Jump to content

Balancing the Han


Recommended Posts

On 14/06/2022 at 8:46 AM, real_tabasco_sauce said:

How do we feel about having both CS and champion crossbow cav? It seems weird to have so many crossbow units, also with very different stats: 

for comparison: mace crossbow

40 pierce, 60 range, 9.6 walkspeed (champ inf costs).

Han Xbows:

CS infantry crossbow: 20 pierce, 45 range 9.6 walkspeed (40 wood cost, i guess the idea is the cost makes up for the units lower stats)

CS cavalry crossbow: 20 pierce, 50 range 14.4 walkspeed (40 wood cost too)

Champ cavalry crossbow: 40 pierce, 55 range14.4 walkspeed (champ cav cost)

I would say the different stats between mace and han are ok, because they used different crossbow designs.

I would rather not give them exactly slinger stats, but keep their repeat time as it is now and bump their damage up to 30 and remove the -10 health.

yeah, the camp should go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:

Possible stats of repeating crossbow:

-50 food 40 wood 10 metal

-40 range, 8.5 pierce damage, .75 repeat rate (unless this makes performance problems), and very low accuracy. This means that the have damage per second of 11.3 compared to 12.8 for skirmisher and 9.2 for slinger.

This unit would fill in some gaps for Han infantry and allow other areas like champions or cavalry to be balanced without making the civ overall more vulnerable.

@maroder that change would be assuming crossbow training is removed. Even if it is not removed, then 10 pierce/second would be greater than the slinger dps which is 9.2 pierce/second, so I would argue for a range reduction to 40 meters to accompany your change, or perhaps an accuracy disadvantage compared to slingers. The unfortunate result will be that the unit will play very similar to slingers (but with some key differences), despite seeming so unique. 

@real_tabasco_sauce told me he would be willing to work on a repeat crossbow concept mod similar to the quote above as a potential long term solution, however his computer right now is busted. I think a repeat crossbow is the best way to achieve a uniquely played ranged infantry unit for the Han.

Another thing to look at is the Han champions and heroes, but I have heard there were already changes in this area.

There has been some concern about p1 swordcav for Han. I don't think it will be the end of the world because javelin cavalry, spear cavalry and home infantry will be ok at countering them. It is possible that a fast rush: (no stable, no barracks, cav from cc to chickens, attack before 2 minutes) will be quite OP for Han, so I might suggest that swordcav can only come from the stable and not cc. I have only seen a few swordcav rushes in the RC, and none have been chicken-based like we see sometimes in a25, so it is something I will look out for in future RC multiplayer tests.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, maroder said:

I would rather not give them exactly slinger stats, but keep their repeat time as it is now and bump their damage up to 30 and remove the -10 health.

yeah I think this is the best approach for now. This, and increasing the wood cost back to 50.

I could see a repeating crossbow change, but to be honest, this would do essentially the same thing. 

@maroderwhat do you think of the citizen soldier cavalry crossbows? I would say these should be removed instead of the cav archers.

59 minutes ago, maroder said:

yeah, the camp should go

If people really want champ cavalry crossbows, I would say they should be put in a chariot, replacing the existing chariot unit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:

that change would be assuming crossbow training is removed. Even if it is not removed, then 10 pierce/second would be greater than the slinger dps which is 9.2 pierce/second, so I would argue for a range reduction to 40 meters to accompany your change, or perhaps an accuracy disadvantage compared to slingers. The unfortunate result will be that the unit will play very similar to slingers (but with some key differences), despite seeming so unique. 

Including the crush damage slingers have 10.08 /s although granted, that the crush damage is not that effective vs units.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

what do you think of the citizen soldier cavalry crossbows? I would say these should be removed instead of the cav archers.

1 hour ago, maroder said:

yeah, the camp should go

If people really want champ cavalry crossbows, I would say they should be put in a chariot, replacing the existing chariot unit.

