Something should be done about Huns' castle unit Tarkan.

[Tom]

I think it's inarguable that Tarkan is the least used unit in the entire game. I've played AoE II online for hundreds of hour now, and I have literally never seen anyone using this unit.

Though I can think of a few strategies that, in theory, fits the Tarkan's special ability, for example, rushing directly into the enemy's base, bulldozing every towncenters in seconds, and quickly run away before the enemy's pikemen catch on. But in reality, no one would ever do that, because you can accomplish the same thing with Paladin, which though a bit less effective in this regard, is more useful in any other circumstance.

Something should be done about this unit for the sake of variety, if for nothing else. Because currently, Huns feels like a civ with no castle unit at all. That makes it a, though competitive no doubt, somewhat uninteresting civ to play.

[Ashur_Arbaces]

I always saw it as a troll unit: neglect the enemy army and go straight for the expensive buildings, run away if the enemy tries to catch you.

But yeh they are pretty much useless in normal circumstances, tryed to come up with a few strats/situations where they are usefull but aside from some scenario maps, a mediocre castle drop and the above mentioned use I don't find many situations where they are usefull.

I tryed to think of some buffs (like making them good vs camels so the Huns have an answer vs Sara late game) but coudn't come up with anything good :/

[Experienced Noob]

I used to think they stunk too, but I was watching two of the best players in the world 1v1 last week (Slam and Jordan), and one of them did mass tarkans in Imp and won the game, which was pretty much even up to that point.

[TheBattler]

The unfortunate thing about Tarkans is that they destroy everything at equally the same rate as equally upgraded Knight units, except for Castles, Walls, and Towers, which you would use siege weapons for.

The saving grace of Tarkans is that the Elite upgrade is cheaper than the Cavalier and Paladin upgrades combined, and it's way faster...I think it's actually faster than Cavalier, which makes it blazing fast since Paladin takes forever to research.

If it were up to me, I'd basically give the Tarkan equal stats to a Hussar, maybe +1 pierce armor, make it cost gold, and pump up it's anti-building attack so that it kills Castles and Town Centers at the exact same rate it would have to have a very high anti-building attack to make up the lower stats and thus heavier losses while assaulting a Castle.

[Pewr]

They are useful in regicide :) You start with a castle, so you can do a 16 minute fast castle and then pump them out and go straight for the enemy castle (where the king usually is) and BAM, GG. They will not expect it at all

[Deep Fried Jesus]

Tarkans are best used against a person looking to pick a fight with paldins and doesn't have camels. Paladins are strong, but since they lose to halbs, upgrading all the way just to bash bases with is a waste.

[Ruinae Retroque Rursus]

I think the gold cost needs to be lowered meself.

[Ashur_Arbaces]

Originally posted by Deep Fried Jesus:

Tarkans are best used against a person looking to pick a fight with paldins and doesn't have camels. Paladins are strong, but since they lose to halbs, upgrading all the way just to bash bases with is a waste.

using tarkens would still be an incredible waste of money then. Vs pikes you just go cav archers (with your own pikes as a meatshield and siege rams vs buildings).

[Til Bardaga!]

The Tarkans aren't that bad at all, but are just not very versatile. They are actually used often in Hun wars, as tarkans are much cheaper to upgrade than knights. Elite Tarkans have 7 pierce armor and 170 HP, which is nearly equivalent of a paladin.

[Ashur_Arbaces]

Originally posted by Til Bardaga!:

The Tarkans aren't that bad at all, but are just not very versatile. They are actually used often in Hun wars, as tarkans are much cheaper to upgrade than knights. Elite Tarkans have 7 pierce armor and 170 HP, which is nearly equivalent of a paladin.

The problem with tarkan is that what the tarkan does the paladin does equally as good or only slighlty worse, but It's miles better at other things then the tarkan. Making the tarkan obsolete.

[Til Bardaga!]

Originally posted by AL Ashur_LeVaar:

Originally posted by Til Bardaga!:

The Tarkans aren't that bad at all, but are just not very versatile. They are actually used often in Hun wars, as tarkans are much cheaper to upgrade than knights. Elite Tarkans have 7 pierce armor and 170 HP, which is nearly equivalent of a paladin.

The problem with tarkan is that what the tarkan does the paladin does equally as good or only slighlty worse, but It's miles better at other things then the tarkan. Making the tarkan obsolete.

At countering cavalry archers and elite skirmishers, the Elite Tarkan only performs slightly worse than the Paladin, but costs much less to fully upgrade. The research time is much shorter as well. As a pocket player in a team game I would go paladins if I were Huns, but in a 1vs1 Elite Tarkans are really a viable option versus cavalry archers and skirmishers. I do actually think Tarkans could use a buff so that they are more versatile, but they aren't a joke unit. I know they are buffed in AoF (non elite have +10 HP, and they can be produced from a stable), but those buffs are really negligible. Non-elite tarkans were terrible anyway (less HP than a knight, less attack, requires castle production, slower attack rate, and equal pierce but less melee armor).
Marauders is also a bit of a strange tech. If you research Marauders (and elite tarkan), you might as well have researched Cavalier and Paladin instead, as marauders allows you to produce tarkans from stables.

