Indians Discussion Thread
- gamevideo113
- Howdah
- Posts: 1899
- Joined: Apr 26, 2017
- ESO: gamevideo113
Re: Indians Discussion Thread
If skirms are shooting your siege elephants you're probably doing something wrong lol
[Some people aspire to be pr30+, some people aspire to have fun, and some people aspire to play 3v3 Deccan.] - vividlyplain - 2019
Who (nationality) rape ?
stupid logic. noob players can say op?
toxic, Insult, Racism ?
stupid logic. noob players can say op?
toxic, Insult, Racism ?
- [Armag] diarouga
- Ninja
- Posts: 12710
- Joined: Feb 26, 2015
- ESO: diarouga
- Location: France
Re: Indians Discussion Thread
gamevideo113 wrote:If skirms are shooting your siege elephants you're probably doing something wrong lol
Nope, it happens very often, even in high level games.
Just get your skirms in the front, and the falconets behind.
He can't poke your skirms because he'll get hit by falcs else, and if you try to snipe the falcs with your siege elephants, you'll have to commit and skirms will focus fire them.
- lemmings121
- Jaeger
- Posts: 2673
- Joined: Mar 15, 2015
- ESO: lemmings121
Re: Indians Discussion Thread
[Armag] diarouga wrote:gamevideo113 wrote:If skirms are shooting your siege elephants you're probably doing something wrong lol
Nope, it happens very often, even in high level games.
Just get your skirms in the front, and the falconets behind.
He can't poke your skirms because he'll get hit by falcs else, and if you try to snipe the falcs with your siege elephants, you'll have to commit and skirms will focus fire them.
ranged cav tag on siege eles is so bad.
- [Armag] diarouga
- Ninja
- Posts: 12710
- Joined: Feb 26, 2015
- ESO: diarouga
- Location: France
Re: Indians Discussion Thread
Garja wrote:siege eles are fine, they have other perks
Are they better than rams?
Re: Indians Discussion Thread
Siege ellies having only 30rr, light cav tag (but not abstract cavalry tag), and artillery tag makes them really easy to counter. Skirms (especially arq with repelling volley), longbows, fusiliers, meteor hammers, rifle riders, heck even arrow knights and yabusame melt them and without abstract cav tag they even die pretty easily to weird units like grens, abus guns, bombards, and even cdb & vills have a multiplier against them lol
Re: Indians Discussion Thread
They have like 700hp and 5 speed or something. Countering artillery is sort of a loophole in Indian army, probably to compensate for the fact that all other units are super strong. In fact most of times you can just kill artillery in other ways, either by using infantry or with elephants or even just with mass zambs.
-
- Pro Player
- Posts: 8049
- Joined: May 4, 2015
- ESO: PrinceofBabu
Re: Indians Discussion Thread
Agreed but with that said 28 range does suck. Same range as hc which take 5 shots, almost same range as lb (which hard counter) and out ranged by frigates.
-
- Advanced Player
- Posts: 768
- Joined: Aug 7, 2016
- ESO: miggo1999
- Location: Hannover
-
- Advanced Player
- Posts: 768
- Joined: Aug 7, 2016
- ESO: miggo1999
- Location: Hannover
-
- Crossbow
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Sep 30, 2019
- ESO: Granlentin
Re: Indians Discussion Thread
Hello, new to the forums here, I didn't read all of the 50 pages, only last ones, so sorry if I make a repetition.
I just wanted to talk about the Cease Fire ability (lol) and made some proposals. I read some of yours, but I'm not convinced by the pure delete of this or to change this by a export generator. I mean this have to be reworked for sure, but I'll like to conserve the basic purpose and stay close as possible of the design will behind it.
I assume that the ability was made for a defensive combat purpose only, so I'll develop in this way.
For all of this proposals, the ability can take after a delay (to be ajust) with the possibility to be also announced to ennemy players. So it limit the surprise effect.
A mix of them could be possible too. I stick with an ability limited in time, numbers to be ajust with tests.
1. All units become untargetable near their ally buildings only (maybe exepting walls), all buildings untargetable, defensive buildings still can fire.
2. For this one, think this as a pact witch have been sign between factions, and all violations of this pact lead to a sanction. Here the thing: during the time effect, all damages infliged are somehow converted into a gold penalty (again this is not 1 for 1 ratio). So you hit a unit, you lose gold. Apply to all players. If the situation really require, you can do what you have to do but have to pay for this.
