Should the Composite Bowman be moved to a new civ?

[KingKickAss]

I really feel like the more recent DLC civs are starting to become mishmashes of features that the devs come up with where they look out of place or feel weird. A lot can be said about the Georgians and the Armenians, but one of the most glaring things for me is the Composite Bowman.

Why does this blatant infantry civ have the most unique archer unit in the entire game? Lets put it all into perspective with the rest of their civ's kit.

-Armenians get militia/spear line upgrades one age earlier. (Tech that just screams "Infantry civ")
-They get a unique infantry unit that can heal units and is capable of carrying relics(Typical infantry civ unique.)
-A unique tech that buffs the health of their infantry, spears excluded(Typical infantry civ tech)
-Team bonus that gives extra line of sight to infantry(Infantry civ team bonus)

So why do they get a unique unit archer that fires straight arrows which ignore armor? You literally came up with two unique units, one of which would be perfect for the Armenians on it's own, and just decided to throw in this unique archer as well? Couldn't you settle for being traditional and just letting the Warrior Priest being the civ's unique unit?

If a foot archer civ was to be added(Which we haven't received since the Vietnamese which was pre-DE), they would need something even crazier or a unique unit that is a non-archer, wouldn't they? A charge attack archer? A projectile shield archer?

If the Nubians were added, the Composite Bowman would have been a perfect unique unit for them. Why are the Armenians(A civ very geared towards infantry) getting a unique archer that isn't as easy to counter as other archer units?

In my opinion, the Georgians and especially the Armenians have dethroned the Burgundians/Sicilians as the two civs that stick out like a sore thumb among AoE2's roster. I wish the developers would understand that the playerbase would happily purchase DLC civs without all these extraordinary and super unique kits. (Honorable Mule Cart mention which should be a unique feature to a single civ, particularily the Huns(IMO) instead of just being an attempted draw for a DLC).

[Quintem]

I think an issue is the civs don't have great historical match from what some claim or it's a bit all over the place historically.

Getting a unique unit archer is not that strange. It was to fill a weakness in their lineup. At least from a gameplay point of view.

[KingKickAss]

Цитата допису Quintem:

Getting a unique unit archer is not that strange. It was to fill a weakness in their lineup. At least from a gameplay point of view.

What weakness would that be? I'm curious even though I believe that every civ doesn't have to be very well rounded and have an answer to literally everything.

[Quintem]

Цитата допису KingKickAss:

Цитата допису Quintem:

Getting a unique unit archer is not that strange. It was to fill a weakness in their lineup. At least from a gameplay point of view.

What weakness would that be? I'm curious even though I believe that every civ doesn't have to be very well rounded and have an answer to literally everything.

A lack of ranged support for their infantry. A lot of infantry civs either get good siege or decent-good archers. Japanese FU archers and CA. Vikings have hard hitting archers. Goths actually get hand cannons. Bulgarians get FU onagers with cheaper techs to support that. That's just the ones I can think of off the top of my head.

Usually a civ has a core weakness that a unit that helps deal with that issue. Though this does not always make a civ perfectly well rounded. Throwing Axemen act as anti spear and support unit to knights for Franks.

Not sure this 100% makes sense, I'm tired and all the recent posts on here have drained my ability to think straight.

[James3157]

Georgians and Armenians are unfortunately the weakest civilizations on multiplayer for 1v1. Also, Armenians are the strongest only on water maps, but weaker on land maps. Composite bowmen are overall a useful unique unit for Armenians, but they are far from being one of the strongest civilizations on 1v1 maps.

[KingKickAss]

Цитата допису Quintem:

Цитата допису KingKickAss:

What weakness would that be? I'm curious even though I believe that every civ doesn't have to be very well rounded and have an answer to literally everything.

A lack of ranged support for their infantry. A lot of infantry civs either get good siege or decent-good archers. Japanese FU archers and CA. Vikings have hard hitting archers. Goths actually get hand cannons. Bulgarians get FU onagers with cheaper techs to support that. That's just the ones I can think of off the top of my head.

Usually a civ has a core weakness that a unit that helps deal with that issue. Though this does not always make a civ perfectly well rounded. Throwing Axemen act as anti spear and support unit to knights for Franks.

