. (600 food/600 wood, 40 seconds)
Unique Unit -
Cavalry with thrust attack (Ghulam mechanic)
Cost: 45f/65g
TT: 12 seconds
HP: 105, 135
Attack: 9, 11
Pass through damage: 50%
Armor: 2/2, 3/2
Rof: 1.8
Speed: 1.35
Missing Techs and units -
Rax = Eagle
Range = HC
Stable = Knight, BE
SW = SR, BBC
Blacksmith = Last archer armor
Monastery = Fervor, Faith, Illumination, Block Printing
Dock = Galleon, Heavy Demo, CG, Dromon
University = No Keep, BBT, Heated Shot, Arrowslit
Eco = Final stone mining
Other = Hoardings
15%/30% might be acceptable to encourage using them in the Imperial.
Would units at the 10 tiles away be hit? Would this be not too powerful?
People would no longer use scorpions.
How many units the āsecondary targetsā means? Only one? All on the straight line?
I think it is enough that an arrow could hit just one more unit after hitting the main target unit.
If you like it stronger, seeing the arrows passing through more units on the line, I think the arrows should at least have the damage decrease (like 50% ā 25% ā 10%) until hitting the Nth unit (like 4th) and disappear.
I still worry about overlapping the Keshiks. And this is still far stronger than the Chieftains.
The effect of the CA bonus looks more like a effect that should be a UT, to be honest.
I think lacking the Bracer is a must than the Ring Archer Armor due to the CA bonus.
With lacking of Bracer, the range arrows traveling could be +0/+1 than max range in the Castle/Imperial age.
But anyway, this plan is better. I can clearly see the gameplay that feudal scouts ā early castle age lancers ā CA ā CA + UU or Hussars.
2 Likes
About the challenge to fit Japanese and Korean campaigns into a thematic DLC:
Thx, MatM for outlining their connections. Both campaigns could be bundled with Jurchens (in a bit smaller than usual DLC, only 1 new civ + 3 campaigns) or Khitans are added as well (making the DLC larger than usual with 4 campaigns and 2 new civs). As DoI already changed the usual formula, this is still plausible.
Would be a good package for fans of the two old civs in particular, and also for all those hoping for Jurchens.
(the Chinese campaign could still be bundled with Tibetians and e.g. Tais)
4 Likes
Yeah, itās works to meā¦
How could the Siamese campaign relate to Chinese and Tibetan people? So far, the campaigns in the DLCs after DE will have AI players from the new civs of the DLC.
Isnāt it more obvious that Siamese and Chams will be in one DLC? This DLC might also contain the Nuosu or Mons or Javanese civ.
I really think that a new East Asian DLC with new civs for the Jurchens and Khitans and campaigns for the Jurchens, Khitans, Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese is not really that far-fetched. We have had a DLC containing 3.5 new civs and 3.5 new campaigns, so a DLC containing 2 new civs and 5 new campaigns should not have no chance. Roughly speaking, both are 7 new things.
As I understand it, not every campaign in an DLC needs to have AI players of every other civ in that DLC (Tatar campaign has no Bulgarians, Lithuanian campaign no Bohemians, etc ). And both Tibetans and Tais had links to Chinese.
But, yes, it could be more coherent to separate DLCs along the lines of East Asia Vs South-East Asia. I just want Tibetans, Jurchens and Tais more than Chams or Khitans. And I am not sure if they really release a DLC with 5 campaigns which supposingly is more work to do than to introduce a civ. If itās only Jurchens + the three old civs, some may say, only one new civ, on the other hand, they have to slow down anyway with new civs as hardly anyone is able to remember all or most of them anymore.
It started from LOTW DLC. Also not all 3 campaigns must have all 3 civs. I think only DOTD has that.
1 Like
I donāt know too much about specific civs, but I think Hindustanis and Dravidians could maybe be further split.
Iām not against this but what would the Mameluke unit be renamed to?
I donāt think so much āsplitā as āadd the Kannadigasā who are VERY different*, and most people just leave the map empty where they are.
*Kannadiga strength was in heavy cavalry, which is different from every S. Asian civ in the game currently. So I hope they are eventually added, as I like to see what more can be done with geographical areas with more restricted tech trees.
4 Likes
See now thats a cool concept. Paladins and elephant archers!? Yes please
