they still would be expensiv and very hard to mass.What about giving Mamelukes 1 pierce armour? It would not make them op in tg at the same time they could become viable more in 1v1s.
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.
Camels are a nice support unit to deal with enemy cavalry or skirms.
Yes, but you wouldn't invest that much into a "support unit" sarracens have no viable cavalry unit to play the role of core unit of your army (except of Mamelukes).
Indians have FU HCA, which could replace Arbalesters (yeah, they're more expensive, but again, indian eco is amazing), yet so Indians usually go full camels (or full HCA). Well, that's what I argue about sarracens. You can only go full archers (either mounted or foot)
Saracens are classified as a cavalry civ. They use to be THE camel civ back in AOK. that's the whole point about it. They are supposed to be the 2nd best camel civ, yet so we hardly see saracens camels. Zealotry is almost irrelevant (except for Mamelukes, of course). I consider it a flaw in design, because currently they're clearly an archer civBut that goes for any archer civ - archers will form the core of the army. It is the same with the Byzantine bloodlines discussion - why do you want to turn archer civs into cavalry civs? Serious question, I don’t understand that. I totally enjoy balance discussions, so I am curious here
(They have an eco bonus.)The saracens already have good military options, they just need an eco bonus in my opinion.