Video

Silahdars are stronger so go for them. Orochi are not worth it in the current META strictly speaking they are still sleepers like Onna Musha but like them they lack tankiness to truly shine, also damage wise its actually a bit delayed so their overall burst is weaker than most units general DPS.

Reiters is german which they use for the unit.

@@Azzakye I see

I am Lebanese and didn't get that

I think you need a doctor mate

When you are getting surrounded and are terrified it tends to end up in shambles. There are also just a lack of units that are resilient to cavalry while not being dedicated anti cavalry.

honestly if this is on discord the highest is Max and I dont know if even he has the time to help.

@@Azzakye no, it’s in the game. Thanks man

Target ai can always be like that I mean just recently it got really bad with units trying to attack units on the other side of the wall with units literally right infront of them.

thats the same with any unit but the potential is there problem is I dont like doctrines being used as a balance point.

I don't think range spam is a good arguement. Just because a type of unit is strong or "spam" is not really a good justification for others to not be balanced correctly.

@@Azzakye I mean yeah but longbows was already good enough, It had a role and exceled at it, you get off 1 volley of LBs on golden range and they already paid themselves off

@@雷伊貝 I think the counter role is silly as Longbows are only effective against other range units and is inferior against everything else. Its not like other range units arent good at killing other range and Longbows arent particularly effective at it either. So my arguement comes down to the fact that Longbows are strictly too conditional for marginal cost effectiveness while being inferior by all other standards.

@@Azzakye Other ranged units arnt bad, but longbows are devastating, they basically take out 1/3 of a unit, out range and have a pretty good targeting vs ranged and do enough vs unshielded

@@雷伊貝 Yeah this is just subjective arguement. Personally I don't see it that way as Longbows are severely underpowered compared to the mastery version of the other T4 units and it would be insane to think they are only marginally better than T3 options this is not even considering they cost about 50% more, of course you also have Rattan marksmen. In context to their 40% damage against range with top veterancy they are quite literally only cost effective right now. Granted Longbows have a range and accuracy edge but its doesnt account for much when they are underperforming so hard in other areas that even their specialty is only cost effective. Like right now there is no reason to bring Longbows over Imp Archers.

I do not condone griefing.

Lets be honest Sipahis attacks would need to be redone for that to happen.

Range is completely one note and generally do not have interesting gameplay. I would say good usage is rewarded just from the fact that positioning and timing is key still but I get it. Overwatch auto aim makes it too easy to make use of their long range so its a super high usability as the unit does the work for you which is good if that allows the hero to do other stuff but range units are so weak that you have to guard them from lone heroes or flankers at all times so your hero is literally a guard dog.

I wouldn't say that yet cause its hard to say what 30% fire rate increase and 60% damage increase net but in theory they should be matching Imp archers but they dont have block break so there is that.

They'll only be able to get the 60% if they can hit the same enemy multiple times in a row. It's not gonna give the same burst damage and they will still fire slower than imperial archerVolley. precision volley. Also imperial archers hit higher armored enemies for a ton while longbowmens damage drops much more significantly so I doubt they'll be near as useful for enemy melee infantry. It might though make them somewhat viable for melee fights.

@@stefanteal1075 I think you are underestimating the 30% fire rate increase considering for all intent and purpose they fire slightly faster than Imp archers. the 60% would be less than Imp archers bodkin against heavily armoured targets but truthfully its hard to tell without some testing.

@@Azzakye Longbowmen in their current state fired 8 volleys so 16 seconds (fully upgraded in honor tree) averaging 1 shot every 2 seconds. Imperial archers with precision volley average 11 in that span of time. With 30% increase, longbowmen should be firing 10.4 shots every 16 seconds putting them right behind imperial archers for rate of fire. So they will be very comparable but longbowmen will need a warmup phase to get to the 60% increase damage not including hitting a different target or the enemy moving out of sight making the 60% probably more of a 120-140% in practicality. Just some thoughts. We'll see what they end up being like or how fast they get to that 60% increase in the ptr.

