AOE-II DE The Saracens new UT is bad!

[Instinctz]

Actually why Sicilians already should have strong knights in the first place

Because they are a cavalry civ?

Pikes do nothing

Patently false. Pikes and halbs are still cost effective counters. Stop your lieing.

Of course if the devs pay attention to this issue and decided to remove the 50% less damage and remove the 100% build for tcs or castles and nerf it and nerf Hauberk and 1st crusade then I don't mind to buff them else where

As rhe one saying they should be rebalanced its part of your job to provide those rebalances. Stop shoving it on someone else.

It's stuff like this that gets you mocked.

No one tried and made threads about balance and if they did they will be attacked

Dude people have literally pointed out issues with your balance threads time after time. Stop lieing.

I've literally done it more times then I care to count.

The fact that I have to point out stuff like "you can't nerf balanced civs without compensation" is a good example of that.

You nerf balanced civs because you don't like their bonuses.

Case in point you wanr to nerf lithuanians and say the relic bonus is bad.

Lets compare to malians farimba.

Farimba applies ro the entire stable.
Farimba cannot be lost
Farimba provides +5.


Lithuanians relics can be lost.
Applies only to knights and the leitis.
Provides a max of +4.
Has to be worked for.

Literally the only advantage of the relic is available earlier. And yet I don't see you up in arms about farimba.

Based on your logic you should be complaining endlessly about that. But not a peep.

Even hera says lithuanians aren't Uber good and are just above average.

Yeah they start with 150 food. Literally the only eco bonus they have. Look how much they struggle in late Feudal and early castle age.
Yeah their skirms are very good. But thry aren't going to win you a game.
Yeah their Pikes are fast. They also lack 1 armor and 2 attack. They arebt top tier anymore.
The leitis? Only good against melee civs. Useless against archers. High food cost prevents massing in castle age. Yeah it beats paladins and boyars. Know what else does? Halbs. And far cheaper too.

You even complain about their cav archers. Yeah they are good in a pinch but they aren't going to hold up against other cav archer civs abd aren't cost effective against archers. Whens rhe last time you actually saw a pro use them to considerable effect?

 

[MAE_ME]

Because they are a cavalry civ?



Patently false. Pikes and halbs are still cost effective counters. Stop your lieing.



As rhe one saying they should be rebalanced its part of your job to provide those rebalances. Stop shoving it on someone else.

It's stuff like this that gets you mocked.



Dude people have literally pointed out issues with your balance threads time after time. Stop lieing.

I've literally done it more times then I care to count.

The fact that I have to point out stuff like "you can't nerf balanced civs without compensation" is a good example of that.

You nerf balanced civs because you don't like their bonuses.

Case in point you wanr to nerf lithuanians and say the relic bonus is bad.

Lets compare to malians farimba.

Farimba applies ro the entire stable.
Farimba cannot be lost
Farimba provides +5.


Lithuanians relics can be lost.
Applies only to knights and the leitis.
Provides a max of +4.
Has to be worked for.

Literally the only advantage of the relic is available earlier. And yet I don't see you up in arms about farimba.

Based on your logic you should be complaining endlessly about that. But not a peep.

And because they are cavalry civ it is fine to make them broken? Sicilians are just a disaster. About Lithuanians you can't even compared to Farimba, Farimba is a UT not a laughable free attacks from relics, and they lack Paladin unlike Lithuans. Lithuans too have a broken UU that better than any melee unit in the game with their ridiculous ignore armor bonus. In castle age having 1 relic will make a diffenerce, and Lithuans already have great monastery that works 20% faster and make their monks faster to produce and faster to get relics. +150F from the start will provide them a great early advantage to push the enemy and control the map or make them super ez get eco upgrades like for free in feudal. The civ too have answer to anything, you have knights? They have better. You have xbows? They have insane skirms with more speed and more armor; you have camels? LOL, camels in general barely do their job and Lithuans have halbs with more armor and faster than Celts infantry 11. You have monks? They have better, you have great cavs or Paladins? They have cheap dirt UU ignore armor.

 

[Instinctz]

And because they are cavalry civ it is fine to make them broken?

They arent broken. Literally Pikes and halbs are still cost effective against them.

If they are so dang awesome how come pros aren't lining up to use sicilians in tournaments hardcore?

Farimba is a UT not a laughable free attacks from relics, and they lack Paladin unlike Lithuans

Relics is free?
Let's see I have to get a monastery.
I have to purchase monks.
Send those monks to the relics and pick them up.
Then make it back and garrison them in the monastery.

and they lack Paladin unlike Lithuans

Very unlikely to happen in 1v1.