- In this period of time you have to give direct order to attack, unit will be set to not attack automatically by default.
- Maybe Indian player can choose the penalty ressource you have to pay with.
- Maybe add a multiplier penalty for economic units.
- negative ressource must be possible.
This one is not oriented defensive so much, but maybe to promote it with the penalty is higher for the one who plays it.
3. Affect economic units only and maybe buildings, with ajustements for time effect and cooldown.
4. Increase buildings damages and give them all the ability to fire with few exceptions like walls. Not my favourite alternative because this not fit the Taj Mahal style and this is most buff oriented, but serve more or less the same "defense for a short period of time" purpose.
5. Any Military can't move or attack from any side. Units can be trained but can't do anything during the time effect. Maybe you can continue the construction of buildings but can't create new ones, I dunno. Not my favorite solution too, looks like a weird military freeze.
So yeah for all of those this is a complete rework, thats a lot of weird proposals but IMO the mechanic is broken in his design itself, so here we are. I don't know if all of this can be made with modding and how much time it needs honestly. So, what do you think of those ?
I just wanted to talk about the Cease Fire ability (lol) and made some proposals. I read some of yours, but I'm not convinced by the pure delete of this or to change this by a export generator. I mean this have to be reworked for sure, but I'll like to conserve the basic purpose and stay close as possible of the design will behind it.
I assume that the ability was made for a defensive combat purpose only, so I'll develop in this way.
For all of this proposals, the ability can take after a delay (to be ajust) with the possibility to be also announced to ennemy players. So it limit the surprise effect.
A mix of them could be possible too. I stick with an ability limited in time, numbers to be ajust with tests.
1. All units become untargetable near their ally buildings only (maybe exepting walls), all buildings untargetable, defensive buildings still can fire.
2. For this one, think this as a pact witch have been sign between factions, and all violations of this pact lead to a sanction. Here the thing: during the time effect, all damages infliged are somehow converted into a gold penalty (again this is not 1 for 1 ratio). So you hit a unit, you lose gold. Apply to all players. If the situation really require, you can do what you have to do but have to pay for this.
- In this period of time you have to give direct order to attack, unit will be set to not attack automatically by default.
- Maybe Indian player can choose the penalty ressource you have to pay with.
- Maybe add a multiplier penalty for economic units.
- negative ressource must be possible.
This one is not oriented defensive so much, but maybe to promote it with the penalty is higher for the one who plays it.
3. Affect economic units only and maybe buildings, with ajustements for time effect and cooldown.
4. Increase buildings damages and give them all the ability to fire with few exceptions like walls. Not my favourite alternative because this not fit the Taj Mahal style and this is most buff oriented, but serve more or less the same "defense for a short period of time" purpose.
5. Any Military can't move or attack from any side. Units can be trained but can't do anything during the time effect. Maybe you can continue the construction of buildings but can't create new ones, I dunno. Not my favorite solution too, looks like a weird military freeze.
So yeah for all of those this is a complete rework, thats a lot of weird proposals but IMO the mechanic is broken in his design itself, so here we are. I don't know if all of this can be made with modding and how much time it needs honestly. So, what do you think of those ?
Re: Indians Discussion Thread
I am once again going to bring up removing 'light cavalry' tag from the siege elephant for a few reasons.
Primarily, skirmishers are intended to counter anticav, which siege elephants definitely are not. They also have a much lower range resist than other artillery to begin with, meaning that its quite reasonable to snipe them with infantry already. In matchups with absurdly good anti-goon units such as longbows or arqubusiers, they just get one shotted.
They don't counter cavalry, so they arent light cav. It is quite similar to adding 'abstract cavalry' to horse artillery "bEcAusE tHerE's a hOrsE". Its not cavalry, its an artillery unit and should be countered as such.
They only have 4 speed. Unlike garja said, they are actually the same speed as infantry, so you cannot outrun approaching skirms, only keep distance.
They have the artillery tag already, meaning they are hard countered very effectively by dragoons, so its not like removing skirms from the hard counters will make them unreasonably difficult to kill. Yabsuame and rifle riders melt siege elephants like imperial garrochistas through strelets.
They are also countered by culverins since they have the artillery tag, which includes funky units like honoured flaming arrows, light cannons, etc.
My other suggestion would be to add
+2 range
+0.5 multi vs artillery
To the honoured upgrade age IV
As they just straight up lose to heavy cannons and great bombards, i think rockets too. Pretty pathetic for an anti-artillery unit that costs.. is it 700 res?