I think you don't have to be so rigid and let range do more than deal damage. IMO they need to fix the fire rate to damage though, when your arqebus is literally shooting faster than your crossbows and archers something weird is going on.

immo, this longbow mastery is weak. basicly you ussing longbows backside and aiming to targets, but now they be stronger only with cover fire so its means you have to fight in 1 front, its means you must survive front, in nowdays? when units 1 shooting you.. idk its not strong at all

That could be for many reasons but its usually due to the fact there aren't enough teams/players to truly differentiate from just causal siege. Adding to that we do not focus much on individual skill and more to do with teams as a whole so its more difficult to see the skill of the players.

So how does a grapeshot walk, then? Based on your comment at 34:44

no where to be seen

its like that for the first 15 mins I do not realise that until mid way through the first battle.

unfortunately these are live vod and I muted myself on the day. So there is no audio if people want me to upload a post commentary I do not mind doing that.

every game basically goes through power creep and yeah players love to optimise so much so time to kill continues to decrease. So its the fault of the players as much as the developers.

strange I know. I think everyone agrees that Wuwei is still a major problem, but at the same time you don't see them that often.

I think collision would be great for the game. The whole stacking thing just feeds into the burst meta by maximising engagement. The knockdown is hard to gauge as its not really the driving factor as MaA do not have follow up damage.

Wuwei are mush stronger than Onna musha, there are very few things that's actually effective because of how well rounded they are. You would need an almost absolute advantage like range or damage because tankiness won't work.

They have counters, but yeah they need a nerf

@@bizon4129 ye they have counters. like 2-3? when normal units have like 10-15+ ? and i saw full reaper squad with best doctrines 1 shooted with wuwei spam combos. Its sick when unit with 235 leadership can masacre something (in theory) best to meele fight in 1-2 sek and don't loost at all almost.

they not even good vs meele, they good vs cav, good vs shields, good vs everything actualy..

Yes, its strong in a sense with the basically unkillable level of defense and constant sustain when compared to other classes. I think its also to do with Clash of Shield 2 second extra duration from epic set which made it super annoying to deal with while remaining impactful with a supercharged ulti

DB and Bow getting buffed? how?

Bow isn't even Meta Bro...

@@Azzakye They have got buffed. Not going to hopefully. They already OP

@@holyspot8964 I mean from runes sure but its not like they are all of a sudden meta.

But then how would everyone know about Chinese supremacy? Even Chinese old men are immune to Western units flaccid CC attempts.

I expect LS to go back into the heal bot it always was

@@Azzakye At least, if they nerf their survivability they should boost their damage accordingly. Otherwise, they are simply fckn up the class altogether

@@666xurxo balance is difficult

Yeah still waiting for them to get nerfed

No, cause we optimise everything, it doesnt. The failure is always there is either one real choice or the choice doesnt matter.

@@Azzakye the RNG behind doctrines means every players available doctrine pool is different. Since Alchemy more than doubled library of doctrines, they exponentially increased the complexity of unit balance. Yes at high player levels, optimized units start looking similar. The longer 2 players have been playing, there’s an increased likelihood of their doctrine pools and unit pools overlapping, but there’s a lot of variation between level 200, level 1000, and level 6000 in a roster of +125 units. You might put Stamina V on MAA, while I put it on IronCap Swords

@@SchockerX69 You are artificially inflating the complexity due to the nature of progression based gameplay. It doesn't matter at the end of the day because the point still stands complexity doesn't exist when the choices you have either dont matter or one is better than the rest.

​@@SchockerX69 It is hard to get them but players have already figured out the best in slot so if you don't have them you are at a disadvantage. It would be added complexity if you had different doctrine builds for different roles.

If you are talking about the Champion Trove point cap it refers to the capture points and not supply points, regardless it still effective to interrupt enemy supply points so I have no idea what you are talking about.

IKR, that was my reaction to the damage output