It is not impractical either, you may have Elite Skirms but not Arbalest researched, because you went for Plumes or Eagles previously, but then your ally just told you he would go for mass Camels, so you want a unit that covers the Camel weakness (Archers).
You may also go for Mass Skirms if you are fighting Tatars, Turks or Mongols.
Not to mentions that Hul’che Skirms are better against buildings than Arbalests are now, since Obsidian Arrows has been deleted, and the Skirms will always deal 2 damage per attack, while Arbs will only deal 1.
Would not help much anyway, you cannot reduce damage below 1, and since the new Mayans UT gives Skirms a double attack, it cannot be reduced to lower than 2.
He might be talking about the hp bonus from those as well, I included that in the 7k hp figure though, masonry gives 10% more I don’t know about architecture
Didn’t realize that the Saracen’s team bonus was online.
That’s a completely pointless demonstration then, because if you’ve got skirms in a team game you’ve already lost. Otherwise, there’s zero practical application for this castle sniping gimmick since it’d only be remotely useful in lategame trash fights, which literally cannot happen in a game with a teammate because either you are trading or you’re probably dead.
Well guys, it’s important to notice that the tech will work a little different for high or low piercing armor targets…
If you are using against archer or anything that takes more than 1 of damage for a skirm. like 11 on a arbalest, it makes less than 1% of increased damage output.
But, when used on high pierce armor targets, or high enough to deny the skirm damage like a champion, a ram, or a paladin, the damage is doubled! 100% more damage in these situations, it’s a pretty good tech, that cover a little a weak spot of the unit…
But they have a slower than average fire rate of 3, as do all skirmishers. That means, comparatively to an Archer, it’ll only do .6 dps compared to an archer’s .5 dps in a case against a high-pierce target where minimum damage is applied, assuming the spear hits.
It might be a substantial increase over the generic Skirmisher but it’s still utterly pitiful compared to any ranged unit.
Again. I don’t care if the tech is good or bad. I’m frustrated by the fact that it’s another skirmisher UT on a meso civ and this entire tangent is utterly meaningless to me. I’d rather it be a far worse Halb tech than this instead of being another skirm tech. Maybe we change a different civ’s UT to make up for it, idk, it’s just way too homogeneous for my tastes.
I don’t mind that all Mesos have a skirm UT, it’s a way to make them feel closer on top of eagles and same architecture. It’s a bit like how all Western European civs have no bloodlines nor thumbring, or all middle eastern civs have camels.
One could argue the fact that Spanish used to have this architecture set shows ES didn’t care about this, but with DE it fits, and Burgundian don’t break the trend. Maybe it’s not intentional but it’s nice to have.
But Americans civs having a skirmishers specific UT is completely intentional and I think it fits. It is nice to have an above average skirmishers for them as they don’t have LC/Hussar which is the strongest trash unit.
I find it funny that people complain about Chinese not having Gunpowder and Indians not having Battle Elephants, when the Britons also lack the Thumb Ring, which historically was the very sign of Yeomanship, and every professional Longbowman had one.
Everyone’s arguing accuracy and all I can ask is “why here.” There’s a billion places where we could be accurate and we choose not to be, yet now we have changed a UT that was inaccurate but popular (strong even) into something completely homogeneous because “accuracy.” Boring, ridiculous, and it’s a lazy argument. This game is less accurate than a CA pre-Thumb ring.
I don’t care what UT gets changed. It’s utterly ridiculous that all three meso civs have UT’s for the same exact units now. They had the chance to do something different with the Mayans UT since they were changing it anyway and they just decided to do the same thing again except differently and these two terms are not the same thing. Rant over.
“but mayan spear throwing”
Tell me what civilization, prior to the existence of metal warfare, didn’t have spear throwers with mad skill. Turns out, spears were pretty dang good until we figured out how to make really sharp metal. Okay, rant now actually over.
Actually, Spears began dominating Warfare after they got made of Metal, not before.
Before Metal, the Wrist Axe and teh Warclub were the most used weapons, at least as far as archaelogy can tell us.
The military Spear usually shows up alongside Copper, in most places around the world, so it is kind of a marvel that the Mayans still preffered Spears over Warclubs (the Aztecs were big on Warclubs and Slings, for example) even though they had no metalworking.
That sounds like a stretch. To me, spears are the ultimate simple weapon. They get improved by metal, but further I think the conditions created by metal warfare make the spear better. AKA, armor with gaps, heavier weapons with shorter range but more lethality. Having the ability to poke from a good distance is something that scales very well through history, which is why we always prefer effective range in combat, especially in the modern era, but in every phase of historical combat.
The spear will always have value as a weapon due to it’s ease and reach. You really can make a spear that’s usable and effective out of almost nothing, and that’s hard to replace.
They actually are not, specially not Melee Spears. They only really start showing up for militaries around teh world, when Copper does, believe it or not.
Are you talking about spear throwing or spear use in hand-to-hand? Because I totally believe spear throwing is largely pointless without a metal tip (much harder to impart force) but the idea that a long stick with a sharp end wasn’t a useful tool for fighting before metal armor exists is hard to imagine.
I mean, I guess you can throw rocks and I’m underestimating the utility of a well-used sling, but still.
It actually was not, since Shields and padded cloth existed far before metal weapons did, so the Spear was actually not a good weapon to kill humans with.