As you all probably know i make fun of op india all the time but this is a pretty glaring inconsistency in the counter system, which i think should be looked at a bit. I wouldnt touch their fortress age stats apart from the unit tag, i think they are good there, but age 4, they're just laughably bad
Primarily, skirmishers are intended to counter anticav, which siege elephants definitely are not. They also have a much lower range resist than other artillery to begin with, meaning that its quite reasonable to snipe them with infantry already. In matchups with absurdly good anti-goon units such as longbows or arqubusiers, they just get one shotted.
They don't counter cavalry, so they arent light cav. It is quite similar to adding 'abstract cavalry' to horse artillery "bEcAusE tHerE's a hOrsE". Its not cavalry, its an artillery unit and should be countered as such.
They only have 4 speed. Unlike garja said, they are actually the same speed as infantry, so you cannot outrun approaching skirms, only keep distance.
They have the artillery tag already, meaning they are hard countered very effectively by dragoons, so its not like removing skirms from the hard counters will make them unreasonably difficult to kill. Yabsuame and rifle riders melt siege elephants like imperial garrochistas through strelets.
They are also countered by culverins since they have the artillery tag, which includes funky units like honoured flaming arrows, light cannons, etc.
My other suggestion would be to add
+2 range
+0.5 multi vs artillery
To the honoured upgrade age IV
As they just straight up lose to heavy cannons and great bombards, i think rockets too. Pretty pathetic for an anti-artillery unit that costs.. is it 700 res?
As you all probably know i make fun of op india all the time but this is a pretty glaring inconsistency in the counter system, which i think should be looked at a bit. I wouldnt touch their fortress age stats apart from the unit tag, i think they are good there, but age 4, they're just laughably bad
Re: Indians Discussion Thread
Na, India is fine imo. Siege eles have much more range than skirms anyway.
Also, India is the only civ with a "culv shipment" in age 3. If you buff that vs skirms, India will have an easier time dealing with 2 falcs, which is one of their few weaknesses. Goons aren't as good vs siege eles due to less range and being hard countered by ghurka sepoy.
Also, India is the only civ with a "culv shipment" in age 3. If you buff that vs skirms, India will have an easier time dealing with 2 falcs, which is one of their few weaknesses. Goons aren't as good vs siege eles due to less range and being hard countered by ghurka sepoy.
- [Armag] diarouga
- Ninja
- Posts: 12710
- Joined: Feb 26, 2015
- ESO: diarouga
- Location: France
Re: Indians Discussion Thread
I agree that it is a bad design but balance is more important.dansil92 wrote:I am once again going to bring up removing 'light cavalry' tag from the siege elephant for a few reasons.
Primarily, skirmishers are intended to counter anticav, which siege elephants definitely are not. They also have a much lower range resist than other artillery to begin with, meaning that its quite reasonable to snipe them with infantry already. In matchups with absurdly good anti-goon units such as longbows or arqubusiers, they just get one shotted.
They don't counter cavalry, so they arent light cav. It is quite similar to adding 'abstract cavalry' to horse artillery "bEcAusE tHerE's a hOrsE". Its not cavalry, its an artillery unit and should be countered as such.
They only have 4 speed. Unlike garja said, they are actually the same speed as infantry, so you cannot outrun approaching skirms, only keep distance.
They have the artillery tag already, meaning they are hard countered very effectively by dragoons, so its not like removing skirms from the hard counters will make them unreasonably difficult to kill. Yabsuame and rifle riders melt siege elephants like imperial garrochistas through strelets.
They are also countered by culverins since they have the artillery tag, which includes funky units like honoured flaming arrows, light cannons, etc.
My other suggestion would be to add
+2 range
+0.5 multi vs artillery
To the honoured upgrade age IV
As they just straight up lose to heavy cannons and great bombards, i think rockets too. Pretty pathetic for an anti-artillery unit that costs.. is it 700 res?
As you all probably know i make fun of op india all the time but this is a pretty glaring inconsistency in the counter system, which i think should be looked at a bit. I wouldnt touch their fortress age stats apart from the unit tag, i think they are good there, but age 4, they're just laughably bad
Artillery is India's only weakness (and siege elephants do okay honestly, also sepoys/mahouts+cease fire is scary) and removing it would be very dangerous.
Re: Indians Discussion Thread
I was always wondering what the effect of sieging a wonder while aging is.
So India is aging with the agra and I siege it in the meantime, does it affect the age up time or the HP of the wonder?