And in team games they are going to max out at +2 attack assuming they get 4. Big deal. +2 attack.

 

[Tocaraca]

Becasue Lithuans have many options, their knights with the stupid relic bonus do the job; their start with 150f make them great impact early game that make them control the map early; their trash, xbows and even CA and halbs and bombards play do well, the civ is so flexible, however, this won't change how their UU is broken with it's cheap cost and completely ignore armor, the unit already actually have 16 attack as basic attack withkout anything. Mamelukes still one of the worst UUs in the game if not the worst. The Saracens UU is a COUNTER UNIT, which is a big problem, they already have great camels with 170HP, their UU design is so bad and cost so much gold and need castles, even their training time is one of the highest TT of UUs in the game. It is just a failed design, the Saracens need help, really need changes for their UU and both of their UTs.

You're a complete and utter airhead.

 

[Instinctz]

You're a complete and utter airhead

He's living proof you can reach 1600 and not understand the game.

 

[D4Mi4N]

You're a complete and utter airhead.

"big minecraft youtuber" tocaraca has spoken.

 

[Tocaraca]

"big minecraft youtuber" tocaraca has spoken.

Hey! I unlisted all of my Minecraft videos for a reason

 

[Tiekel]

Saracen UU be given +1 range and allowed to jump

 

[MAE_ME]

Saracen UU be given +1 range and allowed to jump

This topic about Saracens new UT (Counterwight) not the UU. However, this won't change how the Mamelukes is the most stupid unit design in the game.

Do you know Sandy Paterson? He was one of the main designers for AOE1, AOE2 (AOK & AOC) and he was a design leader guess what did he say about the Mameluke?

He literally said: " Mameluke design is one of the stupidest ideas ever and that was dumb".

He literally said it, but kid like you will say "oMg, tHe uNit iS gReAt, iT iS iN tHe gAmE 20 yEaRs aGo". The guy not only talked about Mamelukes design, but many other wrong things in the game too.

From where did I get this? Well here is the link for his talk about the UUs design in AOK & AOC: https://youtu.be/OTcNwLlEY-U

He started to talk about Mamelukes in min 17:20

And he here is another video for him talking about other aoe2 expansions and DE and some units and bonuses stuff (https://youtu.be/vQ1hhABDTMo). He ironically mentioned again the bad design of the Mameluke (check min 27:25) he literally said: " The Mameluke threw their scimitars that was stated in age2 and that was my fault sorry about that"

The guy too laughed on Malians UU design when he heard the devs made it a woman throw knives on the enemy LOL. He said Malians were very famous with their ferocious horsmen, well at least they added Farimba UT to cover that. He talked about many things in the game and how it should be. He criticized a lot of things, like Khmer doesn't have a good navy which they were very famous about their navy and their ships (the civ doesn't even have shipwright tech LOL), he also criticized adding Portuguese in the game (which they may shouldn't) and how the devs gave the Ganetour as a UU for Berbers and ironically it was a Portuguese UU that they fought Berbers LOL. He too laughed on how the devs added a civ called "Indians" and there was like more than 10 empires in India but they fixed this recently after 22 years by splitting Indians. He even talked about Saracens civ name and they may should have called the Arabs instead. I think any AOE2 player should watch both videos.

 

[Instinctz]

This topic about Saracens new UT (Counterwight) not the UU. However, this won't change how the Mamelukes is the most stupid unit design in the game.

Do you know Sandy Paterson? He was one of the main designers for AOE1, AOE2 (AOK & AOC) and he was a design leader guess what did he say about the Mameluke?

He literally said: " Mameluke design is one of the stupidest ideas ever and that was dumb".

He literally said it, but stupid like you will say "oMg, tHe uNit iS gReAt, iT iS iN tHe gAmE 20 yEaRs aGo". The guy not only talked about Mamelukes design, but many other wrong things in the game too.

From where did I get this? Well here is the link for his talk about the UUs design in AOK & AOC: https://youtu.be/OTcNwLlEY-U

He started to talk about Mamelukes in min 17:20

And he here is another video for him talking about other aoe2 expansions and DE and some units and bonuses stuff (https://youtu.be/vQ1hhABDTMo). He ironically mentioned again the bad design of the Mameluke (check min 27:25) he literally said: " The Mameluke threw their scimitars that was stated in age2 and that was my fault sorry about that"

The guy too laughed on Malians UU design when he heard the devs made it a woman throw knives on the enemy LOL. He said Malians were very famous with their ferocious horsmen, well at least they added Farimba UT to cover that. He talked about many things in the game and how it should be.