I would dev keep either the normal cav crossbow or the champion. Not that strong of an opinion on which to keep. I just want to make sure that there is enough differentiation regarding the potential addition of the Xiongnus down the line, whose main fighting force are archers/ cav archers.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, maroder said:

I would dev keep either the normal cav crossbow or the champion. Not that strong of an opinion on which to keep. I just want to make sure that there is enough differentiation regarding the potential addition of the Xiongnus down the line, whose main fighting force are archers/ cav archers.

seeing as the crossbow on a horse (idk how the heck u would load it lol) seems like a very specialized concept, I think the champion makes more sense. 

I think it is wise to plan for the addition of the Xiongnus. (one option here is this: should the han archer cav be kept, it could become a Xiongnu mercenary unit when that civ is added)

So maybe keep the champ crossbow, considering there is also a hero cav crossbowman.

If there are still too many champs available, I would say to just put the crossbowman on the chariot.

Edited by real_tabasco_sauce
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 14/06/2022 at 12:33 AM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Civil Engineering (Level 1)

  • Old: "All structures −15% build time, +10% health and −5% cost."
  • New: "All Structures −10% build time and −10% cost."

Civil Engineering (Level 2)

  • Old: "All structures −25% build time, +20% health and −5% cost."
  • New: "All Structures +20% health."

Civil Service (Level 1)

  • Old: "Technologies at all buildings, except the Forge, −15% cost and −15% research time."
  • New: "Ministers −50% train time."

Civil Service (Level 2)

  • Old: "Technologies at all buildings, except the Forge, −15% cost and −15% research time."
  • New: "Ministers +50% health."

could be nice linked techs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 14/06/2022 at 12:33 AM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Ministers also moved to the Imperial Court. The Imperial Ministry removed from the building queue.

any more opinion on this from other people?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
28 minutes ago, maroder said:
On 13/06/2022 at 3:33 PM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Ministers also moved to the Imperial Court. The Imperial Ministry removed from the building queue.

any more opinion on this from other people?

It does seem weird to me for the ministry to have these level 1 and 2 upgrades but no upgrades for ministers.

I do think these could stay in the ministry building, however.

Edited by real_tabasco_sauce
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One comment I have for ministers is that all of their eco buffs seem to be very small (2% per minister), and the most effective way to use ministers seems to be to garrison them in the ministry

For the Minister over the Masses: I would prefer it to be some non-percentage based bonus that requires some management, like if its garrisoned in a storehouse or farmstead an extra 1/10 of the quantity dropped off by a unit will be added to the player's bank. For example: 10 wood dropped to minister occupied storehouse will result in 11 wood added to bank. For horse with 20 meat, 2 food will be dropped off. Garrison limit of 1 for storehouse and farmstead and docks (ministers only)

Building speed one can stay but I think it should be increased to 4% per minister, this would be significant enough to allow unique building rush strategies.

Ideally different uses for minsters could be used at different times, and for different strategies without one particular use that is better than them all. I am not sure if the dropsite garrison feature is possible, but it would be nice to have some more non-percentage based upgrades in the game.

I think the garrison in ministry should be kept since a Han player might not always have time to manage the other bonuses, so garrisoning them in ministry might be a "safe" option for them to keep their huge investment 900 f 900 metal safe.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, maroder said:

any more opinion on this from other people?

So the Ministry is removed and anything from it moved to the Imperial Court? With the necessary upgrade, training of the Ministers and researching the tecs that CC is occupied for a looong time. Might be ok if you have several CCs, but with just a single CC I think this puts a very heavy cost on all that Minister stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, maroder said:

I don't recommend deleting archers and spearmen, because JI is not equal to pike, and it is often not used with shields, but I am in favor of putting crossbowmen in P1, Han should have crossbowmen and spearmen to combine in P1, and archers should shoot Faster and placed in P2, JI should have stronger attack but weaker protection against projectile weapons.
Abolish the crossbow cavalry, although there are such units in reality, it is rare, because the use of crossbows on horses is considered to be poor equestrian and not good at using bows and arrows. The cavalry should be sword cavalry for P1, spear cavalry and archer cavalry for P2.
Champion I don't know why the chariot should be cancelled. It should be a spearman, a crossbowman, a spear cavalry, and a chariot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, AIEND said:

I don't recommend deleting archers and spearmen, because JI is not equal to pike, and it is often not used with shields, but I am in favor of putting crossbowmen in P1, Han should have crossbowmen and spearmen to combine in P1, and archers should shoot Faster and placed in P2, JI should have stronger attack but weaker protection against projectile weapons.
Abolish the crossbow cavalry, although there are such units in reality, it is rare, because the use of crossbows on horses is considered to be poor equestrian and not good at using bows and arrows. The cavalry should be sword cavalry for P1, spear cavalry and archer cavalry for P2.
Champion I don't know why the chariot should be cancelled. It should be a spearman, a crossbowman, a spear cavalry, and a chariot.

So @AIEND is this more or less what you describe?

p1, CC units: Crossbow, Spear, sword cavalry

p2: archer, Ji, sword infantry, Spear cavalry, archer cavalry

p3: (Champs) champion spearman, champion spear cavalry, champion crossbow chariot?

(I think the last one is the best replacement for what is currently champion archer chariot and champion crossbow cav)

I would honestly say that this seems pretty well streamlined. If including archer cav is seen as an impediment to the future inclusion of Xiongnu, then in that case, they could become a mercenary or auxillary unit for Han.

Lastly, I think crossbow training should only apply to citizen soldiers.

Edited by real_tabasco_sauce
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 分钟前,real_tabasco_sauce 说:

所以 @AIEND 或多或少是你所描述的吗?

p1、CC单位:弩、矛、剑骑

p2:弓兵、姬、剑步兵、枪骑、弓骑

p3:(冠军)冠军矛兵,冠军矛骑兵,冠军弩车?

(我认为最后一个是目前冠军弓箭手战车和冠军弩骑士的最佳替代品)

老实说,这看起来非常精简。 如果将弓箭手纳入匈奴被视为未来纳入匈奴的障碍,那么在这种情况下,他们可能会成为汉族的雇佣兵或辅助部队。

最后,我认为弩训练应该只适用于公民士兵。

Elite crossbowmen use high-strength crossbows, called "蹶张Juezhang" in ancient times, so champion crossbowmen should keep it.

Xiongnu's advantage lies in their cavalry archers, their infantry archers are not as good as the Han Dynasty, and the Xiongnu soldiers who surrendered to the Han army in reality only have cavalry.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 分钟前,real_tabasco_sauce 说:

我认为最后一个是目前冠军弓箭手战车和冠军弩骑士的最佳替代品

You have to realize that the Chinese do not like to use crossbows on horses or chariots, because it is very inefficient. Although chariots and cavalry were equipped with crossbows in the Qin Dynasty, that was because the Qin army recruited many to expand the size of the army. Caused by people who are not good at riding and archery. The Han Dynasty controlled the army within a certain size and preferred to use a small number of elite soldiers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, AIEND said:

champion crossbowmen should keep it.

yes, but what do you think about these units being in chariots.

^ i didn't see your above comment.

So then champion infantry spearman, champion infantry crossbowman, chamption spear cavalry, and champion chariot archer?

What should the chariot carry?

Edited by real_tabasco_sauce
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

是的,但是您如何看待这些单位在战车中。

^ 我没有看到你上面的评论。

那么冠军步兵矛兵,冠军步兵弩手,冠军矛骑兵和冠军战车弓箭手?

战车应该携带什么?

Chariots use bows and arrows.

High-strength crossbows cannot be used on horses or chariots, so the Chinese feel they are inferior to bows and arrows.

Edited by AIEND
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If everyone agree that this is a good idea to have that many units: fine by me.

I only see the problem that the Han have basically every unit type: Spear, Pike (Ji), Sword, Crossbow, Archer + all types of cav.

So they basically have an easy counter to everything, which is a huge advantage. Combined with their strong eco that seems a bit unfair vs other civs who have a smaller roster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...