Horsemen
- Thread starter Richard
- Start date
DeletedUser
Guest
horsemen are already mathematically the best attackers of all of the 'normal' units vs their best 'opposite defender'
horse attack = 18.3 per pop
chariot blunt def = 19 per pop
compared to slingers at 23 vs 30 range def for swords or hops at 16 vs 25 sharp def for archers, horses are really strong attackers considering the blunt defense values of def units.
so i guess i'm of the opinion that they don't need rebalancing, players just need to be made aware that they're already awesome!
horse attack = 18.3 per pop
chariot blunt def = 19 per pop
compared to slingers at 23 vs 30 range def for swords or hops at 16 vs 25 sharp def for archers, horses are really strong attackers considering the blunt defense values of def units.
so i guess i'm of the opinion that they don't need rebalancing, players just need to be made aware that they're already awesome!
DeletedUser
Guest
I do not like this change. As it stand the land units are surprisingly well balanced, with horsemen already being the most efficient attackers. This will imbalance the units.
As for the reasons why they were built less frequently... I think I can explain that.
First of all, they have higher requirements so people will only have access to them later. You might think this is true for chariots also but the difference is, chariots are very adept defenders, horsemen are obvious attackers. As, sadly, the majority of players focusses more on defending the chariot is a more viable choice because it's a defender AND an attacker.
If your horse nuke is attacked overnight you wll cry.
If your chariot nuke is attacked you will get decent BP, with a big change on a positive ratio.
If anything is to be changed to horsemen I would suggest cutting the cost/time, as that is the most irritating factor they have atm.
As for the reasons why they were built less frequently... I think I can explain that.
First of all, they have higher requirements so people will only have access to them later. You might think this is true for chariots also but the difference is, chariots are very adept defenders, horsemen are obvious attackers. As, sadly, the majority of players focusses more on defending the chariot is a more viable choice because it's a defender AND an attacker.
If your horse nuke is attacked overnight you wll cry.
If your chariot nuke is attacked you will get decent BP, with a big change on a positive ratio.
If anything is to be changed to horsemen I would suggest cutting the cost/time, as that is the most irritating factor they have atm.
DeletedUser27700
Guest
I agree with that.
Horsemen are already great, I fear this would make them too good.But cutting the build times and/or resource cost would be nice.
DeletedUser345
Guest
I am also a little puzzled by this as in my mind horsemen are the second most popular attacking unit which I see the most, I'm going to have the run the calculations before I provide more feedback however I would have suggested sorting out hoplites.
EDIT: I've been looking at this a little bit harder and this move will also push people into using more hoplites as to get the perfect defense blunt defence would have to move to 89.96% of range defense which obviously requires hoplites to do so, this one has knock-on effects.
EDIT: I've been looking at this a little bit harder and this move will also push people into using more hoplites as to get the perfect defense blunt defence would have to move to 89.96% of range defense which obviously requires hoplites to do so, this one has knock-on effects.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
Guest
This blows my mind, horse nukes are an essential part of my army. I do like the idea of reducing resources and time and agree if they are going to be re balanced that that is the way to go.
DeletedUser
Guest
The unit battle stats are fine as is. By integrating them with a few slingers, their shortcomings when coming against militia supplemented defenses are easily compensated. They are also the unit of choice when dealing with high wall levels. I do not believe the battle stats should be changed, but making them cheaper would certainly up their usage.
DeletedUser
Guest
I never heard anyone saying that horsemen where a bad unit as they are. I see 2 main reasons why slingers are more used:
- Ressources: slinger are cheap, but also, when you build a nuke, you'd better build a few ls to escort them. But building them will let you with more stone. Apart from myth (whose building is really limited but the 500 favor cap), slingers are the only offensive unit to use this stone. BTW, recruiting horsemen lets you with more stone too, and as a result, mixed horsemen-slingers nukes are quite common. but horsemen require so much silver that those mixed nukes tend to have more slingers.
- Vulnerability: horsemen have only 1 in defense against sharp. Apart from myth (same reason), there's no other unit that have such a weak point. Horsemen have good looting abilities, so you could think about them for farming, but what if they get caught by a sharp counter-attack...
If you make them require less silver and improve a bit their sharp defense, you should see more horsemen without really distorting the balance. Changing their attacking power is not needed IMO.
- Ressources: slinger are cheap, but also, when you build a nuke, you'd better build a few ls to escort them. But building them will let you with more stone. Apart from myth (whose building is really limited but the 500 favor cap), slingers are the only offensive unit to use this stone. BTW, recruiting horsemen lets you with more stone too, and as a result, mixed horsemen-slingers nukes are quite common. but horsemen require so much silver that those mixed nukes tend to have more slingers.
- Vulnerability: horsemen have only 1 in defense against sharp. Apart from myth (same reason), there's no other unit that have such a weak point. Horsemen have good looting abilities, so you could think about them for farming, but what if they get caught by a sharp counter-attack...
If you make them require less silver and improve a bit their sharp defense, you should see more horsemen without really distorting the balance. Changing their attacking power is not needed IMO.
DeletedUser36743
Guest
There is no equivalent offensive unit to the Slinger (distance) or Hoplite (sharp).... for blunt weapons
Horsemen is the only unit that provides an equivalent blunt offense unit as the above.... this change of increasing +5 attack is very welcome
Horsemen is the only unit that provides an equivalent blunt offense unit as the above.... this change of increasing +5 attack is very welcome
DeletedUser
Guest
Any attack boost would be welcome as HM are great for cracking turtles 
DeletedUser22234
Guest
Put Mythical units in the picture and the statistics are reversed!
Horse attack = 18.3 per pop
Pegasus defense = 45 per pop
The ratio of attack to defense is 1 : 2.46
Compared to
Slingers attack = 23
Cerberus defense = 52.5 per pop
The ratio of attack to defense is 1 : 2.28
and
Hoptile attack = 16
Centaur defense = 37.5
The ratio of attack to defense is 1 : 2.34
DeletedUser
Guest
Yeah but myths are vastly inferior because you can make a very limited amount of them and it takes ages to build a myth nuke.
DeletedUser
Guest
while horses vs pegs is a worse match than other normal vs myth battles (which are currently far more rare than normal vs normal battles anyway), these ratios are all really close and well balanced imo
here horses (the weakest match-up) are less than 8% weaker than the strongest match-up. i'd say that's fairly well balanced.
the 'normal' ratios are
1 : 1.04 (blunt)
1 : 1.3 (range)
1 : 1.56 (sharp)
here horses are 25% stronger than the 2nd strongest match-up, and 50% stronger than the weakest. do they really need to be made stronger just because they're very slightly weaker in the rare case of myth defence? i far prefer the idea of making them cheaper rather than stronger. they are slightly more expensive per population than hops and a fair amount more expensive than slings, plus they're leave you with excess stone while using silver and wood (which, in a fully built city, is not desirable if you need to build anything other than slingers)
Thane Badger
Phrourach
DeletedUser25380
Guest
I agree with all said, I think just upping the def value of horsemen against sharp is what's needed. The reasons slingers are more built is because they need less time/resources, use the stone (especially on stone islands), need a lower level academy, and slingers are almost always researched anyway (due to lower academy and need earlier for farming villages). I think another incentive to use horsemen would be to make it available earlier in the academy and maybe need less research points so it is less a choice to make vs. another research (for example, cats).
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
Guest
No..... don't turn horsemen into hybrid units... not a good idea. HM are meant for attacking, not def.
DeletedUser
Guest
i agree, i try to never defend with horsemen so i couldn't care less if they had 1 def for everything!
DeletedUser25380
Guest
Sorry, I never meant turning them into hybrid, I just meant upping the defence against sharp for the case where you leave your units exposed - 1 is really really weak.
I agree, horsemen are great offense units.
Also comparing them to chariots is not a good point of comparison imo. For one, chariots are a hybrid unit, so they will be built more as some use them in cities they don't want to specialize for a reason or another, or because they don't plan on being online for example.
But also, chariots are mainly defence and horsemen mainly offence, so they shouldn't be compared against each other, defence and offence are usually organized differently. For offence, only the value of the units in one attack count, so a lot of players will favor attacks that mix the three weapons. For defence, all units count, so it doesn't matter whether they are built in the same city or not. Also both other main defence units, swords and archers, don't use stone, which leaves chariot as a good way to use resources in your defence cities. Basically, I am saying the reasons that chariots are being built have nothing to do with the reasons horsemen are being built or not built.
I agree, horsemen are great offense units.
Also comparing them to chariots is not a good point of comparison imo. For one, chariots are a hybrid unit, so they will be built more as some use them in cities they don't want to specialize for a reason or another, or because they don't plan on being online for example.
But also, chariots are mainly defence and horsemen mainly offence, so they shouldn't be compared against each other, defence and offence are usually organized differently. For offence, only the value of the units in one attack count, so a lot of players will favor attacks that mix the three weapons. For defence, all units count, so it doesn't matter whether they are built in the same city or not. Also both other main defence units, swords and archers, don't use stone, which leaves chariot as a good way to use resources in your defence cities. Basically, I am saying the reasons that chariots are being built have nothing to do with the reasons horsemen are being built or not built.
DeletedUser
Guest
I personally find horses nicely-balanced. Correct (for me) place in Academy, resource cost/building time/strength, loot capacity - looks very well.
DeletedUser
Guest
I agree with everyone else. I dont want to see the horse upgraded.