He also said it was fun, and I'll take fun over accurate any day. If you want a historically accurate game those exist.

 

[MAE_ME]

He also said it was fun, and I'll take fun over accurate any day. If you want a historically accurate game those exist.

I don't mind to keep it as it is but at least fix them and make them more usable or have a sense to use. For example you as a Saracen player why would you make the stupid Mameluke that cost a castle and 85 gold and less hp than your normal camel? Or you actually won't use camels at all as Saracens because they are just counters and not that strong as Indians civs camels. Saracens as a civ need buffs for sure and their UTs need to be removed and replace them with more better stuff that fit them, their camel UT is more like a civ bonus like camels should have 10% hp in castle and another 10% hp imp, even their new UT is more a like a civ bonus compared to what Celts, Khmer, Slavs and even Burgundians have to their siege units. Gurjaras camels have +50% more damage on camels for free and a UT give them more +4 armor. Hindus have imp camels and free +25% more attack Camels, Berbers camels cheap dirt and regenrate and have great UU and great eco bonus (like having half wheelbarrow for free start in dark). Saracens just clowns here, they have no identity and people 99% use them as archer civ and both of their UTs and UU are clown stuff. The civ bonuses, UTs and UU need a whole redesign.

 

[Instinctz]

For example you as a Saracen player why would you make the stupid Mameluke that cost a castle and 85 gold and less hp than your normal camel?

Because range and micro. Even pros were making them in the recent team game tournaments, which means there obviously is upsides over camels. Otherwise they wouldn't make them.

But gosh, they did. So your argument is bunk.
Hell despite your claims that Mamelukes are a counter unit, due to their range and speed they are actually quite reasonable against infantry.

Gurjaras camels have +50% more damage on camels for free and a UT give them more +4 armor

50% more bonus damage. Not damage. And it's likely to get nerfed in the next patch. 4 melee armor? 30 hp is better then that, especially when it comes to team games.

Furthermore neither gurjaras nor hindustanis have nearly as good of archers as saracens do.

So yeah. It makes sense they don't have camels as strong as them.

You're literally comparing saracens to 2 civs thst everyone knows are going to get nerfed to say saracens aren't good enough. Do you know how dumb that makes you look? It'd be like comparing Ethiopians to mayans or britons. Everyone knows mayans and britons need nerfs, that doesn't mean Ethiopians needs buffs.

 

[enmipho]

Is this the new BF trading vs selling thread?

 

[MAE_ME]

You're literally comparing saracens to 2 civs thst everyone knows are going to get nerfed to say saracens aren't good enough. Do you know how dumb that makes you look? It'd be like comparing Ethiopians to mayans or britons. Everyone knows mayans and britons need nerfs, that doesn't mean Ethiopians needs buffs.

You got it wrong. I am talking about a UTs bad design and laughable clowny UU design. Saracens UTs are so bad, they don't deserve at all to be a UTs worthy to spend resources on them instead of being a normal bonuses. It is like saying lets make Celts 25% more attack a UT, or the Brokengundians +25% on gunpowder a UT or even Khmer +1 range for scorps and even Slavs 15% cheaper siege. Literally all these bonuses better than Saracens new UT counterwight. Lets take a look too to their camel UT, it gives +20hp, it sounds good on paper but is it really good? No it is not. First of all it is a UT for a counter unit, and not that much strong. 2nd thing you can't make a counter unit a core since they are just a counter serve on porpose. You said Saracens have good tech tree instead, so what?! They have nothing special about their units, they are all generic and only have a laughable identity about their camels. Their UU too is just another camel, the 3 range is not that much and they are slower than the normal camel and have less hp and already hard to micro with 3 range this is regardless the 55F, 85G cost and need at least 2 or 3 castles to keep production.

This is how Saracens UTs and UU design is bad. Sandy Paterson who was a design staff leader himself who desiged all the UUs called it a dumb and stupid design and was a fault and he is totally right. Saracens need a full redesign for both their UTs and their UU especially their UTs are closer to be a normal bonuses instead of UT, you can easly make their camels have +10%hp castle and +10% imp and it will be fine and balanced instead of laughable UT. If the devs want to keep the Mameluke as it is then it is fine, however, their gold cost need to be down to 60 instead of 85 to make them more usable and their training time should be less.