[Ashur_Arbaces]

Originally posted by Til Bardaga!:

Originally posted by AL Ashur_LeVaar:

The problem with tarkan is that what the tarkan does the paladin does equally as good or only slighlty worse, but It's miles better at other things then the tarkan. Making the tarkan obsolete.

At countering cavalry archers and elite skirmishers, the Elite Tarkan only performs slightly worse than the Paladin, but costs much less to fully upgrade. The research time is much shorter as well. As a pocket player in a team game I would go paladins if I were Huns, but in a 1vs1 Elite Tarkans are really a viable option versus cavalry archers and skirmishers. I do actually think Tarkans could use a buff so that they are more versatile, but they aren't a joke unit. I know they are buffed in AoF (non elite have +10 HP, and they can be produced from a stable), but those buffs are really negligible. Non-elite tarkans were terrible anyway (less HP than a knight, less attack, requires castle production, slower attack rate, and equal pierce but less melee armor).
Marauders is also a bit of a strange tech. If you research Marauders (and elite tarkan), you might as well have researched Cavalier and Paladin instead, as marauders allows you to produce tarkans from stables.

I can understand that in a 1 vs 1 Elite tarkans can be good option since they cost much less and take less time to research. But they still underpreform in comparison to paladins and they are hard to mass in AOC since they can only be produced in castles so I personally would never go for them unless I'm in serious trouble with res (wich to be fair is rather likely to happen in 1 vs 1). I'ts uses are still very niche in comparison to the paladin though.

Non elite castle age tarkan is indeed terrible and really needs a serious buff. Like half of the non elite castle age UUs actually.

[Promiskuitiv]

Personally i think Tarkans are fine as they are, they have their uses in at least some games (quickly rush down a castle/monastery/wonder/town-center/... - especially if you don't have paladins already (-> if you went for hussars and heavy cavalry archers or something similar instead) - and else they're mini-paladins) and if they would be buffed that would only make the already flexible and strong huns even stronger.

If at all some very slight changes would be fine, but personally i don't think they should be buffed hard enough that you would use them every game (even if they wouldn't be completely overpowered). I like them as a niche-unit (as they are or sliiightly stronger (against buildings maybe - to push improve them for a/their specific purpose only)) - but just that's all just my personal opinion.

[Til Bardaga!]

Originally posted by Promiskuitiv:

Personally i think Tarkans are fine as they are, they have their uses in at least some games (quickly rush down a castle/monastery/wonder/town-center/... - especially if you don't have paladins already (-> if you went for hussars and heavy cavalry archers or something similar instead) - and else they're mini-paladins) and if they would be buffed that would only make the already flexible and strong huns even stronger.

If at all some very slight changes would be fine, but personally i don't think they should be buffed hard enough that you would use them every game (even if they wouldn't be completely overpowered). I like them as a niche-unit (as they are or sliiightly stronger (against buildings maybe - to push improve them for a/their specific purpose only)) - but just that's all just my personal opinion.

I agree at some points, but personally, I don't think the non-elite Tarkan is fine at all. I think the att bonus vs buildings could be further increased. They are actually FAR weaker than knights in the castle age (despite the +10 HP buff in AoF). Not only do they have poor production speed at that stage of the game (generally you don't have more than 1 castle at that stage), less attack and less armor, they also attack about 10-15% slower. Non-elite tarkans aren't a niche unit, as they have zero purposes. What makes Elite Tarkans unique from other units is that they can get 3+4 pierce armor quite quickly at a much lower cost than Paladins. Non-elite tarkans do not have this property. I think non-elite tarkan should have 2/2 armor (like a knight), and the same attack rate as knights (if it doesn't screw up the attack animation, else +1 attack).

I was thinking of giving tarkans a small attack bonus versus siege units, but I guess that would kind of take away the 'unique-ness' of the Magyar Huszar.
My favorite idea for a buff is to give the Tarkans a unique property that they resist arrows fired from towers (including bombard towers), town centers and castles. It would be like the inverse of the camels weakness versus these buildings. This would make Tarkans much better at raiding and taking down buildings, without it being too overpowered.

[Ruinae Retroque Rursus]

Originally posted by Til Bardaga!:

My favorite idea for a buff is to give the Tarkans a unique property that they resist arrows fired from towers (including bombard towers), town centers and castles. It would be like the inverse of the camels weakness versus these buildings. This would make Tarkans much better at raiding and taking down buildings, without it being too overpowered.

a.k.a increased pierce armor? :P

And if you're going to increase armor from Bombard Towers, forget it; +10 armor isn't going to make a difference to the fact they're killed in two hits. :P Pretty much everything is. :P

[mrtickles22]

Make them cheaper, faster and increase their bonus against buildings (or have an ability that causes buildings to "bleed" HP because, duh, they are on fire). Right now they are not-very-good knights that (as said above) are okay in early imperial in hun wars but otherwise pretty bad.

Also the least used unit in the entire game is the petard. It's never useful.