Not sure where to put this question but whatever I guess
So India is aging with the agra and I siege it in the meantime, does it affect the age up time or the HP of the wonder?
Not sure where to put this question but whatever I guess
Re: Indians Discussion Thread
No, aging up is not slowed by sieging the wonder. It will lose HP, but while they still age, they continously regenerate the HP very fast.blackout wrote:I was always wondering what the effect of sieging a wonder while aging is.
So India is aging with the agra and I siege it in the meantime, does it affect the age up time or the HP of the wonder?
Not sure where to put this question but whatever I guess
Re: Indians Discussion Thread
Im just throwing this out there:
What if mansabdars were +15% instead of 10%. What impacts if any would this have on the meta and/or late game scaling
What if mansabdars were +15% instead of 10%. What impacts if any would this have on the meta and/or late game scaling
- [Armag] diarouga
- Ninja
- Posts: 12710
- Joined: Feb 26, 2015
- ESO: diarouga
- Location: France
Re: Indians Discussion Thread
India is a slow civ with already great skirmishers. Buffing mansabdars wouldn't solve the early game issues and make their late fortress even stronger.dansil92 wrote:Im just throwing this out there:
What if mansabdars were +15% instead of 10%. What impacts if any would this have on the meta and/or late game scaling
I'm not sure it's necessary.
Re: Indians Discussion Thread
Is India considered a bad late-game civ?
I think they are rather strong with their gurkha/sepoy/siege ele death ball.
I think they are rather strong with their gurkha/sepoy/siege ele death ball.
Whatever is written above: this is no financial advice.
Beati pauperes spiritu.
Beati pauperes spiritu.
- howlingwolfpaw
- Jaeger
- Posts: 3476
- Joined: Oct 4, 2015
Re: Indians Discussion Thread
duckzilla wrote:Is India considered a bad late-game civ?
I think they are rather strong with their gurkha/sepoy/siege ele death ball.
I play india in FFA that goes late game, I would say they are challenging, and match up poorly VS some other civ late games, but they have a lot of good late game cards, you can not even pick them all, so that can make for a very strong civ. Bonuses are building barracks can control more where the battles happen and hold a position, or jump. High strength to population ratio, I sometimes even delete down to 80 vils when fighting strong civs to make up for indias slow train time. and have infinite batches of urumi and tigers that together are very strong. Sepoy in melee also work super good to stop cav waves. Weaknesses are elephants have bad pathing and can be troublesome to take out lare batches of skirm, musk, cannon combos. Siege elephants have good speed, but with tags are weak to most other units. and one must practice timing with getting units to pop out. I like to say india fights in waves where you might retreat an inch to gain 2 more, where Euro civs fight more to feed a line and try to push it.
- gamevideo113
- Howdah
- Posts: 1899
- Joined: Apr 26, 2017
- ESO: gamevideo113
Re: Indians Discussion Thread
Mansabdars are quite underwhelming though, if you compare them to, let's say, a daimyo (cost wise).
[Some people aspire to be pr30+, some people aspire to have fun, and some people aspire to play 3v3 Deccan.] - vividlyplain - 2019
Who (nationality) rape ?
stupid logic. noob players can say op?
toxic, Insult, Racism ?
stupid logic. noob players can say op?
toxic, Insult, Racism ?
Re: Indians Discussion Thread
This was my thoughts, i can't ever really use mansabdars, they're expensive and hard to train, easy to snipe down, and offer fairly limited effects. I know the aura is post upgrade so it scales sort-of-ok, but its still fairly underwhelming. The most notable ones are the elephant ones. 14 pop unit lolgamevideo113 wrote:Mansabdars are quite underwhelming though, if you compare them to, let's say, a daimyo (cost wise).
Honestly no one ever uses ellie mansabdars, maybe if the aura wasnt changed the elephant ones could be +2 pop instead of 2x pop
- gamevideo113
- Howdah
- Posts: 1899
- Joined: Apr 26, 2017
- ESO: gamevideo113
Re: Indians Discussion Thread
I was thinking about just giving them the same cost as their normal counterpart. I don't think it would become problematic.
[Some people aspire to be pr30+, some people aspire to have fun, and some people aspire to play 3v3 Deccan.] - vividlyplain - 2019
Who (nationality) rape ?
stupid logic. noob players can say op?
toxic, Insult, Racism ?
stupid logic. noob players can say op?
toxic, Insult, Racism ?
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests