Yes, Patito strikes again with one of it doubts about balance.
It seems really weird for me the balance for Saracens stables and mounted units. Before starting, I just want to make clear that I'm not saying sarracens are in a weak spot: They have a really solid archer rush in feudal, one of the most open tech-trees of the game. It's just I'm think they mounted unit situation is rather akward.
The first comparision when we think about saracens camels, is obvious: Indians. Zealotry gives saras camels +30hp, letting them with 10hp more than indians imperial camels. So far so good, but what's the problem?
Let make some comparisions (assuming ever unit is FU)
saras camels have to hit 10 times a champion to kill him, and takes 13 hits from them before dying
Indians camels have to hit 8 times a champion to kill him, and takes 12 hits from them before dying
saras camels have to hit 5 times a arbalester to kill him, and takes 28 hits from them before dying
Indians camels have to hit 4 times a arbalester to kill him, and takes 32 hits from them before dying
saras camels have to hit 8 times a Halbedier to kill him, and takes 6 hits from them before dying
Indians camels have to hit 6 times a Halbedier to kill him, and takes 5 hits from them before dying
saras camels have to hit 8 times a EEW to kill him, and takes 17 hits from them before dying**
Indians camels have to hit 6 times a EEW to kill him, and takes 16 hits from them before dying**
As we can see, Indians imperial camels stands better againts every unit. this, and the fact that +5 attack againts buildings from indians (and their extra pierce armor) make the Imperial camel a viable unit as a core for an army, which saracens camels are not. HP bonus in a defensive unit won't make it viable for offensive functions. It would just hold better againts the unit it have to counter.
At this point some of you might say "yeah, well, sarracens camels are still better than Malians/berbers" yes, they are. BUT malians and berbers have cavaliers as viable unit to mix with camels. This way, you can rely on cavalry in both offensive and defensive duties.
Sarracens lack a companion for their camels. Yes, Mamelukes are an awesome unit, but doing castles, mass them, make the elite and zealotry is a lot to do, specially because it most cases, it means you're transitioning from archers. And on top of that, if you happen to lose some castles, you find yourself without any unit to mix in with.
Yeah, zealotry camels and hussars are good, but they can't be a core unit for an ofensive army. Take any civ, look at their UU, and if that UU fails, you can always go for the generic unit (Just an example:Mongols have mangudai and FU HCA with a bonus, Celts have Woad Raiders and FU champions with bonuses, Viets have Rattans and arbalesters with extra HP). Yes, I know that in most cases loosing your castles means you're loosing the game (That's why wo don't see that Mongols HCA that much) but again, they still have the chance to do it and to hold on. Not with sarracens. Go for mamelukes, lose some castles, and... GG. Good luck replacing mamelukes with camels.
Again, I'm not saying Sarracens lack options; just the contrary: 99% they can confortably play archers (foot or mounted). Going for the camels is most of the time, unjustified.
What do I propose: Give saracens camels a bonus on attack (+1 from castle age, or maybe +1/+2 in castle/imperial). That way the can become effective againts melee units,while worse than Indians againts ranged units/buildings.
Yeah maybe we should take something awayfrom them, like nerfing their infantry (I wouldn't touch archery range, since their identity is built arround archers nowadays).
What do you think?
(** calculated without UT affecting EEW for make it simplier)
It seems really weird for me the balance for Saracens stables and mounted units. Before starting, I just want to make clear that I'm not saying sarracens are in a weak spot: They have a really solid archer rush in feudal, one of the most open tech-trees of the game. It's just I'm think they mounted unit situation is rather akward.
The first comparision when we think about saracens camels, is obvious: Indians. Zealotry gives saras camels +30hp, letting them with 10hp more than indians imperial camels. So far so good, but what's the problem?
Let make some comparisions (assuming ever unit is FU)
saras camels have to hit 10 times a champion to kill him, and takes 13 hits from them before dying
Indians camels have to hit 8 times a champion to kill him, and takes 12 hits from them before dying
saras camels have to hit 5 times a arbalester to kill him, and takes 28 hits from them before dying
Indians camels have to hit 4 times a arbalester to kill him, and takes 32 hits from them before dying
saras camels have to hit 8 times a Halbedier to kill him, and takes 6 hits from them before dying
Indians camels have to hit 6 times a Halbedier to kill him, and takes 5 hits from them before dying
saras camels have to hit 8 times a EEW to kill him, and takes 17 hits from them before dying**
Indians camels have to hit 6 times a EEW to kill him, and takes 16 hits from them before dying**
As we can see, Indians imperial camels stands better againts every unit. this, and the fact that +5 attack againts buildings from indians (and their extra pierce armor) make the Imperial camel a viable unit as a core for an army, which saracens camels are not. HP bonus in a defensive unit won't make it viable for offensive functions. It would just hold better againts the unit it have to counter.
At this point some of you might say "yeah, well, sarracens camels are still better than Malians/berbers" yes, they are. BUT malians and berbers have cavaliers as viable unit to mix with camels. This way, you can rely on cavalry in both offensive and defensive duties.
Sarracens lack a companion for their camels. Yes, Mamelukes are an awesome unit, but doing castles, mass them, make the elite and zealotry is a lot to do, specially because it most cases, it means you're transitioning from archers. And on top of that, if you happen to lose some castles, you find yourself without any unit to mix in with.
Yeah, zealotry camels and hussars are good, but they can't be a core unit for an ofensive army. Take any civ, look at their UU, and if that UU fails, you can always go for the generic unit (Just an example:Mongols have mangudai and FU HCA with a bonus, Celts have Woad Raiders and FU champions with bonuses, Viets have Rattans and arbalesters with extra HP). Yes, I know that in most cases loosing your castles means you're loosing the game (That's why wo don't see that Mongols HCA that much) but again, they still have the chance to do it and to hold on. Not with sarracens. Go for mamelukes, lose some castles, and... GG. Good luck replacing mamelukes with camels.
Again, I'm not saying Sarracens lack options; just the contrary: 99% they can confortably play archers (foot or mounted). Going for the camels is most of the time, unjustified.
What do I propose: Give saracens camels a bonus on attack (+1 from castle age, or maybe +1/+2 in castle/imperial). That way the can become effective againts melee units,while worse than Indians againts ranged units/buildings.
Yeah maybe we should take something awayfrom them, like nerfing their infantry (I wouldn't touch archery range, since their identity is built arround archers nowadays).
What do you think?
(** calculated without UT affecting EEW for make it simplier)