 

[Instinctz]

You got it wrong. I am talking about a UTs bad design and laughable clowny UU design. Saracens UTs are so bad, they don't deserve at all to be a UTs worthy to spend resources on them instead of being a normal bonuses. It is like saying lets make Celts 25% more attack a UT, or the Brokengundians +25% on gunpowder a UT or even Khmer +1 range for scorps and even Slavs 15% cheaper siege. Literally all these bonuses better than Saracens new UT counterwight. Lets take a look too to their camel UT, it gives +20hp, it sounds good on paper but is it really good? No it is not. First of all it is a UT for a counter unit, and not that much strong. 2nd thing you can't make a counter unit a core since they are just a counter serve on porpose. You said Saracens have good tech tree instead, so what?! They have nothing special about their units, they are all generic and only have a laughable identity about their camels. Their UU too is just another camel, the 3 range is not that much and they are slower than the normal camel and have less hp and already hard to micro with 3 range this is regardless the 55F, 85G cost and need at least 2 or 3 castles to keep production.

This is how Saracens UTs and UU design is bad. Sandy Paterson who was a design staff leader himself who desiged all the UUs called it a dumb and stupid design and was a fault and he is totally right. Saracens need a full redesign for both their UTs and their UU especially their UTs are closer to be a normal bonuses instead of UT, you can easly make their camels have +10%hp castle and +10% imp and it will be fine and balanced instead of laughable UT. If the devs want to keep the Mameluke as it is then it is fine, however, their gold cost need to be down to 60 instead of 85 to make them more usable and their training time should be less.

Or how about we don't redesign stuff just because you don't like it.


Saracens are fine. Their uu is fun. Cry less

 

[MAE_ME]

Or how about we don't redesign stuff just because you don't like it.


Saracens are fine. Their uu is fun. Cry less

I can pass the Saracens issue anyway it is not a big problem nor breaking the game system but still their UTs are so bad. What I want to see is redesigning/deleting/nerfing Lithuans, Cumans, Sicilians and Burgundians more than anything, and of course Mesos with their eagle line, Britons, Franks, Gurjas, Hindus, Huns and Chinese are still on the nerf list. So I hope the next patch will have something.

 

[Lokalo]

He too laughed on how the devs added a civ called "Indians" and there was like more than 10 empires in India but they fixed this recently after 22 years by splitting Indians.

Yeah, cuz Indians definetily were there for 22 years and wasn't added at like 2013...

 

[Tocaraca]

Mamelukes are not a "counter unit", they are one of the best units in the game 11. Lithuanians, Burgundians, Cumans, Huns, Spanish, and arguably Persians, Turks, and Tatars all have quite literally no effective counters to massed mamelukes. Civs without arb and without a strong halb+onager combo do not have answers. They beat all melee cavalry, all melee infantry (except teutonic knights), skirms, cav archers, all gunpowder units, all isolated siege units (except Celt/Ethiopian/Khmer heavy scorps and siege onagers), heck they even trade cost effectively against Aztec/Bengali/Bohemian/Khmer/Sicilian/Viking arbalesters due to their lack of Thumb Ring.
Ever since they lost their weakness to skirms, I've seen them way more than at least half the unique units in the game. They are only balanced due to their castle requirement and mediocre creation speed.

 

[MAE_ME]

Mamelukes are not a "counter unit", they are one of the best units in the game 11. Lithuanians, Burgundians, Cumans, Huns, Spanish, and arguably Persians, Turks, and Tatars all have quite literally no effective counters to massed mamelukes. Civs without arb and without a strong halb+onager combo do not have answers. They beat all melee cavalry, all melee infantry (except teutonic knights), skirms, cav archers, all gunpowder units, all isolated siege units (except Celt/Ethiopian/Khmer heavy scorps and siege onagers), heck they even trade cost effectively against Aztec/Bengali/Bohemian/Khmer/Sicilian/Viking arbalesters due to their lack of Thumb Ring.
Ever since they lost their weakness to skirms, I've seen them way more than at least half the unique units in the game. They are only balanced due to their castle requirement and mediocre creation speed.

Well you are talking like CBA player or custom scenario player since you think everything is easy. Mamelukes need numbers to be as you described, and is making numbers for a unit cost 55F, 85G for a civ have no eco bonuses and need at least 2 castles (since Mameluke have hight creation time) is easy? The simply answer is no, so this is one thing. 2nd thng you said Mamelukes are not a counter unit, and you are totally wrong, they are a laughable counter unit that cost castle and 55F, 85G for a civ already have camels with more hp and more speed and less cost than their UU which makes them not a practical unit at all. The range advantage is barely do well since 3 range already not that much, CA do well vs Mamelukes if they got numbers and of course they will get numbers becasue they are units don't need castles unlike Mameluke so the other player will already got his army, add for this example any other unit. 3rd thing, as I mentioned before, there is almost 0 reasons to make the Mameluke as a Saracens player, literally no need. If you are against cav civs you already as Saracens have camels with 170 hp and less cost and less training time and don't need castles. You have FU CA which they are great vs anything if you get numbers, you have FU arbs and FU manognels. The Mameluke is just wrong, it is so dumb concept to make a UU a counter and you already have great counters.

It like giving a civ a skirmesher as a UU that need a castle and more expensive and you already have FU skirms with more advantages.

 

[ChipsAreTasty]

Well you are talking like CBA player or custom scenario player since you think everything is easy. Mamelukes need numbers to be as you described, and is making numbers for a unit cost 55F, 85G for a civ have no eco bonuses and need at least 2 castles (since Mameluke have hight creation time) is easy? The simply answer is no, so this is one thing. 2nd thng you said Mamelukes are not a counter unit, and you are totally wrong, they are a laughable counter unit that cost castle and 55F, 85G for a civ already have camels with more hp and more speed and less cost than their UU which makes them not a practical unit at all. The range advantage is barely do well since 3 range already not that much, CA do well vs Mamelukes if they got numbers and of course they will get numbers becasue they are units don't need castles unlike Mameluke so the other player will already got his army, add for this example any other unit. 3rd thing, as I mentioned before, there is almost 0 reasons to make the Mameluke as a Saracens player, literally no need. If you are against cav civs you already as Saracens have camels with 170 hp and less cost and less training time and don't need castles. You have FU CA which they are great vs anything if you get numbers, you have FU arbs and FU manognels. The Mameluke is just wrong, it is so dumb concept to make a UU a counter and you already have great counters.

It like giving a civ a skirmesher as a UU that need a castle and more expensive and you already have FU skirms with more advantages.

The person you are trying to call a noob by saying is a custom scenario player has hit 2k elo before with a large amount of his games being saracens so... Maybe you're just wrong bro?

The mameluke is a strong option in a variety of cases like the ones that toca literally stated in his comment. Not every UU has to be seen every game, and like Instinctz said before we literally see pros use them now so...? 11

 

[D4Mi4N]

The person you are trying to call a noob by saying is a custom scenario player has hit 2k elo before with a large amount of his games being saracens so... Maybe you're just wrong bro?

The mameluke is a strong option in a variety of cases like the ones that toca literally stated in his comment. Not every UU has to be seen every game, and like Instinctz said before we literally see pros use them now so...? 11

tbf he just resorts to this kinda stuff. he called me mentally ill in this thread.

 

[Instinctz]

He too laughed on how the devs added a civ called "Indians" and there was like more than 10 empires in India but they fixed this recently after 22 years by splitting Indians

This right here is a red flag. Indians haven't been in the game for 22 years. You have NO CLUE what you are talking about

 

[Tocaraca]

Well you are talking like CBA player or custom scenario player since you think everything is easy. Mamelukes need numbers to be as you described, and is making numbers for a unit cost 55F, 85G for a civ have no eco bonuses and need at least 2 castles (since Mameluke have hight creation time) is easy? The simply answer is no, so this is one thing. 2nd thng you said Mamelukes are not a counter unit, and you are totally wrong, they are a laughable counter unit that cost castle and 55F, 85G for a civ already have camels with more hp and more speed and less cost than their UU which makes them not a practical unit at all. The range advantage is barely do well since 3 range already not that much, CA do well vs Mamelukes if they got numbers and of course they will get numbers becasue they are units don't need castles unlike Mameluke so the other player will already got his army, add for this example any other unit. 3rd thing, as I mentioned before, there is almost 0 reasons to make the Mameluke as a Saracens player, literally no need. If you are against cav civs you already as Saracens have camels with 170 hp and less cost and less training time and don't need castles. You have FU CA which they are great vs anything if you get numbers, you have FU arbs and FU manognels. The Mameluke is just wrong, it is so dumb concept to make a UU a counter and you already have great counters.

It like giving a civ a skirmesher as a UU that need a castle and more expensive and you already have FU skirms with more advantages.

With all due respect, how old are you?

 

[HongeyKong]

Tocaraca must be cringing seeing this younger self 11

 

[Tocaraca]

Tocaraca must be cringing seeing this younger self 11

Not entirely inaccurate... it's like when I used to complain about a unit/civ, I would analyze it from a logic/mathematical point of view, and then if I ever bothered to use proof to back up my claims I would search for high level games to verify my opinion, rather than simply basing my opinion on high level games. However, this guy isn't even bothering to use anything to back up his claims... not stats, not something a high level player said, not a result of some ranked game... 1111