Not sure this 100% makes sense, I'm tired and all the recent posts on here have drained my ability to think straight.

Wouldn't the easy solution be to just give them thumb ring then? Instead of bending the civ around to force them to have a unique unit they shouldn't have? I can understand the idea of a unique filling a hole, but you shouldn't need to introduce a second unique just to cover something in a kit.

[jonoliveira12]

Armenians get an unique Archer, because they are already overcharged with Infantry (even an Infantry-Monk unit that heals) so they need some synergy breaker to force the player to use other parts of the Tech Tree.

Just like how Franks or Teutons get Infantry UUs, despite being markedly Knight civs.

The role of a UU, is to be "unique", not to be thematically apropiate or even very useful. CompBows are actually very useful to back Infantry against high Armour units, and they do synergize very well for the price of forcing the player to pay for Archer techs at the Blacksmith.

[KingKickAss]

Цитата допису jonoliveira12:

Armenians get an unique Archer, because they are already overcharged with Infantry (even an Infantry-Monk unit that heals) so they need some synergy breaker to force the player to use other parts of the Tech Tree.

Just like how Franks or Teutons get Infantry UUs, despite being markedly Knight civs.

The role of a UU, is to be "unique", not to be thematically apropiate or even very useful. CompBows are actually very useful to back Infantry against high Armour units, and they do synergize very well for the price of forcing the player to pay for Archer techs at the Blacksmith.

What castle age units are too tanky for champions/halbs to run over?

[Jäveln]

ah please no i love armenians they ar emy new infantry civilization with tanky swordsmen fighting priests and great archers which is usefull against any enemies with good pierce armor, ive seen goths pullback from a charge against them and its nice with arange dunit that can match them

[Devang]

You mean like how the AoK (OG) civ Franks, have an infantry unique unit despite everything else being geared for cavalry?

Not all civs have an unique unit that corresponds to their generic unit focus. Sometimes the unique unit covers a hole in the tech tree, complimenting the generic unit roster

[kucsidaveee]

I agree with OP here.
What I actually suspect is that the devs might have been planning more than what we got here, but it got cut. (most possibly because microsoft meddling). Seems like the Qizilbash warrior was planned for a civ that would appear in the Ismail campaign.
And yes, a new archer focused civ is sorely missed for me as well.

[KingKickAss]

Цитата допису Devang:

You mean like how the AoK (OG) civ Franks, have an infantry unique unit despite everything else being geared for cavalry?

Not all civs have an unique unit that corresponds to their generic unit focus. Sometimes the unique unit covers a hole in the tech tree, complimenting the generic unit roster

How do you feel about the rest of the post and all the other details in it?

[Heimdall313]

Цитата допису Quintem:

Цитата допису KingKickAss:

What weakness would that be? I'm curious even though I believe that every civ doesn't have to be very well rounded and have an answer to literally everything.

A lack of ranged support for their infantry. A lot of infantry civs either get good siege or decent-good archers. Japanese FU archers and CA. Vikings have hard hitting archers. Goths actually get hand cannons. Bulgarians get FU onagers with cheaper techs to support that. That's just the ones I can think of off the top of my head.

Usually a civ has a core weakness that a unit that helps deal with that issue. Though this does not always make a civ perfectly well rounded. Throwing Axemen act as anti spear and support unit to knights for Franks.

Not sure this 100% makes sense, I'm tired and all the recent posts on here have drained my ability to think straight.

^
I'm still salty about Vikings losing Thumb Ring after 20+ years. It's a complex argument, but Thumb Ring is actually superior to Bogsveigr in virtually all scenarios, it's a lot cheaper, and it doesn't waste a unique tech. Considering Vikings have some of the absolute worst cavalry in the game, they kinda do need *something* to support the Champs/Berserks.

Цитата допису KingKickAss:

Цитата допису jonoliveira12:

Armenians get an unique Archer, because they are already overcharged with Infantry (even an Infantry-Monk unit that heals) so they need some synergy breaker to force the player to use other parts of the Tech Tree.

Just like how Franks or Teutons get Infantry UUs, despite being markedly Knight civs.

The role of a UU, is to be "unique", not to be thematically apropiate or even very useful. CompBows are actually very useful to back Infantry against high Armour units, and they do synergize very well for the price of forcing the player to pay for Archer techs at the Blacksmith.

What castle age units are too tanky for champions/halbs to run over?

Teutonic Knights are... well, functionally useless relative to the rest if the civ, but Franks is correct, Throwing Axes are amazing vs Camels and Halbs while also supporting very well vs defenses.

Champions are pretty dang brutal in Castle age, but the issue is your castle age economy would basically bankrupt if you upgrade the 2HS. They're also missing Plate Mail Armor in Castle Age - your Barracks may be ahead of the times but the smith isn't. The +2 pierce armor is quite important, while the counter to your large Champ investment is the notably much cheaper Crossbow line, and they aren't cost-efficient vs Knights either (which is why you always want to mix Pikes into champ blobs).
Knight + Crossbow is so omnipresent in Castle because it really does destroy everything, while only a few niche alternatives exist (Eagle Warrior and Steppe Lancer rushes in early Castle for example). Early two handed swordsman is a cheap but substantial upgrade in Castle, but only really helps if you can trap an Eagle rush or something.

[KingKickAss]

Цитата допису Heimdall313:

Цитата допису KingKickAss:

What castle age units are too tanky for champions/halbs to run over?

Teutonic Knights are... well, functionally useless relative to the rest if the civ, but Franks is correct, Throwing Axes are amazing vs Camels and Halbs while also supporting very well vs defenses.

So would you say the Composite Bowman exists as a part of the civ because castle age Halbs/Champions/Rest of Armenia can't deal with the Franks? To be clear, the actual topic of the thread that some people seem to skip over, is whether or not the Armenians absolutely need this very unique archer unit to the point where they get to have two unique units? Like giving them thumb ring(they do have arbs and all the blacksmith upgrades) won't fill that void? Or any other simple tweaks to their features for that matter?

In my opinion, if a civ needs to be given a second unique unit to function, there is something fundamentally wrong with the design of the civ.

[Quintem]

Цитата допису Heimdall313:

they aren't cost-efficient vs Knights either (which is why you always want to mix Pikes into champ blobs).

How are 2h swordsmen not cost effective vs knights? Since long swords are already on paper, reality is a bit different. 2h swordsman does considerably more damage than a long swordsman does.

[Heimdall313]

Цитата допису KingKickAss:

So would you say the Composite Bowman exists as a part of the civ because castle age Halbs/Champions/Rest of Armenia can't deal with the Franks? To be clear, the actual topic of the thread that some people seem to skip over, is whether or not the Armenians absolutely need this very unique archer unit to the point where they get to have two unique units? Like giving them thumb ring(they do have arbs and all the blacksmith upgrades) won't fill that void? Or any other simple tweaks to their features for that matter?

In my opinion, if a civ needs to be given a second unique unit to function, there is something fundamentally wrong with the design of the civ.

Ok so Composite Bowman is really good, but complex. It has 100% accuracy out of the gate, doesn't even *need* thumb ring. Its projectile is different than other archers; moves in a straight line, not an arc, and while that sounds pointless (and it looks dumb but w/e) it means anything running at the bowman in a straight line always gets hit, while Arbs/Crossbow before Ballistics will sometimes overshoot and miss entirely.
Composite Bowman ignores pierce armor (except against Siege, Boats, and Buildings, do not use them vs Rams, Galleons, or Castles) which means it does 6 damage in Castle age vs Knights (4+2) and 8 damage in Imperial (4+4). Castle Age knight with full upgrades, Composites do double the damage of Crossbows with full upgrades. 10-12 Composites take out a Knight in 2 volleys, Crossbows can't even joke about that one. That's about equal to Genoese Crossbow in Castle age too which have +5 vs Knights, and are actually better vs things like Champs than Genoese crossbow.
Extreme example, but Composite Bows and Arbalests vs Elite Battle Elephants, its insane how much better the Composites do.
They make very very good support for your infantry vs Knights and Elephants, a few other oddballs. But, same counters as Arbs at the end of the day: Skirms and Siege, and they don't trade well vs other Archers either.

Thumb Ring Arbalest is better than Bogsveigr Arbalest (Vikings), but I'd take Composite Bowman 8 days a week over fully upgraded Arbs.